Mhambi's qoutables: Xolela Mangcu on Mbeki and Ronald Suresh Roberts

Xolela Mangcu on the writer who is trying hard to rehabilitate South African president Mbeki through the book Fit to Govern: The Native Intelligence of Thabo Mbeki:


"My criticism, for the most part, is a political one. What Mbeki has never got, and what Roberts does not get, is that we never wanted a “rigorous student of language and stereotypes” for a president.

What we wanted was a leader who could reach out into the “vast deep” of despair and despondency and mobilise people towards action."

Sphere: Related Content

The British invaded to save 'Africans' from Boer explotation

Some times the international media makes Mhambi's blood boil. Some of you may have read what I thought of His Big White Self, Nick Broomfield's gloriously entertaining and misconceived documentary.

This week I read this ill informed posting on the blog of a respected US publication, Foreign Policy, titled Thursday Video: Rock song rekindles ethnic tensions in South Africa .

Lord Milner
Originally uploaded by Wildebeast1.

I just could not let this ignorance - arrogantly posted without a secound thought - go. So I wrote a letter to the editor in reply, and I post parts of it below.:

Dear sir, in your Thursday Video: Rock song rekindles ethnic tensions in South Africa (http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/node/3825) Michael H. Cognato says:

"Sure, the Boers were resisting British imperialism, but it was for the sake of their own right to marginalize and exploit the African population without British interference."

Based on what facts does Mr. Cognato make this statement? Does he assert that the Boer War was fought because the British wanted to interfere in Boer exploitation of what he calls Africans?

Does he assert that Afrikaners are not African? With this statement Mr. Cognato shows that he is blissfully unaware of the current debate in South Africa. The ruling ANC proclaims that there are Asians, whites, coloureds and Africans in South Africa, ie that that only black is African and the others not. What the eminent South African sociologist Van Zyl Slabbert, calls a "racially exclusive Africanism".

As for the reasons for this war. Thomas Packenham, the British historian, sets out in two books – The Scramble for Africa and The Boer War why this war happened. He pins the responsibility partly on the British as a war over resources (gold was discovered), but points out that Lord Alfred Milner was the primary instigator over far more sinister reasons.

Here are qoutes by Milner:
"I am a Nationalist and not a cosmopolitan.... I am a British (indeed primarily an English) Nationalist. If I am also an Imperialist, it is because the destiny of the English race, owing to its insular position and long supremacy at sea, has been to strike roots in different parts of the world. I am an Imperialist and not a Little Englander because I am a British Race Patriot ...

The British State must follow the race, must comprehand it, wherever it settles in appreciable numbers as an independent community."

Liberal Scotish journalist Neal Ascherson wrote that as a racist politician, Milner is the only British politician that "deserves a comparison with Hitler. He believed in the superioriy of his own race, and was preprared to instigate war to asure their dominance."

Acherson made this comment in direct reference to Milner's actions and pronouncements in instigating the Boer War.

Mr. Cognato remarks: "Chanting a general's name is a strange habit in a democracy." If he bothered to consult a history book or even the internet he would have learned that the general in question was a vociferous campaigner against the Boer war.

One of the conditions Milner set for the Transvaal Republic not to be invaded is to afford the franchise to (white) foreigners that had rushed to South Africa when gold was discovered. Milner also insisted that if elected these foreigners should be allowed to speak English in the Volksraad (parlaiment).

General De la Rey argued that these concessions should be allowed to avoid the war. Hardly bad for a politician in 1898, especially when measured against the anti-immigration and anti-Spanish discourse in the USA of today.

As for your comments about exploitation. Bar the vote, South African and the US legislation only started showing a marked difference in respect to discriminating against blacks in the 1950's.

Sources:
The Scramble for Africa by Thomas Packenham (Abacus, 1992).

N. Ascherson, 'The War That Made South Africa', New York Review of Books, 6 December 1979, p.12.

Sphere: Related Content

Left rhetoric right wing actions

James challenged me the other day because of something I said in my post "De la Rey is a left wing icon":

"It is a somewhat astounding fact that the Nats during their rule, consistently decreased economic inequality amongst and between all South Africans".

What did you base that on? Not to be argumentative, but if inequality was decreasing in a noticeable way between black and white under apartheid, then why was there any disatisfaction with it? If you have some kind of source that you drew that statement from, I'd really like to read it....

And too right. It is a contentious statement and deserves to be backed up with fact. Especially since the ANC has come to power South Africa has endured its longest peroid of continued economic growth in history. All south Africans should be richer.

All South Africans should be richer

The Nat's record was not consistent in the beginning but they did reduce poverty AND inequality, especially under Vorster and PW Botha.

"Despite the steady improvement in the wages of workers since the 1960's, the racial disparities were such that South Africa was near the top of the inequality league in the world."

(South Africa now tops this league.)

"From the early 1970's the government and employers initiated a steady process of redistribution away from whites that changed the position considerably. A significant redistribution of income was the result...

By 1994, blacks contributed R23 billion to government revenue, and received R34 billion in cash and in-kind transfers from government of which the largest part went on social welfare, housing, health and education."

"Whites still received nearly half of the amount the state spent on public services, but they received much less in services than the amount of tax they paid, while blacks were receiving considereably more.

Spending on social welfare for colored and Asians rose at an even more rapid rate than on blacks, and accelerated after 1984 when the government embarked on systematically reducing the disparities that still existed between the three groups that participated in the Tricameral parlaiment."

The social spending contributed to a severe fiscal crises that the state experienced from the mid 70's, other contributing factors being the War in Namibia and Angola, and the expansion of the civil service.

"A severe tax burden now weighed heavily on middle-class whites... according to an IMF study, whites by 1987 paid on average 32 percent of their incomes in tax, but received only 9 percent back in benefits."

These qoutes are from Stellenbosch academic Hermann Giliomee's book. The Afrikaners - Biography of a People.

He notes that the government started to encounter serious resistance from certain whites because of these progressive taxation policies.

He concludes his book with the end of the Nat's rule. He states that during 1948 to 1994 - the period of their rule - the economy grew four and a half times, and that the life expectancy of all South Africans increased. He notes however that the phycological damage of apartheid was heavy. The book has allot more information, numbers and references if your interested.

Contrast that to the dramatic drop in South African life expectancy since 1995.

The World Socialist website analyses the UN Development report on South Africa for 2004:

It acknowledges that there have been some positive aspects, like the building of many houses, but cats aspersions on the quality of these house since the housing subsidy dropped. It continues:

"Between 1995 and 2002, life expectancy at birth is estimated to have declined from 61.4 years to 51.4 years, indicating a 16.3 percent drop. This is largely due to the massive impact of Aids.

The statistical average hides a worse reality. In 2001 the life expectancy of blacks was 51, contrasted to whites with a life expectancy of 69. In 2001 more than 28 percent of blacks in the 30 to 39 age group were estimated to be HIV positive.

This is compounded by the drop in the total number of health professionals, which, according to the South African Health Review, declined between 2000 and 2002. According to the UNDP report: “In many hospitals and clinics around the country, there are insufficient medical and support staff to handle the workload. There are simply not enough funds being allocated to the hiring of additional staff and the payment of more attractive salaries.” The inequitable distribution of health services is also evident...

The level of inequality is confirmed by the Gini coefficient. A Gini coefficient of one indicates perfect income inequality, while a Gini coefficient of 0 indicates perfect equality. The report notes that in 1995 the Gini coefficient for South Africa was 0.596, rising to 0.635 in 2002. The report goes on to note: “In view of this rising income inequality, only six percent of all people who reached retirement age of 65 in 2000 can be regarded as financially independent. About 47 percent of people retiring are dependent on their families, 31 percent have to continue working and 16 percent rely solely on a pension from government...

The UNDP report states: “Steep wealth inequality ... contributes to persistent and rising income poverty and inequality.” This is in a context where the ruling class has “enormous corporate power and a direct influence over the economic lives of the majority of South Africans.” The government’s pro-business policies have undoubtedly added weight to already powerful corporate influences...

Ernst and Young Management Services reported that in 2003 R42.2 billion ($US620 million) worth of BEE deals were made. But the beneficiaries of these deals belonged largely to the politically well-connected elite.

The opposition Democratic Alliance noted that 60 percent (R25.3 billion) of these deals “accrued to the companies of two men [both close to the ANC leadership]: Patrick Motsepe and Tokyo Sexwale”."

One of the most worrying aspects is that school enrollment has also dropped, and while some claim the average South African is not getting a better edication, this is contested by some Wits academics I spoke to. Mhambi can stomach allot, provided he knows that South Africans are getting a propper education. But if we are not bettering the youths education, then our tomorrow will probably be worse.

Symbolic and material happiness

You ask that if the Nats decreased inequality, why were black South Africans unhappy? I spoke only of economic inequality. I don't know how old you are, but if you were old enough to have rememered the apartheid days, you would hopefully realise how dehumanising it was. It made you feel as if you don't belong, that your a second class citizen.

Essentially black South Africans were unhappy for the same reasons asAfrikaners today, who are by and large doing well economically, but very unhappy.

Don't believe the World Socialists? You can read the 2006 UN Human development report for yourself, where south Africa did significantly worse.

And chew on this chart of South Africa's Human Development Index vis-a-vis other territories from the UN's 2006 report.



But if you drove around South Africa today you knew this already. Quite frankly the poverty and conspicious consumption you see everywhere is obsene.

Sphere: Related Content

De la Rey - the left wing icon

General De la Rey, peace or war icon? Image: Mhambi, Green background: Peet Pienaar, Hat: Ernesto Che Guavarra.

There is much debate about what Bok van Blerk's the De la Rey song could mean. Is the song a call to war? Is the song treacherous? Is De la Rey an icon of the right?

Mhambi thinks not. The right might want to appropriate him - but it won't stick. De la Rey was an anti-colonial freedom fighter. And a reluctant fighter at that. He opposed war and anti-immigration policies.

What is clear - whatever the intentions of the songs writers - is that the De la Rey phenomena is a search for and a reassertion of Afrikaner identity. To some that makes it right wing.

Mhambi disagrees. A key part of that identity is a struggle for justice. De la Rey represents an era when the Afrikaners were the heroes of a global struggle for justice against colonialism. When Mhambi was young I turned against Afrikaner Nationalism because it was clearly incompatible with what I was taught Afrikaners had stood for.

Mhambi finds it very weird how perceptions, pronouncements and reality diverge, especially in South Africa.

Even the legacy of the Nationalists need to be reappraised. Your having a laugh I hear you say.

Nope. Ask yourself why do people like Guardian reporter Rory Carrol call South Africa a 'boot camp for progressive ideals'.

For all their overt institutional racism the Nationalists were in practice economically left of the ANC in many key respects. They were hands on, never laissez faire. They favoured regulation as opposed to a rampant free market.

Afrikaners know that government can make a difference to poverty and inequality, because they tried it and it worked.

It is a somewhat astounding fact that the Nats during their rule, consistently decreased economic inequality amongst and between all South Africans, something the ANC has failed to do so far. First they lacked the intention, dumping the redistributive RDP plan for the growth of Gear policy. Now they profess the will to adress poverty through Asgi-sa, but seem unable to make it happen.

The Nats built local industry to move South Africa away from being only a supplier of commodities to the West. It is indeed ironic that without the Hertzog government's efforts to build the local economy and industry in particular, there would in all probability not have been a big and mighty trade Union like Cosatu.

Crucially the Nationalists were anti-bling and ostentatious displays of wealth. Were their moto was Suid-Afrika eerste (South Africa first) , the ANC seems to have a very different one: Me, me, me. The Nats valued unselfish public service, rare in a continent blighted by predatory elites. Corruption, what Francois Bayart and his colleagues describe as "the privatisation of public resources" is spreading.

The ANC has so-far presided over an ever increasing gap in economic inequality. It has presided over de-industrialisation. It has allowed mining companies like Anglo-American to list in London, while the English language South African press acquiesced. Would the Nationalists have allowed this capital flight?

The Afrikaners launched Africa's largest body of literature, covering the whole gambit of human experiences, including feminist, and even gay literature. Allot of it severely self critical. The one dimensional stereo types just don't do Afrikaners justice.

It's time for a major reassessment of the Afrikaner's role on the continent. They are the ghostly vanguard of the Thabu Mbeki's "African Renaissance". But now Africa's largest skilled force of effective and loyal public servants are not only not given their due recognition, they are also being shunned.

Afrikaners themselves need to see where their formative roots lie, when the likes of De la Rey were anti-colonial freedom fighters - and champions of the poor and oppressed. They should understand and admit the tragic impact of apartheid and they should work towards making a symbolic gesture of contrition - a la Germany's Willie Brandt.

The ANC needs to recognise that without harnessing the Afrikaners, culturally, socially and in the public sector - all of South Africa will be poorer.

Sphere: Related Content

Myths and misunderstandings: South African white racism

Crocodile
Originally uploaded by Barry Lewis.

Mhambi is regularly struck at how the British (and probably most Westerners) misunderstand South Africa racism. I just started a new job, and over a boozy Chistmas lunch, a new colleague told me of his lovely visit to South African shores.

He had a lovely time but was gob smacked when he visited Sun City, playing a round of Golf on the famous course. It was not the fact that there are real crocodiles in the water hazards that shocked him. It was a sign "No caddies past this point" - on the border of a crocodile infested pit.

For a start he did not use a caddie, that smacking too much of white-michief-type colonialism. In South Africa caddies are almost exclusively black. But the sign left him incredulous. "How could this racist sign still be up there, a few years after apartheid ended??" he asked me, clearly exasperated.

Mhambi gave a well practised sheepish laugh. What to say? First off, I was not sure he and I saw it the same way. I certainly was not shocked.

I deduced that he must think that white golf players send their caddies into crocodile infested pits to fetch their racist bwanas balls - hence the sign. And then he said as much. "How racist is that?!!" he asked rhetorically.

I laughed even more, now my embarrassment was tinged with sadness.

To me one could detect signs of racism in the sign, but of a different ilk to the one that had just been spotted and caused such disgust.

The sign was directed at caddies, and not players who commanded them. The caddies were not mere automatons with no power to decide where they could go.

In fact, the caddies probably scour the golf course on their own for abandoned balls, to sell them at a discount to players.

They have a reckless disregard for the dangers of this particular course - hence the sign. That's how I saw it, and I'm pretty sure I'm right. But I kept this to myself.

But my colleague can just not imagine that a caddie would want to try and get a ball in such a dangerous place.

The Sun City golf course management and myself could. But for him, it was easy to imagine whitey golfers sending powerless caddies to their deaths.

Does this misunderstanding tell us anything more profound?

Yes. White South African racism, and in particular Afrikaans racism is of a paternalistic kind: It's a - our blacks that we can't trust to look after themselves - kind of racism. That is the racism this signs speaks of, and it is often mistaken for another more BNP / National Front / Klu Klux Clan - Western kind of racism.

Does it matter? Of course. Any lawyer will tell you that the intention of an offender is essential in determining the severity of the crime.

Sphere: Related Content