Africa
Education
Joburg
South Africa
Greatest AfricansAfricaEducationJoburgSouth AfricaGreatest Africans
Because of the way in which structural racism normalises white dominance and superiority, it entrenches and perpetuates inequalities in power, access, opportunities and treatment
By Oscar van Heerden
When considering the racism so prevalent in South African society and wanting to have a correct understanding of the phenomenon it is important that one look at all three aspects of racism: individual, institutional and structural.
The historic injustice of the South African chapter of racism can be found in a very neat theory coined by the liberation movement as ‘Colonialism of a Special Type’. This theory in short states correctly that the coloniser and the colonised live side by side within the same borders, which is different from the more typical situation where the coloniser is indeed a foreign power located afar. This is an important theory and it explains a situation that gave rise to legal segregation of the races, later known as Apartheid, which obviously was upheld by fundamental institutionalised racism.
According to Professor Vernellia Randall in a paper named, ‘Speaking Truth to Power’, institutional racism must be understood as an interaction between prejudice and discrimination. Prejudice she states is an attitude that is based on limited information or stereotypes. While prejudice is usually negative, it can also be positive, she contends. No one is completely free of prejudices, although they may not have any significant prejudice against a particular group. Oppression, she says, is a systemic subjugation of a social group by another social group with access to power.
She goes on to say that power is the ability to control access to resources, the ability to influence others, and access to decision makers. Discrimination on the other hand is behaviour, intentional or not, which negatively treats a person or group of people based on their racial origins.
In the context of racism, power is a necessary precondition for discrimination.
Professor Randall further states that racism depends on the ability to give or withhold social benefits, facilities, services, opportunities, etc., from someone who is entitled to them, and is denied on the basis of race, colour or national origin. She concludes that the source of power can be formal or informal, legal or illegal, and is not limited to traditional concepts of power.
So what gave white South Africans this power?
The constitutional law expert, Pierre de Vos (2013) goes to great lengths to expose the impact of structural racism in South Africa and it is worth quoting him here at length in order to illustrate the point.
He begins by telling us of his personal experience in Thailand some time back where he noticed how most of the advertising in that country aspired to the notion of European(ness) and or what he called whiteness. He concludes that the often-invisible but prevalent assumption in most societies that have been economically, culturally and socially colonised by the West is that white “Europeans” are the norm against which all others are implicitly measured – and often found wanting. This assumption is deeply problematic.
He says that these anecdotal examples hint at the dominant normative assumptions about white superiority that are so deeply embedded in modern society in our globalising world that they can easily appear to be normal and natural when, in fact, they are nothing more than a manifestation of structural racism.
He goes further to say that if you care to look with a critical eye, you quickly spot the myriad of ways in which popular culture, workplace rules and practices, academic discourses, social norms and standards, rules that validate certain types of knowledge and discount other types of (often indigenous) knowledge, and commercial advertising send out (sometimes explicit and at other times concealed) messages that normalise and even celebrate the superiority of white Western ways of being in the world.
De Vos states that this is so because when you experience the world as a white person, as someone who does not really have a race or a culture that is systematically denigrated and held up as inferior, you may not realise that you are lucky (one should say privileged) enough to have your general disposition and belief system (if not always all individual traits and actions) held up as normative, as ideal, as “just the way the world is” or “ought to be”. You might not realise that this position of privilege grooms you for success, signals to you that success is nothing less than your due. It creates a world in which others assume that you are competent, hardworking, honest, intelligent, socially well-adjusted and appropriately ambitious.
One does not address the consequences of structural racism merely by creating opportunities for black people to ‘assimilate’ into the normative white world.
In conclusion de Vos contends that structural racism means the entire system of white superiority described in anecdotal forms above. He is not talking about the gross forms of individual racism in which a person knowingly and flagrantly display racial prejudice. Sparrow a case in point. Instead, he is talking about the assumptions with regards to white superiority and whiteness as the assumed norm of goodness and competence that is diffused and infused in all aspects of society, including our history, culture, politics, economics and our entire social fabric.
Because of the way in which structural racism normalises white dominance and superiority, it entrenches and perpetuates inequalities in power, access, opportunities and treatment.
Because of structural racism, race is not a proxy for disadvantage – it is always and remains a form (if not the only form) of disadvantage.
Finally, de Vos provides us all with a solution in which he indicates that one does not address the consequences of structural racism merely by creating opportunities for black people to ‘assimilate’ into the normative white world. Instead he says, you transform the society and challenge the basic meaning-giving assumptions according to which society operates and in terms of which goods, services and opportunities are distributed. In short, you attack and dismantle white privilege, which is the ip side of the coin of structural racism.
Some of us call this ‘transformation’, de Vos stated. I couldn’t agree more with his cogent understanding of structural racism and indeed how one must simply go ahead dismantling it – a bitter pill to swallow for many white South Africans I have no doubt, but a necessary endeavour to say the least.
Institutional racism is not always manifested knowingly and intentionally: the power of it lies exactly in its ability to make itself invisible. This allows its beneficiaries to deny its existence (and genuinely believing in its absence) while bene ting from it.
Individual Racism & Social Cohesion
In order for all of us to consolidate our infant democracy, to safeguard the so called miracle, post 1994, we must all collectively concentrate on the ‘small’ issues. Small, meaning the interpersonal.
These last few months saw individuals using social media to share their racist views about black people in South Africa, little did they know that what they started would be a race war and in war there are bound to be casualties and lots of collateral damage.
The question we must all ask ourselves, are we prepared for it? The Penny Sparrow and other eruptions of hate speech, what does this all mean, why is it happening now and what might result from it?
It’s gonna get ugly before it gets better and perhaps that’s what we need as South Africans.
We are all in agreement about the shortcomings of our beloved TRC processes and the fact that many victims and families did not feel justice had been done, not enough remorse were shown or empathy shared, to say the least.
As a result, complacency crept in and an acceptance that more of the old will simply continue. Whites will still have their black domestic workers and gardeners and certainly their land as Chris Hart so aptly reminds us of, with no regard or consideration of the Native Land Act of 1913.
Let me share my understanding of what is the state of play with regards to race relations in South Africa. Professor Njabulo Ndebele once shared with a certain audience some short stories to illustrate a simple point with regards to consolidating South Africa’s infant democracy.
The first was the “Reitz Koshuis” incident some few years ago at the University of the Free State, you would recall the utter vulgar behaviour of some of the white students towards their respective black “house mothers”. These were individuals responsible for the cleaning of the student koshuis and the students’ general well-being. Yet these white students deemed it important to belittle these mothers, offer them food that they had urinated in and many other disgusting things, all the while videoing the whole affair for the purposes of sharing it on social media, I presume.
The second story related to educators and learners, during the usual annual strike action of SADTU members who choose their timing so well to coincide with the end of year Matric exams (so important to learners whom have come to the end of their schooling lives and seeking entry to Institutions of Higher Learning). In order to put pressure on the Department of Basic Education they basically refuse to administer these exams. Realising that this action can jeopardise the future of such learners some teachers wanted to opt to assist with the exam whilst the strike action continued. However their colleagues had other plans and the disagreement resulted in teachers’ fist fighting with each other in front of the learners in order to bring their respective points across.
The third story was about the South African Police Services who during a routine service delivery protest decided to isolate someone whom they thought was one of the main instigators of the protestors, tied him to the police vehicle and proceeded to drag him down the road, ultimately resulting in his death.
Those that are supposed to uphold the law were now actively breaking it; all this in front of citizens whom they expect to abide by the law at all times.
One can also mention the tragic massacre of Marikana, where miners were shot down in cold blood, but not only from the perspective of the police and the mine workers but also from the point of view of white Capital. The latter considered it ok for enormous profits and bonuses to be paid out to their board members/shareholders and yet frowned on a living wage for ordinary black workers.
Institutional racism is not always manifested knowingly and intentionally: the power of it lies exactly in its ability to make itself invisible. This allows its beneficiaries to deny its existence (and genuinely believing in its absence) while bene ting from it.
• ensured successive Free and Fair general elections;
• we have established a world admired constitution and the requisite institution to protect it in the form of the Constitutional Court;
• an Independent Judiciary;
• a Free Press;
• a Bill of Rights, protecting the citizens of South Africa; and
• (last but certainly not least) our Chapter 9 institutions to give effect to all enshrined rights and responsibilities of citizens.
I accept that at some point or the other these are separately and collectively threatened by the state and/or government but this is surely consistent with the ebbs and flows of a vibrant democracy. Having said that, however, civil society must at all times safeguard itself against the abuse of state power wherever it may manifest itself. This is again an important feature of democracy.
Allow me to repeat: in order for all of us to consolidate our infant democracy, to safeguard the so called miracle post 1994, we must all collectively concentrate on the ‘“small’ issues. Small, meaning the interpersonal.
If those Reitz students don’t manage their respective relations and attitudes towards those caregivers, consolidating our democracy will remain under threat.
If the Educator and the Learner don’t have mutual respect for each other and Teachers don’t lead by example in society, our democracy will remain under threat.
If those who took an oath to uphold the law do not abide by it, our democracy will remain under threat.
And unless captains of industry do not accommodate ethical considerations with regards to wage negotiations, our democracy will remain under threat.
Take stock of our history and ask yourself whether this country’s dark history accords with your nonsensical utterances.
The interpersonal: that is where we must do battle, not with each other, for I fear that race war will have no victor on either side.
To conclude, are you ready for a war? Are you ready for the unravelling of the so called miracle, the rainbow nation?
Racism has no place in our new democracy. We have fought too long and too hard to rid ourselves of it. To regain our dignity and pride as equal citizens. You talk of monkeys and entitlement as if you’ve read it in a book. Do you know how that chapter ends, Ms Sparrow & Mr Hart?
Do you?
One only has to look at the devastation race and ethnic war has brought to the people of Syria, Libya, Palestine, Nigeria and France, to mention but a few places.
Perhaps I should just say to Sparrow, Hart and their ilk, THINK!!
Article Tags