Our greatest export has been a lie of a miracle reconciliation

Written by Sentletse Diakanyo
Monday, 03 October 2011 17:16

Confronting our past makes for emotive dialogue, which often ends up in tears, but national unity and reconciliation demands of all of us a higher level of maturity and mutual trust.

The road to freedom was not smooth. A long, hard troubled journey was travelled, with black people having to contend with the negativity towards them as a collective and towards the struggle for liberation, which was portrayed as an illegitimate cause in support of communism. Those who were at the forefront of the fight for freedom, like Nelson Mandela, were seen as dangerous criminals and terrorists. The same Afro-pessimism that existed during the fight of the oppressed people against apartheid existed during the era of colonial thuggery, when blacks were seen as savages and barbarians.

The pursuit of national unity and reconciliation was at the core of the African National Congress agenda throughout the struggle, but the apartheid nationalist regime brainwashed the majority of whites into believing that black people were not concerned with the welfare of the nation and its property. It took the leadership of Nelson Mandela in the aftermath of the assassination of Chris Hani to placate primal fears of whites and calm the seething anger of Africans. The world took notice of the capacity of blacks to practise restraint in the midst of great provocation. The country had retreated from the brink of anarchy.

The interim constitution agreed to in 1993 demanded of all South Africans, black and white, to commit to working towards national unity and reconciliation. Nelson Mandela was entrusted with the immense burden and responsibility of uniting a glaringly divided nation and promoting reconciliation amongst South Africans.

Unfortunately, it would seem that some understood the reconciliatory agenda of the Mandela presidency to mean that the entire nation needed to suffer from collective amnesia, that the process of reconciliation meant “forgiving and forgetting” all the historical injustices. But as one of the most multi-racial and multi-cultural nations in the world, the task of bridging the historical divide was always going to be a difficult and emotionally challenging one. The description by Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu of us as a “rainbow nation” punctuated this multi-culturalism that is the fibre of society and posed the challenge of uniting in our diversity.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) sought to heal the wounds of the past and close a sad chapter in our history. Emanating from the TRC process was the granting of amnesty to perpetrators of apartheid crimes against humanity and to those in the fight against that unjust system. The TRC should have provided an opportunity for all South Africans to carry out the task of nation-building and reconciliation with less angst about the past, but some did not take the process seriously and did not make full disclosures about crimes committed in the past. People such as Eugene de Kock were refused amnesty primarily because of this lack of transparency. Outside the TRC process, the rest of South Africa had to embrace each other and work together to redress the historical wrongs.

Since the TRC, there has been in existence a disturbing level of arrogance and resistance amongst some whites who perhaps viewed the transformation agenda as challenging to their own historical privileges. While we proudly proclaim ourselves to be a rainbow nation and pretend to the outside world to be united in the name of Nelson Mandela, the reality is that we remain deeply divided along racial lines. The “us and them” mentality still exists in our society. When the subject of transformation arises, whites who are inspired by ignorance and the need to maintain the status quo will accuse well-meaning South Africans of “reverse discrimination”.

The question of race is that which divides us and it is that which should unite us.

South Africans generally steer clear of having uncomfortable conversations about the past, about things that divide us and about lasting solutions to all these problems that are deeply rooted in race. Keeping up the pretence and continuing the lie of “national unity” appears to be premised on the notion that a problem ignored long enough will fade with time. Sadly this head-in-the-sand syndrome only serves to delay progress towards full realisation of national unity and reconciliation. White people are legendary in dismissing dialogue that seeks to confront the problem of race and the divisions that exist within society, primarily because of a fear of being accused of racism. This situation is exacerbated by frustrated black people who readily abuse the race card when challenged on key national questions.

In his treatise Striving of the Negro People (1897), WEB du Bois posed the following question: “How does it feel to be a problem?” His was an important question in the context of addressing the problem of racism in the 20th century; and it is an important question to address the problem of the 21st century, the problem of economic emancipation of the black collective. The question of transformation and empowerment highlights the difficult task of addressing apparent irrreconciled ideals between black and white people. The challenge for both groups is the open acknowledgement and recognition of the impact of our past in the present and equal recognition that national unity and reconciliation is key to resolving such contentious historical issues.

Confronting our past makes for emotive dialogue, which often ends up in tears, but national unity and reconciliation demands of all of us, black and white, a higher level of maturity and mutual trust, a change of attitude and transformation of the mind and the urgency to discard all racial stereotypes we have long become accustomed to. Embracing transformation of the mind as transformation of society is the prime requisite for national unity and reconciliation. It is, therefore, useful for all of us to know something in the manner of different cultures, that we may be enabled to form a correct judgement regarding what constitutes this rainbow nation and what is required of us to preserve it.

A nation united in diversity demands of its citizens a reasonable understanding and knowledge of all that gives rise to such diversity. The promotion of multi-racialism and multi-culturalism cannot exist in a vacuum and be rooted in ignorance and prejudice. It is important that we find our common interests and use them as the basis to have uncomfortable conversations.

It is the duty of all South Africans, regardless of race, while living under the pretences of unity, to commit to restoring the dignity of the majority who continue to exist on the margins of the economy. To transition a nation from a divided and volatile coexistence to a harmonious normality requires confidence in our ability to define a common purpose; to truly live to the ideals of a united and prosperous nation; and to fulfil the promise we make when we sing the national anthem, that “united we shall stand”. Our insistence on living a lie of a rainbow nation is a betrayal of the sacrifices made for this freedom, a betrayal of our own social harmony. South Africans should not be afraid to have the difficult conversations openly. It is those difficult conversations that help to bridge the great divide.