Too late to apologise?
06/03/2008 12:25  - (SA)  

Want to know more? Answerit can help.

Georgina Guedes

Apologies have been flying these past two weeks, highlighting the fact that South Africa is still a hotbed of racist feeling, from both sides of the colour division.

But while tension is running high and sparks are flying, there are those speaking out who remind us that sanity prevails.

The first issue, of course, is the racist video that emerged at the University of the Free State.

Segregation of the dormitories, while not officially sanctioned, had become the status quo. A recent push to alter this led to a group of young students making a video in which they tricked dormitory cleaners into eating stew which appeared to be laced with urine.

Any question about the "all in good fun" nature of the video can be rapidly put to rest by the closing message, bearing the words, in Afrikaans, "That, at the end of the day, is what we think of integration."

For the students to try to paint the video as a satirical take on the issue of integration, but to apologise, as they have done, for any embarrassment "unintentionally" caused, is to undermine their apology.

They should apologise outright, not attempt to defend, as satire, their production. There is no satire contained in the bald statement made by the video. Sure, the workers were not actually drinking urine, but the message remains clear.

The dreaded K-word

After seeing the uproar over the video, Irvin Khosa, Chairman of the 2010 World Cup Local Organising Committee, felt compelled to apologise for having told a black journalist not to "think like a kaffir".

In an interesting reversal of the belief that one black person can call another black person whatever he likes, the SA Human Rights Commission got involved. Following the apology, the matter is now considered to be closed.

Khoza felt prompted to make the apology once he saw the UFS video. He stated that he thought that blatant racism in South Africa "was a thing of the past", and was concerned about providing anyone with ammunition for future battles.

Although, the events of the last couple of weeks have clearly proved that racism is alive and well, it is encouraging that Khoza had felt, however briefly, that blatant racism no longer existed. That this was proven as misguided is unfortunate, but it does show that in spite of everything, the turmoil of the past is not always foremost on everyone's minds.

"I'm not sorry"

And then, there's the man who won't apologise. Jon Qwelane is asserting his right to label as "coconuts" (black outside, white inside) the black journalists who spoke out in protest against white journalists being excluded from a Forum of Black Journalists (FBJ) meeting that Jacob Zuma attended.

This is perhaps the grayest area in the murk of the last two weeks' racism dramas. For every argument there's a counter-argument.

Yes, black professionals are entitled to the support of a network of their peers. There is still an alarming dearth of representation of previously disadvantaged groups at management level across the business spectrum, and these kinds of support networks are in place to provide a sense of community for those who have made it to the top against all odds.

No one objects to the existence of the Black Business Forum. But I wonder how people would feel about a White Business Forum? I certainly wouldn't want to be a member, but perhaps that's because of the negative weight of our past.

What's interesting is the thorny issue of what exactly constitutes "black". Indian and coloured people were still welcome at the FBJ. If a compelling speaker was to be present at the Forum for White Journalists, and Indian and coloured people were invited, but black people were excluded, what kind of an outcry would there be?

But the crucial point here is not the exclusion of white journalists in the first place, it's the attack on those black journalists who spoke out in defense of their lighter colleagues. Camaraderie within racial groups is one thing, but when you start limiting the movement and rights of the press, you are straying into very dangerous territory indeed.

I wholly support, admire, and would like to express my gratitude towards those journalists who left the event in protest. Jon Qwelane is entitled to his opinion, and I am entitled to mine. I believe those journalists did the right thing, and that Qwelane's dismissal of them served only to highlight the brave stance they were taking.

Still hopeful

While some people might be wringing their hands and bemoaning the unraveling of the fabric of South African society, I believe that these are all important discussions to be having.

It wasn't possible to wave a magic wand and do away with the imbalances of the past. It took a series of unfortunate events to show us that we still have a long way to go. But with support for every group coming from unlikely corners, I think that it still holds true that there is more that unites than divides us.