Asikhulume: Transformation vs. Reconciliation

I don’t really watch a lot of television. But there’s a secret cache of talkshow programmes on South African television on Sunday nights that are quite interesting to watch if you’re in a, thinking, inquisitive, open-minded mood.

The first I watched was Asikhulume, and the second Interface. Interface did a pretty cool piece on the deregulation of the fuel industry in the light of the massive petrol price hike this month.

Asikhulume/Let’s Talk asked an interesting question: “Has the South African government promoted reconciliation at the cost of transformation?” They had 3 semi-famous people on their panel: a black woman whose name I can’t remember, a white dude called Dan Roodt representing Afrikaner interests, and a black man called Aubrey that was the most rational around that whole table (hostess included).

I always want to hear the opinions of the masses of South Africa regarding the issues the country as well as true popular opinion regarding “The Oppressor” (or Afrikaner). I guess I learnt something I should’ve known anyway… The opinions of South Africans are pretty much as numerous as the citizens themselves. Just as Dan Roodt’s views hardly represents the opinions of every Afrikaner, so one view isn’t necessarily representative of the masses of South Africa.

There were some opinions phoned in by callers that was quite troubling.

1. “Africans can never be racist because racism requires power to be exerted over someone/some group…”
2. References were made where black South Africans called themselves “native africans/south africans.”

Some interesting points raised by Dan Roodt were:

1. Afrikaners are a minority in a similar position as the African Americans of the United States.
2. Whites/Afrikaners are afraid of what measures the SA government will employ to see transformation done due to Africa’s history of dealing with whites after they lose power. Zimbabwe was cited as an example of where whites were kicked out and left with nothing more than the clothes on their backs.
3. Whites/Afrikaners are victims of racism (there was a lengthy explanation here I don’t even want to try to reproduce)

Aubrey made the only point I completely agreed with.

(paraphrase) “Everyone feels like they’re a victim and no-one is willing to accept responsibility…” (left unfinished due to interruption by the hostess, Rebecca I believe her name was)

None of these points really directly addressed the question that the episode claimed to ask. But in all the answers something becomes clear. Transformation wasn’t sacrificed for reconciliation. Nothing was sacrificed for reconciliation because there is obviously none (or possibly very little).

Transformation and reconciliation are things that take time. People aren’t going to wake up one morning and forgive all the wrong that was perpetrated against them for four decades. Similarly, the masses that were denied education won’t be able to be integrated into the skilled workforce because the government decrees that it must be so. Transformation also isn’t the reversal of circumstances by force or even by clandestine guidance over time. That’s vengeance.

While a lot of opportunities have been lost to transform South Africa in the last 14 years, some programmes are in place and doing well. Education is still the area that needs the most attention when it comes to transformation, though. Education fights poverty, not campaigns and charity. Education builds managers, brokers, actuaries, engineers, accountants and scientists. Opportunities in South Africa abound, and the workers are few. Except if you form part of the unskilled majority — there the competition is tough and you’re not just fighting your fellow countrymen for jobs, but immigrants that work for cheaper too.