Dr Wilmot James adds an interesting bit to the ongoing discussion about which group(s) can lay indisputable claim to being South African. It arguably opens up new ways of looking at the issue of settlers and natives, and may lead to new arguments and contestation about indigeneity.
James argues that – as a newspaper headline put it – “we are all settlers”. He states that the modern human being in South Africa came here from East Africa. This occurred about 110000 years ago.
“No one group can lay claim to South Africa. Everyone is a settler, and we will show how people came here in waves of migration,” says James. “We do not understand our history well enough and the truth has been modified in many stories.”
This news will cheer many people up; they will see this as further support for the Freedom Charter notion that SA belongs to all who live/settle/survive in it and that the country will thrive only if shared. Such persons will take it as further encouragement to work for the non-racial and anti-racist, inclusive and democratic society envisioned in our Constitution.
Others, however, will be very cautious as they read James’ findings. Already, in some views expressed, people particularly resent the term “we are all settlers” and the leveling it suggests. These people rail against what they might term an ingenious attempt to gloss over the terrible impacts of the colonial period. In this category will also be groups such as Bruin Development that are campaigning for a better status for so-called Coloured people. They will latch on to James’ remark that the “Khoi/San moved from East Africa and, up until 2 000 years ago, people living in southern Africa were brown.”
Somehow, we must try to live with both truths and perspectives – one that centres on inclusiveness and the other which emphasises restoration and restitution. As I have suggested before, if you want to live on the Southern tip, a capacity to live with ambiguity is a must.
We need to accept the truth that we are all human beings and spring from the same source; at the same time, we must deal with memory, history and past experience. Put another way, we cannot solve the problems of the past in a manner that creates new prejudices; at the same time, we should not myopically try to avoid rectifying past injustices just because we want to be nice or avoid constructive conflict.
This research information drives one to the conclusion that it is possibly incorrect, sloppy and perhaps expedient to use the term "native" in an essentialist way. It is much better to use it in a political sense, and, when doing so, to explain what is meant and who is included in the category.
A subtopic to all of this is the science that underlies all of this: James draws his conclusions from DNA evidence and his studies into human genetics.
The “origins” of human-beings always fascinates, as does the genetics involved, but it all becomes sullied, ridiculous and facile (and sometimes even evil) when various forces try to apply this knowledge to issues such as culture and identity. I say: study our origins, teach it to wide-eyed children by all means, but keep the scientific wonder of our genesis far as possible away from contestation about culture, race, ethnicity and social organization in the world today. Identity, it can be argued, is influenced by culture and by power relations that interfere with selfhood and distort discussion around definitions.
Identity and culture are social constructs; they are also subject to change/ adaptation/ evolution through development processes, policymaking and conscious decisions and actions. In any case, cultures adapt in the light of changes (social, economic, technological, etc.) in the world around them. Let’s use the diversity and richness that lie in our differences as human beings to build the society we want here in Mzansi and in the wider world.
Blog readers are invited to share their "take" on the issues involved and on my views by adding a comment.
Showing posts with label ethnicity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ethnicity. Show all posts
Monday, 27 August 2007
Monday, 11 June 2007
Mac Maharaj: our own Che Guevara?
The book Shades of Difference: Mac Maharaj and the Struggle for South Africa reveals Maharaj as a striking figure of SA’s transformation and raises interesting issues for South Africanness and South African identity.
The book, authored by Padraig O’Malley, (with much of the text featuring the direct narrative of Maharaj himself) contains a remarkable foreword by Nelson Mandela. This is no standardized Madiba endorsement - one gets the sense that Mandela has engaged deeply with the text, knows the person intimately and was really moved while reading the book. Madiba describes Maharaj as a founding father of the struggle and says that Mac’s advice helped to enrich his decision-making.
The book reveals Maharaj as a distinctive character: often stubborn, not always easy to get on with, “arrogant to a fault”, proud and zealous, but always driven by the larger concern for social change and adding value through his inventiveness, boundless energy and extraordinary courage.
Mac grew up in a small KwaZulu-Natal town, Newcastle, which embodies all the homeliness and the parochialism of such places. His rebelliousness brought a major clash with his father – and caused him to head for Durban. There, he stirred opposition to apartheid practices at university, and quickly made his way into the ranks of activists.
Maharaj endured unbelievable torture at the hands of the security police – but he remained unbowed. He spent his 12 years on Robben Island organizing, planning and generally being a thorn in the side of the system. He was always at the centre of survival plans – getting news, getting access to “news”, smuggling money into the prison from abroad. Eventually, it was Maharaj who, in the eighties smuggled Mandela’s autobiography from the island jail so that it could be published.
‘Shades of Difference’ portrays Maharaj as a natural born underground operator, our very own Scarlet Pimpernel or Che Guevara. He was a master of disguise and, in the words of Mandela, “popped up in the most unlikely places”. Thoughtful and razor sharp, he knew his enemy, prepared thoroughly, and - despite being on the state’s wanted list for most of his life - provided key connections between activists in exile and in the country, those in jail and out, the armed wing and community-based structures.
Sadly, the book ends on a pessimistic note. In its closing pages, it paints Maharaj as a victim (which is completely out of kilter with the pro-activeness that otherwise always characterised Maharaj’s life). O'Malley notes that midway through penning the book, Maharaj – who had resigned as Minister of Transport in 1999 – felt that his life was falling apart. He had a major run-in with the Scorpions and was entangled in the high profile commission set up to determine whether the then head of Scorpions, Bulelani Ngcuka, had been an apartheid spy in the eighties.
Mac was in the thick of ANC infighting – and, strangely (or not so strangely given the power issues involved), when comrades fall out they can be nastier to each other than to former apartheid leaders who once gave orders to torture or kill them.
O’Malley recounts occurrences which show Maharaj's political sidelining and he argues that this came about because Mac is of Indian descent. In the last chapter, Hush! Apartheid Thoughts of a Different Kind, he brings this theme strongly to the fore. O’Malley notes that “in the new mythology (an emphasis on Africanness) there is little room for an Indian dimension, little room for the likes of Mac Maharaj. He is an anachronism, an artifact of the struggle.”
I think it’s a pity the book ends on a note of bitterness and regrettable that O’Malley insinuates that Mac’s life work has been largely in vain. While it is good that such views are aired (so we can debate them), I disagree with O’Malley. I don’t agree with such extreme views, in the same way that I reject the tone and content of Cosatu leader Zwelinzima Vavi’s comment that the ANC can be compared to the Nazis of Hitler's day.
To be sure, I too have witnessed among some in the ANC, a worrying chauvinism, a view among some new leaders and many foot soldiers in the ANC that non-Africans can have no place in the leadership of democratic transformation. And yet … I firmly believe it is better to remain involved and engaged (with the transformation project) than to retreat into bitterness and outrage. Such bitterness is paralyzing, and retreating leaves the field wide open for such retrogressive thinking to flourish and grow in influence.
In the end, ‘Shades of Difference’ disturbs and disrupts the comfort zone of the hard core Africanist. It shows how people like Maharaj have largely shed their ethnic loyalties and embraced a commitment to justice, human rights and democracy - and that no one can deny them their place in the struggle.
‘Shades of Difference’ is a compelling book, rich in detail and insights about the freedom struggle. It helps in a small but important way to fill out the picture of where we come from, what the struggle involved and the intricate organizational dynamics of the broad liberation movement.
The book, authored by Padraig O’Malley, (with much of the text featuring the direct narrative of Maharaj himself) contains a remarkable foreword by Nelson Mandela. This is no standardized Madiba endorsement - one gets the sense that Mandela has engaged deeply with the text, knows the person intimately and was really moved while reading the book. Madiba describes Maharaj as a founding father of the struggle and says that Mac’s advice helped to enrich his decision-making.
The book reveals Maharaj as a distinctive character: often stubborn, not always easy to get on with, “arrogant to a fault”, proud and zealous, but always driven by the larger concern for social change and adding value through his inventiveness, boundless energy and extraordinary courage.
Mac grew up in a small KwaZulu-Natal town, Newcastle, which embodies all the homeliness and the parochialism of such places. His rebelliousness brought a major clash with his father – and caused him to head for Durban. There, he stirred opposition to apartheid practices at university, and quickly made his way into the ranks of activists.
Maharaj endured unbelievable torture at the hands of the security police – but he remained unbowed. He spent his 12 years on Robben Island organizing, planning and generally being a thorn in the side of the system. He was always at the centre of survival plans – getting news, getting access to “news”, smuggling money into the prison from abroad. Eventually, it was Maharaj who, in the eighties smuggled Mandela’s autobiography from the island jail so that it could be published.
‘Shades of Difference’ portrays Maharaj as a natural born underground operator, our very own Scarlet Pimpernel or Che Guevara. He was a master of disguise and, in the words of Mandela, “popped up in the most unlikely places”. Thoughtful and razor sharp, he knew his enemy, prepared thoroughly, and - despite being on the state’s wanted list for most of his life - provided key connections between activists in exile and in the country, those in jail and out, the armed wing and community-based structures.
Sadly, the book ends on a pessimistic note. In its closing pages, it paints Maharaj as a victim (which is completely out of kilter with the pro-activeness that otherwise always characterised Maharaj’s life). O'Malley notes that midway through penning the book, Maharaj – who had resigned as Minister of Transport in 1999 – felt that his life was falling apart. He had a major run-in with the Scorpions and was entangled in the high profile commission set up to determine whether the then head of Scorpions, Bulelani Ngcuka, had been an apartheid spy in the eighties.
Mac was in the thick of ANC infighting – and, strangely (or not so strangely given the power issues involved), when comrades fall out they can be nastier to each other than to former apartheid leaders who once gave orders to torture or kill them.
O’Malley recounts occurrences which show Maharaj's political sidelining and he argues that this came about because Mac is of Indian descent. In the last chapter, Hush! Apartheid Thoughts of a Different Kind, he brings this theme strongly to the fore. O’Malley notes that “in the new mythology (an emphasis on Africanness) there is little room for an Indian dimension, little room for the likes of Mac Maharaj. He is an anachronism, an artifact of the struggle.”
I think it’s a pity the book ends on a note of bitterness and regrettable that O’Malley insinuates that Mac’s life work has been largely in vain. While it is good that such views are aired (so we can debate them), I disagree with O’Malley. I don’t agree with such extreme views, in the same way that I reject the tone and content of Cosatu leader Zwelinzima Vavi’s comment that the ANC can be compared to the Nazis of Hitler's day.
To be sure, I too have witnessed among some in the ANC, a worrying chauvinism, a view among some new leaders and many foot soldiers in the ANC that non-Africans can have no place in the leadership of democratic transformation. And yet … I firmly believe it is better to remain involved and engaged (with the transformation project) than to retreat into bitterness and outrage. Such bitterness is paralyzing, and retreating leaves the field wide open for such retrogressive thinking to flourish and grow in influence.
In the end, ‘Shades of Difference’ disturbs and disrupts the comfort zone of the hard core Africanist. It shows how people like Maharaj have largely shed their ethnic loyalties and embraced a commitment to justice, human rights and democracy - and that no one can deny them their place in the struggle.
‘Shades of Difference’ is a compelling book, rich in detail and insights about the freedom struggle. It helps in a small but important way to fill out the picture of where we come from, what the struggle involved and the intricate organizational dynamics of the broad liberation movement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)