The Poor Boy

I feel terrible! I did something I am not proud of. I did something so middleclass. I have become cold and insensitive to the lot of the poor.
Maybe this is because I am bombarded by it on a daily basis. Or maybe I saw myself in the eyes of the child who asked me for a R1 at the Bellville train station. Maybe it is because that was me growing up: begging for 20c and 50c, so I could also buy me the things other children were eating.
Later when I saw that child crying and his mother reprimanded him for that - I prayed to God that, that it must never be my child one day.
And even though my heart softened and I wanted to give him the money, I still did not. I rather soothed my conscience like a typical middleclass would: do not give a person a fish rather teaches him how to fish. Bullshit!!!
That simple middleclass bullshit allowed me to walk away, and to push the incident to the back of my mind. But as I was taking a shower tonight it came back to haunt me and taunt me. It was telling me that I am no different then the people I despise - the middleclass.
It was then I realised I have become middleclass.
Jacob the poor boy who used to walk barefoot to school in the middle of winter has finally made it to the cold and sanitized middleclass.
Jacob the boy whose mother was and still is a domestic worker, and who was raised by farm workers can finally afford and own the movies he used to sell his dignity for at the neighbours' house.
Jacob the boy who begged for money can finally treat another poor boy the way he was treated.
He walk away but not before the child imprinted a lasting image on his conscience that will keep returning as a reminder of what he has become.

Can you afford the new South Africa?

I was visiting my dear friend Thendo in Milnerton when it struck me: he is living in the ‘new South Africa’ – in Mandela’s Rainbow Nation. He lives in the kind of community where you see black and white kids of equal social standing play together. In his kind of South Africa the race and nationality of the next door neighbours do not matter. 

What really matter though are the cost of living and the taxes you pay. This is the price you must be willing to pay for your piece of Mandela’s ‘new South Africa.’

In his community the conversations are not limited to cars, hoes and sport, or to furniture, colour schemes and hair styles. Actually we did not speak about any of these. We had conversations about our Rector begging for money in the Mail & Guardian and why the BRT system has to be in Milnerton and not in Khayelitsha. Debates on whether, we are middleclass or working class, and interestingly enough none of us see ourselves as middleclass – we see ourselves as part of the working class. Rather wishful thinking but allow us to have our wishful thinking.

It was during this visit I realised that the ‘new South Africa’ comes at a price and if you want it you must be willing to pay for it. You have to pay for a truly interracial, interethnic and international experience. Pay to be relatively safer than others. Pay to have the BRT at your door step. This is the kind of life we were promised in 1994 but it is now only accessible to those who have university degrees and have far better jobs than the majority of South Africans. Not that there is anything wrong with pursuing a better life and escaping poverty, I am applauding anyone who strive for a better life; I myself is pursuing Utopia.

However, I cannot help but wondering how we got here? How did the middle class become Mandela’s new South Africa?

Mandela’s new South Africa and the poor’s new South Africa are two completely different ones. The poor’s new South Africa is a life with access to water, electricity, health care, housing and employment. Racial integration is the least of the poor’s worries. 

The reason why the middle class appear to be Mandela's new South Africa is because the majority of black people in 1994 were poor and only a handful was in the middleclass. In 1994 the middleclass was predominantly white and now 20 years down the line there are more black people in the middleclass and still almost no white people in the working class. This also shows that the status quo for white people largely stayed the same whilst the standard of living for black people marginally increased. 

The interracial, interethnic and international transformation of the middleclass is thus largely an appearance; the reality is that more black people can afford a middleclass lifestyle. Hence, Mandela’s new South Africa comes at a price: a university degree, a house loan, car finance, a contract phone, medical aid and dog food. 

A price the poor cannot afford.

Escaping Fanon’s Blind Alley: A Critique of Rhodes Must Fall Campaign

Fanon’s revolution was high jacked and postponed on the eve of Africa’s independence. Africa is dependent and at the mercy of a ruthless global system. So what happened?! Now with hindsight we are able to observe a number of shortcomings with regards to Fanon’s revolution. Firstly, Fanon’s revolution was conceptualised at a national level at a time the colonial system unified at a global level. The conduit of this system at a global level was the then newly formed United Nations. Even though Fanon’s revolution had the potential of changing the nation it was incapable of changing the global environment. Thus, the scope of Fanon’s revolution was the first shortcoming, hence as soon as African states gained their independence they realised that the colonial structure evolved into something global.

Secondly, Fanon’s revolution never came into existence as it was highjacked and postponed on the eve of independence. What some scholars discard from their analysis of post-colonial thought is the following: independence was a negotiated settlement between the colonial African state and the colonial power. It was the colonial administrator of the colony who acted as the interlocutor between the colonial power and the African elite. African liberation fighters and intellectuals were co-opted into the negotiations between the colony and the colonial power. The aim of these negotiations was to ensure favourable conditions for the European beneficiary at the time. It was only once these conditions were met that the colonial power granted independence under the farce called democracy. A negotiated settlement thus can hardly be considered as a revolution. The result was that the African was held once more captive by the same global forces that were responsible for colonialism. 

Thirdly, the native intellectual nor Fanon anticipated the technological advances of the 20^th century. I noticed in the current scholarly work of African intellectuals they are not anticipating any possible technological changes in the future. This anticipation of future technological advances is important since technology played an essential part in the evolution of the colonial system. Technology allowed information to travel faster between colonial powers and for troops to be deployed in Africa at a much faster rate. The UN and its sister organisations such as the IMF and the World Bank became the conduit of this evolved system. Technological advances during this period helped to consolidate their position and they became the structures through which colonial powers could coerce and control African states. The aim was to continue the colonial status quo - where the African state is the producer of raw materials and cheap labour. In addition to this, the old civilising project continued under the banner of modernisation, development and transformation. The outcome was the continuation of the status quo and Fanon’s revolution never took off.

Thinking of the future and technology was a major shortcoming during Fanon’s time and it still resonates in today’s scholarly work. The consequence is that scholarly work is trapped in the past. What many scholars forget is that we live in a present that influences the future. Thus, we must look at the past, live in the present and shape the future. However, since we shape the future in the present we must be mindful of how this future might looks like. Important to note is that the present is a constant which makes it nearly impossible to predict the future. The tricky part is that the future is a constant which makes an end to it rather impossible. If there was an end to it the future would stop at some point. Even though we are not possible to arrive at an end we can shape the direction and reality of the future. This raises the question of how do we shape a future for the African which is without a colonial legacy.

The direction and reality Fanon had in mind can be found in his Wretched of the Earth, especially the chapter on national culture. The opening sentence of that chapter reads as follow: “Each generation must out of relative obscurity discover its mission, fulfil it, or betray it” (Fanon, 1963, p. 206). Many of you might know this quote by heart since many pseudo-revolutionaries use this nowadays. Many on these ‘revolutionaries’ never read the whole book and does not know the complexity of this opening sentence. The first time I read that sentence I wondered why he used the words ‘relative obscurity’ and ‘mission’ in the same sentence. After attending a number of seminars and reading much scholarly work on the post-colonial condition of Africa, I realised its significance.

Its significance is captured in a question: how do we think ourselves out of the post-colonial dilemma? The answer to this question will allow us to shape the direction and the reality of the African's future. First, we have to frame and contextualise this generation’s mission while keeping in mind that the future is a constant. We ideally want to shape a future reality where inequalities of our colonial past are no more. Secondly, for this to happen we have to restart Fanon’s revolution. A revolution by nature is violent but not all violence can be considered revolutions. It also thoroughly destroy all the remnants of the previous system's politically, socially and economically attributes. It is driven by the people and importantly it builds a new one from its ruins. However, even though it is violent and devastating it is more promising than transformation.

Transformation is similar to revolution but distinctively different. It also aims to change the system but at a slower pace, with minimal disruptions and it is driven by representatives of the elite on both side of the spectrum. More importantly it does not aim to destroy the old system but to rather alter the old system so that it largely continues the status quo. Moreover, transformation unlike a revolution is ongoing and has the potential of continuously altering itself in such a way it keeps the dominant social order in power. Here we see that transformation contradicts revolution. The dominant social force on both side of the spectrum will thus opt for transformation so that the system continues benefiting them. In a revolution they will be on the receiving end, hence elites of African states and scholars opt for transformation rather than a revolution as it secures their interest in the system.

An excellent example would be the Rhodes must fall campaign by UCT students and staff. In the words of the UCT SRC this is want they want to achieve with their campaign: “It is in the interest of transformation and nation building that our universities remove all colonial and apartheid symbolism and begin to reflect the South Africa we seek to build.” As you can see they opt for transformation, a transformation that will be negotiated by a selected few on both sides of the spectrum. It is also clear that they want to alter the system and is not interested in a completely new system. As I made it clear transformation does not has the potential to remove all the remnants of the old system. Thus, the Rhodes must fall campaign will not deliver on what the general populace at UCT has in mind. 

This brings an important view to the fore: what kind of mission do we want as the next generation of African scholars that will shape a future reality which is free from our colonial legacy.  Where do we assist? One thing is none negotiable: it has to a be a revolutionary mission. To put is more forcefully: the mission can only exist in a revolutionary project as it will lose its value in transformational project. We need a need a new system and not an altered system that will largely continue the status quo. This is why the Rhodes must fall campaign is a misguided struggle without any real revolutionary substance and is out of touch with the realities African students are facing. Instead of storming the Bastille (reference to the French Revolution) and overthrowing the system, they opted for meek, watered down struggle to stay relevant in a post-apartheid South Africa. Instead of storming the institution they stormed a statue, a symbol. Their struggle is so short sighted that they do not realise that once the statue comes down their struggle is over. This show how out of touch they are with the realities of the current generation’s struggle and do not see that dawn is breaking. They and many other pseudo-intellectuals are stuck in Fanon’s blind alley and is incapable of finding resonance in Keita Fodeba’s poem African Dawn:

“Dawn was breaking—dawn, the fight between night and day. But the night was exhausted and could fight no more, and slowly died. A few rays of the sun, the forerunners of this victory of the day, still hovered on the horizon, pale and timid, while the last stars gently glided under the mass of clouds, crimson like the blooming flamboyant flowers.”

They are so out of touch with our reality that they do not see dawn breaking. Ask the students of Wits, UKZN, CPUT and UWC. They have become so stuck in the rhetoric of the day that they use transformation, struggle and revolution interchangeably. They have become the petty bourgeoisie – the gate keepers of the system. They are incapable of seeing that our struggle is a global struggle and that transformation would not help us overcoming the burden of our colonial past. They are incapable of seeing that even if we transform the nation, the nation would be held captive by the global structure and will have to conform to the status quo once more. The only thing that will get us out of this situation is revolutionary thought and action. Let us learn from the past, live in the present and shape a future reality that is without a colonial legacy.  

The Pornography of Poverty

About a year ago I attended a photo exhibition in the District Six Museum in Cape Town. The photos told a story of how people used to live in District Six before the force removals and its destruction.

A group us later had an interesting discussion with regards to the pornography of poverty. Those of you who does not know what it is, here is an explanation. The pornography of poverty is the explicit, hard-core photographic illustration of poor people in their living environment. Where photos are used to arouse the emotions in people but not necessarily do anything about it. Like the pornography of sex it is for personal purposes and not for charity.

Before that discussion that night at the museum, I had noticed how 'African safaris' have changed. In the 20th century safaris into the wilderness was a fashionable trend enjoyed by the upper classes of society. People went into the natural habitat of animals and took explicit and hard-core pictures of them. Once they had they pictures they went back to their societal circles and revelled over their pornographic content, and because this was fashion they soon became bored.

So they started a new trend which I call pornography of poverty. They do this via township tours. Like the animals they observed in their natural habitat they now observe poor ‘black’ people in their natural habitat. They take photos of explicit and hard-core poverty which they take back to their societal circles to talk about the unfortunate circumstances of the poor. These photos are merely to arouse them and not to anything about it.

So I am wondering which form of pornography is worst: the pornography of poverty or the pornography of sex. Both have immoral content (the pornography of poverty robs individuals of their humanity unknowingly, whilst the pornography of sex is for money and in most cases an individual choice) but which one is considered the worst.

Number 1 - A photo blog

Election time in South Africa

A family in Democratic Republic of the Congo

The national road that connects Uganda and the DRC with one another

Self Portrait 1

Poverty Eradication versus Economic Development

This is in response to President Zuma's State of the Nation Address. While many analysts regurgitated rhetoric and criticized the quality of the President's speech, I would like to offer a solution to poverty. It is a conceptual solution with regard to policy formulation and implementation. In this regard, I propose that the ANC led government's focus must be poverty eradication and not economic development. Economic development must be one of the strategies in the fight against poverty eradication.

What I am essentially suggesting is that we rethink the fight against poverty. The goal so far has been economic development so that it can reduce poverty and create jobs, and since 1994 we did not get any far. This simply resulted in some economic growth without significant reduction in poverty and almost stagnant unemployment figures.

My suggestion is that we make poverty eradication the goal and economic development as one of the strategies to eradicate poverty. This approach recognise poverty eradication as multifaceted and not just as a simple result of the lack of economic growth.

A multifaceted approach would thus include land reform, agricultural development and industry reform as poverty reduction strategies.This approach recognises poverty as the greatest challenge and align resources and effort accordingly.

This is a new way of thinking and obviously there would be resistance to this approach because after volumes of rhetoric and conventional wisdom, it is only the brave that would risk the unknown.

However, remember not so long ago conventional wisdom let people to believe that the world was flat and that you if you walked far enough you will get to the end of the world. Also, not so long ago it was believed that the earth was at the center of the universe and that everything orbited around it and those who dare to challenged it was ridiculed and faced the death penalty.

So, let it begin.

It is better to be a dog than a poor ‘black’ child

I can’t help but wondering about the value of a ‘black’ child in society; that is when you consider that dogs are treated better than starving ‘black’ children. It is safe to conclude that it is better to be a dog than a poor ‘black’ child.

As a dog you will at least have three meals a day. You will also have a comfortable place to sleep, be protected by high security fences, and receive regular pampered treatments by the owner.

As a dog you will not be abused by your owner because animal ‘brutality’ has become a greater sin than child abuse. Now days you cannot even swear at a dog because you will be crucified by animal activist all over the globe (like I would be after writing this).

And dare you defend yourself when a dog attacks you, you will be threatened and abuse by the owners. I know this because my brother not so long ago was attacked by a dog and when he defended himself, one of the ‘white’ (I have to emphasize the ‘race’) owners threatened him, and tried to chase him out the area.

She (the owner) said to my brother that he was not allowed in ‘their’ neighbourhood and hence, the dog had all the right to attack him (in a public road). When he stood up for himself and said that Mandela and others fought for his freedom he was cursed at and threatened more.

Minutes later after the incident on his way home he was almost ran over the other ‘white’ owner (husband). He brought a friend with and they threatened him. He was also advised never to set foot in that neighbourhood again.

This all happed because he did not allow a dog to bite him in a public road. Thus, my conclusion: it is better for a poor ‘black’ child to be a dog, than to be a poor ‘black’ human being.

P.S.: At least some celebrities stopped the dog trend and are adopting ‘black’ African children, but still I cannot help but wondering how much they value these ‘black’ children. 

It is raining shit in the DA

I had to write this after the latest ‘shitty’ incident in Khayelitsha, Cape Town. Based on a discussion I had with my colleagues today I realised that what happened in Khayelitsha will probably set a trend throughout South Africa.

Firstly, I do not think it is a criminal offence to throw someone with shit, unless you seriously get injured or sick from it. Secondly, it put Zille’s government in a tight spot because she cannot criminalise this offence because whose rights were first infringed.

In this regard, it would be the citizens of Khayelitsha. If Zille makes the case that her dignity was infringed, the citizens in Khayelitsha’s right to human dignity was first infringed, especially after the City of Cape Town did not empty the toilets. What I was not able to comprehend is why Zille, after being warned by the ANCYL and the 2009 toilet saga, decided to visit Khayelitsha on such a sensitive matter. By just doing this it provoked citizens.

Thirdly, all politicians would now be very careful to be arrogant at community meetings, especially now that citizens have a weapon of mass destruction. This weapon is more peaceful then violent protest marches but more disgusting. Instead of burning down the councillors house citizens can just drench the house with shit. Police will also treat citizens with the necessary respect because they would be possible targets of this new found weapon. To be honest I will rather choose a stone over a face full of shit.

Citizens, I hereby urge you to use your new found weapon of mass destruction; every time you hear a politician talking nonsense flung them with shit, it seems to be the greatest insult in South Africa.