“The DA Protects White Interests And Would Bring Back Apartheid”

Of course, that would depend on who gets to define “white interests” and “apartheid”.

If you’d argue that the DA would create a South Africa in which anyone could succeed, it would be pointed out that this success would be on “the white man’s terms”. The most curious of those western terms is the word “corruption”. It is western insofar as it tells us what the terms of western success should not be.

Black people share a history in which looking out for one’s people’s interests was prioritized over rule-keeping. We therefore have a higher tolerance for corruption. That’s not the same as saying we are more corrupt. It is to generalize, rather loosely and anecdotally, that we put “ugazi” (“blood” – shared humanity and heritage, robust Ubuntu, compassion, longsuffering and forgiveness) before technical and legal correctness.

By this standard, whoever admits the paradox that rule-keeping levels the playing field for everyone, and is therefore more in line with universal “Ubuntu” than an unlimited “forgiveness” that stands by watching the country go to waste, will be declared anathema.

I suspect our reluctance to call the ANC out has less to do with the fear that “the white man” will bring back apartheid than it is out of spite for him bringing apartheid in the past to begin with. Knowing better or choosing not to, we’ll lump the DA with “the white man” and proclaim a plague on both their houses. Of course we know that the DA emerged from some progressive party during apartheid. “Bajikela abakubo”, one ANC supporter pointed out to emphasize that when white people fought against apartheid, those white people “turned against their own” – an unthinkability that nobody should ever dare, not even in the name of principle. I’ve sensed a bottomless hatred in many black people for “the other”; that this hatred is held back by the same “Ubuntu” that stops them from calling out black corruption. Also, I’ve sensed a choice to fear the mostly black leaders that have been put into power.

The DA thinks it’s the DA’s job to sell itself to black voters; many analysts, commentators and critics agree that the DA should be doing more to make itself more appealing to black voters without looking like it’s trying too hard to get black votes. But then a double-standard arises that allows the DA to have absolutely no imperfections (and it has them!) while allowing the ANC and all other parties to get away with blue murder.

In view of existing evidence, saying that the DA should do more to appeal to black voters is as absurd as saying it’s the government’s job to create jobs. If it’s the DA’s job to sell itself to black voters, then what’s the voters’ job? It is a very passive democracy wherein voting citizens are not expected to think. Someone has to chew it up and spit it in our mouths for us, I see.

I’d have imagined that when the ruling party is not upholding the Constitution, the opposition party should not be bending back-over-backwards to get me to vote differently. The DA might not convince me to vote for the DA, but it shouldn’t have to convince me to vote for something other than the ANC. That I won’t vote for today’s ANC should be a given. I am puzzled, if not offended, that anyone thinks the DA would have to help me see that, just because I’m black. Is there something about my blackness that leaves me unable to make an objective assessment of the varying parties, seeing their strengths and weaknesses (which they all have)? Is it because I’m black that I’m expected to be blind, deaf and dumb to what’s happening around me, and an extra emphasis has to be placed on influencing my vote, beyond crossing the language barrier?

“Many black people have rational reasons for voting for the ANC”, I’m told.

Have we now reached a point where I have the right to speak my mind and say that’s bullshit? I was a wedding that was interrupted by load-shedding. My whole weekend has been thrown out of synch by load shedding. Do I have a right to speak my mind, now? Here it is: there are many reasons to vote for today’s ANC, and many of them are noble and beautiful. But they’re not rational. They’re not about ensuring the best interests of the country. I say this in view of the evidence at hand and unless the ANC changes.

Could it be that the reason the DA is not attracting scads of black voters is that many of those black voters don’t want to be attracted? Let’s be honest, now. Has this thought crossed anybody’s mind? A great number of black voters are not tired of ruling party corruption: many of them have accepted it as inevitable and are scoping the system out for how they can also benefit. They are simultaneously annoyed and amused by the “white man” aka-the-DA jumping up and down yelling, “It’s not fair!” to corruption because it’s so similar to black people’s jumping up and down yelling, “It’s not fair!” to apartheid 20-odd years ago. This idea that black ANC voters are waiting for some magic day when the ANC will improve is rubbish. The majority of black people gained nothing from apartheid and stand to lose nothing from government corruption. A great number of white people, on the other hand…

If the 62% really wanted a good South Africa, they would come to the table. They won’t because, as my acquaintance pointed out, that would be turning against one’s own.

What? Don’t shoot the messenger. I just speculate and observe.

“What do you think you’d get if the DA got into power? Do you really think they’d allow you to thrive in their white world?” I’m asked.

Sure. Because the ANC allows me to thrive in its world. Mixed feelings.

“Zuma has gotten Nkandla out of his system”, someone pointed out to me. “If we replace him with someone else, that person will have to build his or her own Nkandla and the drama will start all over again. So we might as well keep Zuma and bear it out.”

God, I think, handed his resignation in when he heard these words.

There was nothing left to save. Sorry, Tata. You fought against white domination. You fought against black domination. You cherished the ideal of a democratic South Africa in which all are equal, and you were prepared to die for it.

And I now think that we have failed you. Some dreams are just too lofty for mere mortals.

@SKhumalo1987

SKhumalo1987@gmail.com

Advertisements

3 thoughts on ““The DA Protects White Interests And Would Bring Back Apartheid”

  1. I disagree with you about corruption .. The type we are seeing was commonplace in Western Europe albeit over 150 years ago .. civil servants got jobs because of rank and connections in society and often held post they wouldn’t work at but send someone else in their place , suppliers ripped off the sate big time..you could buy an army commission as an officer etc .. so its not anything to do with being African unless you saying our corruption is caused my a different culture ? and for different reasons… You see this corruption in the old Soviet republics as well in in South America and Mexico .. how do you explain this ..its not a black white thing in my view..patronage is universal.. why some western governments do do it much is they have learned the cost and put in prlce the necessary checks .. they professionalised the civil service rather than politicised it. In my working career I practised a type of this too. I wouldl give contracts to friends who could deliver the services and often these were old school mates etc // is this not a form of patronage ?.. the problem in the case of SA is that this is not hurting the whites that much ..Whites have flourished under the ANC .. financially anyway.. its hurting blacks who are diserving of the jobs , the contracts etc. If you ask most of my middle class white friends what upsets them them the most , its ineptitude .. ie wastage of resources Escom etc , then corruption ..They want their tax money to help the country not a select few.. in my opinion the current ruling clique is more based on a type of ethnic nationalism.( left wing nationalism ). and in this you may well be right about black voters and the DA .. the DA do not stand for African Nationalism but rather constitutionalism.. and this could be the underlying issue …… its a problem not unlike unthinking whites voting for Afrikaner nationalism and Germans approving of Hitler corrupt National Socialism. Blacks prefer African nationalism ( its in the name African NATIONAL Congress ) its not the African Democratic Party is it ? However I note a recent ANC stronghold rolled over totally to the DA in a by election ..
    two major bodies of thought address the causes of nationalism:
    the modernist perspective describes nationalism as a recent phenomenon that requires the structural conditions of modern society in order to exist
    the primordialist perspective describes nationalism as a reflection of the ancient and perceived evolutionary tendency of humans to organize into distinct groupings based on an affinity of birth
    Roger Masters in The Nature of Politics (1989) says that both the primordialist and modernist conceptions of nationalism involve an acceptance of three levels of common interest of individuals or groups in national identity

    1.at an inter-group level, humans respond to competition or conflict by organizing into groups to either attack other groups or defend their group from hostile groups
    2.at the intragroup level, individuals gain advantage through cooperation with others in securing collective goods that are not accessible through individual effort alone
    3.on the individual level, self-interested concerns over personal fitness by individuals either consciously or subconsciously motivate the creation of group formation as a means of security

    The behaviour of leadership groups or élites that involves efforts to advance their own fitness when they are involved in the mobilization of an ethnic or national group is crucial in the development of the culture of that group

    The ANC are taking on the appearance of worst kind of nationalism and they fit the mould quite well.Its a dangerous thing and minority groups in SA are starting to feel this .. Mandela’s ideal of a non racial South Africa and for which he worked is just a dream because it failed to take into account this underlying nationalism of many blacks .When I challenged one black friend recently he responded by saying something along the lines that in his view its ok to F up the state corporations and the country as long as blacks are doing it .. Ja well no fine I thought.. with that sort of attitude it may be worth considering Perth as a future home..

  2. In contrast the DA wants to promote the opposite of ethic nationalism ..and that is civic nationalism.. this is because we are are an ethnically divided society .. what other option do we have .

    Civic nationalism (also known as liberal nationalism) defines the nation as an association of people who identify themselves as belonging to the nation, who have equal and shared political rights, and allegiance to similar political procedures. According to the principles of civic nationalism, the nation is not based on common ethnic ancestry, but is a political entity whose core identity is not ethnicity. This civic concept of nationalism is exemplified by Ernest Renan in his lecture in 1882 “What is a Nation?”, where he defined the nation as a “daily referendum” (frequently translated “daily plebiscite”) dependent on the will of its people to continue living together.

    Civic nationalism is a kind of non-xenophobic nationalism that is claimed to be compatible with liberal values of freedom, tolerance, equality, and individual rights.] Ernest Renan and John Stuart Mill are often thought to be early liberal nationalists. Liberal nationalists often defend the value of national identity by saying that individuals need a national identity in order to lead meaningful, autonomous lives, and that liberal democratic polities need national identity in order to function properly.

    Civic nationalism lies within the traditions of rationalism and liberalism, but as a form of nationalism it is contrasted with ethnic nationalism. Member is is voluntary and not by birth .. examples are France and the USA.I feel these two type of nationalism are competing with the majority still going down the ethnic road

    I always find it strange that with their numbers blacks do not vote and become members of the DA because they could change its composition virtually overnight……… maybe they need to to believe more in civic rather than ethnic nationalism to do this ……….If SA is to grow and flourish , its only civic nationalism thats going to get us there .Ethnic type is going to lead to increasing conflict

    • “Civic nationalism lies within the traditions of rationalism and liberalism, but as a form of nationalism it is contrasted with ethnic nationalism.”

      “I always find it strange that with their numbers blacks do not vote and become members of the DA because they could change its composition virtually overnight”

      Amen, and Amen.

      Do you blog? Please tell me you blog.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s