The Convenient Silences of 'Xenophobia'

I did not want to write about ‘xenophobia,’ but I was unable to contain myself when I saw four of my colleagues standing with anti-‘xenophobia’ posters and with these words printed on them: “injury 2 one, injury 2 all;” “Africa for Africans;” “Africa Unite;” and “we are all foreigners somewhere.” I am sick and tired of the word ‘xenophobia’ and the way the petite bourgeoisie are pretending they have nothing to do with it. However, this article is not about my dislike for the petite bourgeoisie, but rather about the silences in the media and conversations on the topic of xenophobia.

I identified five convenient silences that exit in the popular discourse of ‘xenophobia’ in South Africa. I called it convenient because everybody know about it but choose rather not to speak about it. These five silences are: (1) race, (2) gender, (3) locality, (4) nationality and (5) class. If you consider these five silences that you realise that what is happening in South Africa is not xenophobia but something completed different.

Firstly, if you define xenophobia it simple means is the fear of all strangers. If this is the case then it does not explain why only a certain group of foreigners are attacked. White European and Chinese foreigners are not being targeted even though they just as foreign African nationals.

Secondly, the feminist movement also haven't say anything about this particular incident mainly because the majority of victims are males. Here the popular discourse is lacking because it does not consider the gender of the victims.

Thirdly, popular discourse also does not consider the location/locality of these 'xenophobic' incidents. Yes they refer to the place like for Diepsloot Soweto or wherever it is happening, but the discourse neglects to contrast it to where white foreigners are residing. It does not happen in Sandton or the Waterfront, it happens where the majority of people are poor and destitute.

Fourthly, popular discourse neglects to contrast the nationality of the victims to other foreign nationals. Chinese and European foreigners are not being attacked. It is only some foreign nationals on the African continent who are being attacked, especially those who own spaza shops.

Finally, the discourse also does not focus on class. ‘Xenophobia’ in South Africa happens amongst the working class and not amongst the elite in society. Thus, ‘xenophobia’ is rather class bias.

If we consider these silences in the popular discourse we have to conclude that it is not xenophobia, it is also not 'Afrophobia.' If it was 'Afrophobia' then foreign nationals from West Africa would have also been attacked. It is not black on black violence. If it was black on black violence then black people from all walks of life would have participated in these attacks. It is also not economic violence or criminality since it does not explain the pogroms (mob). Crime does not explain the pogroms.

It has to be something else!

My investigation so far has led me to the 'politics of belonging.' If you see it as a 'politics of belonging' then what is happening in South Africa is not unique to South Africa. It is happening all over the continent and the world. In Uganda it is called 'indigeneity, in Cameroon it is called 'autochthony' and in the USA and Europe it is the ‘anti-immigrant sentiment.’

The 'politics of belonging' raises the question as to who may lay the claim that one group belongs more than another in a particular geographical area. As you would see this already raises issues around the idea of the national versus the international - nationalism versus globalisation.

Just a few years ago everyone was hopeful of the prospects of globalisation; however these incidents the world over see a retraction into the idea of the national. We have once more become a citizen of the nation-state. Some argue that the politics of belonging is fuelled by national consciousness. I am not convinced since the politics of belonging in most cases are isolated incidences. 

So far, through my investigation, I have narrowed the cause of the politics of belonging to migration and scarcity. What I observed so far is that there is always a migration from an area of ‘scarcity’ to an area of ‘plenty.’ The migrants integrate themselves amongst the locals and develop a new national consciousness which they share with the locals. However, when a scarcity arises a politics of belonging is ensued as to who may lay claim to the resources. The locals believe since they were the first they have the sole right over the resource distribution. This automatically leads to a confrontation especially since some of the migrants developed the same national consciousness as the locals. They believe they belong just as much as the rest, especially if they have been there for generations. 

The confrontation in most cases has been violent. However, in Europe and in the USA this confrontation so far has mostly been through law. In some cases the confrontation develops into a full scale civil war such as the one in the Great Lakes region of Africa (Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo); where the immigrant’s national consciousness is just as strong as that of the local’s. 

If we consider this, the politics of belonging is a much better explanation then the current ‘xenophobia’ discourse. The consequence of the discourse will be the following: ‘xenophobia’ will be trapped in a dominant narrative and will be reinforced by empirical research. This will blind us from its broader significance.

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.  

Keep dreaming and working

If you have a dream protect it from all the negative people in your life. They are so negative because their insecurities and broken dreams are giving them nightmares when they look at you and when they look in the mirror. You failed a couple of times, SO WHAT! You made a couple of mistakes, SO WHAT! The only thing that matters is that you keep trying and pushing to make your dream a reality.

Nobody said or made promises that it is going to be easy, but surely it will be worth it. If they say negative things towards your dreams and aspirations, please tell them they have no right to comment on yours if theirs are in pieces or stagnant.

I came to realise that people who are working on their dreams are generally positive and supportive towards others’ dreams. They help others in achieving theirs. On the contrary, I came to realise that negative people (in most cases it are people very close to you) either gave up theirs or they fear yours might end up like theirs.

This is one of the biggest mistakes of most friends, family and parents. You share an idea or dream with them and the first words they utter are: ‘it will not work.’ This is the last thing you want to hear especially since you already know the risks; and when these words are uttered it shatters the last bit of confidence you had into a million pieces. What parents, family, guardians and spouses do not realise is that they are systematically sabotaging the future of their children, family members and spouses. A little bit of positivity is all the person needs to get him or her going.

I remember back in 2006 when I had to make a decision whether I must register the next year or not, I needed only two people’s positive reactions to get me into action. There were those who were negative but I needed the confirmation of two people. The first was my Grandmother and the second was Ant Lenie.

Of the two I expected my Grandmother to be the most critical but when I mentioned it to her, her first and only words on the subject were: my kind gaan studeer (my child go study). It was exactly the same response I got from Ant Lenie, and so I registered in 2007 and since then graduated thrice.

You really do not help anyone by being negative if they came to you with their dreams. You must be flattered because that person trusts you! You have two choices either say nothing or motivate that person. If you decide to motivate and support that person, please make sure they answer these questions to themselves before they start their dreams.

The first is why the person wants to do it? It is important the person answer this question because it will keep the person going when they are experiencing difficulties. The second is how would it add value to his or her life? Not all value is monetary, some are intrinsic. Thus make sure the person knows what he or she will be getting from the dream because that will keep them going. Finally, ask the person whether he or she is willing to take the sacrifices that come with pursuing the dream. Pursuing any dream is not easy and there will come days when you feel like giving up. Make sure the person understand this.

These questions are merely a guide but a good way of encouraging someone to start his or her dream. Remember some people were laughed at when they said they want to go to the moon, build an aeroplane, a telephone, a car, etc. Your best response to negativity must be success. 

Kerfees in Namakwaland

Kerfees in Namakwaland is ‘n wonderlike tyd en al het ons nie baie nie laat dit ons nie afsit om ‘n heerlike tyd te he nie. Die musiek, die mense, die braai vleis en die kinders wat lag is van die beste herinneringe wat ek koester. Soos ‘n mens ouer word verloor jy dinge in die lewe, eers is dit die mense om jou,  later is dit jou drome een vir een en eendag as jy jouk om kry is dit Kersfees. Dit is ‘n moeilike werklikheid wat ons as mens moet aanvaar.

Ek skryf hierdie stuk met die musiek van Allou April in die agtergrond terwyl ek omring is met geboue en die gejaag na wind. Soos die Prediker gese het, is al ons drome en suksesse aan die einde van jou leeftyd ‘n gejaag na wind. Alles waar voor jy so hard gewerk het kom tot niks. Niks.

So, terwyl ek besig is met my gejaag na wind verlang ek na die mense van Namakwaland – my oorlede Ouma en Oupa, my oorlede vriend Neels (Oor wie ek nie gehuil kan kry nie. Die huil sit hier binne in my maar dit is moeilik om uit te kom. As dit net wil uitkom sal ek beter voel maar nou wil dit nie.), my vriende wat oor die jare my famlie geword het en my familie.

Die beste en die laaste keer wat ons as familie bymekaar gewees het ‘n Kersfees was in 2005. Die jaar wat by die army klaar gemaak het. Dit het spontaan gebeur. Eers het my een Antie laat weet sy kom en toe my een oom (die ander een was by die huis) en op Kersfees het my ander Antie kom kuier. Al hoewel twee van my Ouma en Oupa se kinders nie daar was nie het dit nie saak gemaak nie.

Ek het lang arm musiek op my laptop gehad wat ek op ‘n CD gesit het en wat ons in die DVD klaar gespeel het. Ek het gedans – ons almal het gedans. Ek het die voorreg gehad om saam met my Ouma te dans. Dit was toe sy nog sterk was want die jare daarna het sy al agteruit gegaan tot sy ‘n skaduwee van haarself was. Ons het gemmerbier gedrink en koek geeet. Vleis geeet.

Wat ‘n tyd.

Vandag dink ek daaraan en verlang na my wereld en sy mense. Waar vandaan ek kom is nou wel droog en kaal in die sommer maar die mense is gasvry en te gemoedkommend; wat ‘n eindproduk van swaarkry is. Is net wanneer jy regtig swaar gekry het of rerig swaarkry dat jy so gasvry en mededeelsaam kan wees sonder voorgee. Mense kan nou maar wat se van ons wereld en sy mense maar nie een kan se ons is suinig en vrekkig nie. Ons almal weet hoe om suiker tot more te vra.

Ons mense het ook hulle eie soorte trots, ‘n trots wat jy nie uit hulle sal kry nie. En dit verskil van hoogmoed. ‘n Trots wat hulle ook partykeer in stilte sal laat vergaan net sodat jy nie hulle menslikheid van hulle kan neem nie. Daardie trots is wat hulle nog mens hou al kry hulle hoe swaar. En dit is die trots wat in my en enige ander kind van die Namakwaland is. Jy kan probeer om oor ons te loop en jy kan dit miskien regkry maar my menslikheid sal agterbly al beteken dit my eie ondergaan. Kruip is vir enige mens swaar maar nog swaarder vir iemand van Namakwaland.

Maar genoeg van die trots en die swaarkry en terug na Kersfees in Namakwaland.

Een van die dinge wat my altyd nostalgies maak is die reuk van vuur in die skemer en die langarm musiek wat so eie aan ons mense is. Die tipe musiek wat dit ontmoontlik vir jou maak om stil te sit. Of jy nou kan dans of nie maar dans sal jy – al is dit net voutjies klop. Gee vir Pieter Pillie en Oorlede Ant Grietjie ‘n kitaar en jy het ‘n party wat die son sal laat op kom.

En terwyl Allou se Madiba’s Jive my terug bring na die werklikheid toe, laat die herinneringe van Kersfees in Namakwaland my met ‘n snaakse tevredenheid.

Geseende Kersfees.

Add caption

Toe gewy aan my vriend Cornelius Ovies, vriende en familie.

Enhancing Humanities in Africa

It seems as Humanities across the globe is in a crisis. Several reports contribute this crisis to a decrease in funding, a declining number of students who enrol for Humanities and a declining number of graduates who find a job after they graduated in Humanities (Delany, 2013; Levitz & Belkin, 2013 and Tworek, 2013).

A recent study by the Academy of Science of South Africa echoes some of the global trends. One of the key findings, in their report titled Consensus Study on the Future of the Humanities in South Africa, indicates that humanities is a state of intellectual stagnation and has been in this moribund condition for the past 15 years. A report commissioned by the Department of Higher Education called the Charter for Humanities and Social Sciences had similar findings. The difference between the two was that the Charter was institutionalised as the National Institute for Humanities and Social Sciences and has to address the challenges Humanities in South Africa are facing. Even though these reports are only based on the state of Humanities in South Africa we may infer that this is most likely the case in the rest of Africa.

However, the reality is Humanities in Africa inherited a particular history of privilege and subjection at independence and since then we have been grappling with it, and it seems as we are stuck. These reports opened a debate in South Africa and other parts of Africa as to what is the way forward for Humanities in Africa.

Pillay (05 April 2013, Mail & Guardian) argues that “we should lead the critique of the humanities and social sciences we have inherited by pointing to its limitation.” Leading the critique would mean we are taking responsibility for a ‘new’ Humanities going forward. In addition to this, Premesh Lalu in an article in the Mail & Guardian encourages African scholars to think ahead and out of the deadlock (Lalu, 07 June 2014, Mail and Guardian). I have to agree as I found that the majority of scholarly work in Africa is stuck in the past and disregard the present and the future. There are two things we have to bear in mind in this debate: we cannot change the past and we live in the present. I am not disputing the importance of the past but we have the tendency of disregarding the present and the future in scholarly work.

Like many other disciplines, Humanities also operates in the present. Our reality is that the present is materialistic and technologically driven society. Technological advances shapes a future which is changing so rapidly that even the most progressive technologically driven disciplines find it hard to keep up. This can be either a threat or an opportunity. If we see it as an opportunity a new generation of Humanities students has to be innovative, contemporary and at the fore front of societal change. Thus, we must anticipate changes and approach it progressively. However, this can only be possible if we are clear of the future we want for Humanities in Africa.

So what is our point of departure?

Mahmood Mamdani of the Makerere Institute for Social Research (MISR) recently asked the question how do we think the world from Africa? In the famous Hollywood movie ‘Blood Diamond’ the mentor of the protagonist said to him TIA which means ‘this is Africa.’ He referred to the main stream Western view of Africa which is seen as violent, corrupt and exotic. Since then a new movement amongst young African musicians developed which is called TINA which stands for ‘this is new Africa’. This movement decided to reclaim African music and expose it to world. They are not standing back for any of their Western counterparts and have some of the most popular videos on Youtube. It is time for Humanities in Africa to reclaim their place in world but we can only do this if we know what our point of departure is and only then we are able to think the world from Africa.