Was it racism or was I paranoid?

Is it possible that my blog “God save us from the racists” was racist? I don’t think so. If there are those who think so, let them convince me of that fact before I can retract. I stand firmly with my views. Interpretation of any aggressive act by a person of another race as racist is such a common phenomenon that I do not think I am immune to that. Not so was my blog.

I do not like racism as a topic; I hope this is the last time I have to write about it. I have never grown up among whites, so I do not know how they behave; to me in Pondoland, a white person was as scarce as chickens’ teeth.

Therefore I never thought there were some untransformed morons until I visited the Free State. Yet it was not the province that angered me. On the eve of the Rugby World Cup final, I saw what was to shock me for the rest of the year. I kept quiet, but I certainly took off the rugby T-shirt I was wearing!

That Friday I saw some white rugby supporters hoisting the old apartheid flag, “kaffiring” everyone around them. This event changed my attitude about the chances of non-racism in our country, and the events at the University of Johannesburg then landed on what was an already populated landmine.

I accept that I may not have a proper understanding of Afrikaner rituals. However, what happened at the UJ has nothing to do with Afrikaner rituals or social bonding. If it were so, other white students should have been showered with cold water too, but that is not the case; this confirms my reading that this was a racist act. If it is not the case, evidence must be produced to convince me otherwise.

In my blog on racism I made the point that black people are as capable of racism as their white counterparts. I said: “Racism, from either blacks or whites, needs to be condemned with all the contempt it deserves. I say this with the appreciation that not only whites are racist; blacks too are culprits of racist thinking and behaviour towards their white counterparts.”

I therefore believe that some of the comments made in response to my blog are a grossly unfair representation of my views, especially the ones that imply that I do not accept or make the point that blacks can be racist too. I focused on whites mainly as a result of the UJ situation.

We all prefer praise, but we have to take criticism and argue its merits and demerits. I am not infallible. Nor do I qualify as a racism lecturer on the basis that I am black. I empathise with most whites; they are subjected to continued racist attacks on a daily basis, especially by a group of blacks that wants to turn the screws on those they believe to be beneficiaries of apartheid. The more whites write about these experiences, the better for our country, and for all of us to learn from each other.

Anyway, pardon me for being disgusted that institutions — such as universities — that have the capacity to be in the forefront of the struggle against racism are such a let-down. Instead of leading the struggle against racist tendencies, some universities have allocated to themselves the role of racist laagers. I am talking here of universities where black and white students stay in separate residences. It surely ought to be disastrous for our country that this is happening.

So long as black students are not socially integrated with white students, they shall remain suspicious of each other. They shall always attempt to interpret each other’s actions, leading to racism or racist paranoia. We come from a racist past; the sooner we accept that the past cannot just be swept away by three elections, the better. I believe interaction is the pill that will solve our problems. However, we do also need to accept that there are some elements that refuse to transform in South Africa, and the Freedom Front Plus is among them.

I also believe some of these reactionary elements are hidden behind the woodworks of our universities. For example, at the UJ, black students are segregated from white students in a polite and calculated way. An example of this is that white students are largely enrolled at Kingsway campus, while blacks are scattered all over other campuses.

Let me ask: Why is it that most white students at the UJ are enrolled for degrees and dominate the former RAU campus, while black students are enrolled for diplomas and dominate all other campuses? I do not believe that black students automatically have lower qualifications than their white counterparts, therefore qualifying for diplomas. Something else is at play here.

Let me also explain my silence on the issue of the University of KwaZulu-Natal and rape. You will care to remember that I am a member of the provincial executive committee of Sasco in KwaZulu-Natal, which is in charge of all SRCs in the province — including that of UKZN. Immediately after I received news from comrade Percy — a socialist friend among those agitating for the student — of what he termed a racist response by the Sasco-led SRC, I sent an email to one of my comrades at UKZN, admonishing them for this behaviour.

I urged my comrades not to focus on their reservations about responses to the rape, but on the fact that a student’s rights were grossly impeded. That could not appear on the blog because it occurred far before I had this blog on Thought Leader. My silence on this matter is not at all a result of selective opinions.

I do agree with the sentiment that whites feel marginalised in South Africa; indeed, to a particular degree they are. The reasons for these feelings of marginalisation are especially the renaming of places, affirmative action and BEE. I do not think that either BEE or affirmative action must have permanence in South Africa, nor does the organisation of which I am a member. I will discuss BEE or affirmative action in another blog entry; they are very contentious and ANC documents are detailed on them.

But let me first talk about name changes. I have always made it clear that, in order for South Africa to be properly integrated, the ANC — or anyone else, for that matter — needs to understand that South Africa produced a Nelson Mandela as much as it produced a Verwoerd. Both the tyrant and the democrat are South Africa’s products and that is a fact. Therefore, no amount of name changing will wash that away.

Wholesale name-changing is an unnecessary attempt at historical amnesia. I believe it is unfair on Oliver Tambo to rename an apartheid symbol after him. It does not only grossly misrepresent what he stood for, but should qualify as a complete insult. I am not saying name-changing is wrong, but the ANC has created the perception that it targets places named after Afrikaners rather than those named after English people.

For example, why do we still have Port Elizabeth, Durban and Johannesburg? Some of these things need to be looked at more closely. I do not think these are done deliberately, but I believe they give a lot of ammunition to racists to advance their backward cause.

The other issue here that needs clarity is the durability of BEE and affirmative action. But remember, colonialism and apartheid lasted 300 years. This debate is poisoned already. I suggest that we debate BEE in my coming column.

In ending this response to my column I think I must amend my earlier heading and say “God save us blacks and whites from mutual racism”!