The End of Afrikaans?

The end of Afrikaans? by Melanie Verwoerd (republished with permission )

Melanie Verwoerd is a former ANC MP and South African Ambassador to Ireland.

Last week the Universities of Pretoria and Stellenbosch decided to change their language policies. Both will be switching to English as the main medium of instruction, with Stellenbosch retaining Afrikaans if requested by enough students.

Predictably, there is great unhappiness amongst some (and I want to emphasise some) Afrikaners about this move. In Rapport this week, one of the six Council members who walked out in protest gave a lengthy interview to Hanlie Retief. John Theron declared that he has now become an activist for Afrikaans - a “language terrorist”. I'm not sure what that means and I find it rather troubling, especially coming from a lawyer who is trained to measure his language. There are many other things I found deeply unsettling about that interview, but what really got my blood boiling was his reference to “my people” - referring to Afrikaners.

I love Afrikaans

For the record, let me make it clear: I am Afrikaans and I love Afrikaans. It is the language of my heart and of my dreams. I grew up in a typical Afrikaner household during apartheid, where my beloved grandmother could find nothing good to say about English, or those who spoke it. “The only good thing the English ever did was bring hot water bottles and tea to South Africa,” was her favourite saying - and she meant it. My father deducted pocket money if we used an Anglicism, and the works of Louis Leipoldt would be our bedtime stories. Despite living in Ireland for 14 years, I raised my children in Afrikaans, and we speak only Afrikaans at home.

But let me be equally clear: I don't want to be included as part of “my people” when Afrikaners say that. For me, "my people" embrace all the amazing people of all races and cultures I have come across over many years, some of whom became my closest friends. Despite language, race and cultural differences, I have a lot more in common with them than I have with the majority of Afrikaners.

I am also a graduate of the University of Stellenbosch. I did my bachelors, honours and masters degrees there. I was on campus from the mid-80s to early-90s, during which time Stellenbosch was unashamedly the cradle of Afrikaner nationalism, providing the intellectual and theological underpinning for apartheid.

After a short break abroad I returned to the university in the early 90s. Little had changed, apart from a small, very vocal group of left-wing students who fought passionately against the university authorities on many issues.

An unwelcoming and unhappy place


In the pre-1994 era of white panic, the university moved swiftly to orchestrate the passing of The University of Stellenbosch (Private Act) 1992 through the last white Parliament. Section 18 of that Act entrenched Afrikaans as the medium of instruction. Many marches and other protest actions were held. It seemed clear as daylight that this was more than an attempt to keep Afrikaans safe: it was also an attempt to entrench whiteness by keeping black students out. The authorities argued lamely that it was not a race issue and that Coloured and Indian parents would like to see their children studying in Afrikaans – a point still argued today. The obvious rebuttal was that in practice the majority of students in this country would still be excluded.

Stellenbosch is thankfully not the place it used to be – at least not in its statutes and governance. But 21 years later, as we saw from the Luister documentary, Stellenbosch is still an unwelcoming and unhappy place for many students who are not Afrikaans.

The point is that language isn’t just a way of communicating. With it come cultural practices, history, and even sometimes political ideology. As one of the Rhodes-must-fall students told me: “My first week at Stellenbosch, the social in the residence was a ‘sokkie’ (a dance popular with Afrikaners). The next week it was a ‘sokkie’ and the third week and so it went on. I don’t mind ‘sokkie’ but could they not have mixed it up a bit? As African students we were never able to integrate into social life”.

The message of the (mainly) black students at Stellenbosch and the other historically white campuses around South Africa is that they feel alienated with no sense of belonging. They do not feel heard or even seen and are tired of being “accommodated” rather than being legitimately and integrally part of the student body.

Then there is also the overt racism that exists. The shocking fact is that many of the white “born frees” of this country are as racist as those who were on campus in the pre-1994 years.

Equal the playing field

Of course racism is not unique to university campuses. It is endemic in our society. But it appears to be a far too big a problem at the historically white universities and together with the sense of alienation felt by so many black students it is creating a very explosive and dangerous environment. It is equally true that the language policy change per se will not deal with the racism. But it will take away the sense of “we were here first” and “we are kindly accommodating you non-Afrikaans speaking people”.

It will equal the playing field a bit more and it will bring down some of the barriers of otherness. At a recent workshop on redefining Afrikaner culture at Wits, I asked one of the Rhodes must fall students from UP, whether it would not be better to have multi-lingual policy – so bring in more of the African languages. “No, that will only create more barriers, between Sotho’s, Xhosa, Zulu’s etc. We are not against Afrikaans. We want inclusivity and equality. And the only way we can see that happen, is to have English for all of us,” she said.

In the Rapport interview, Johan Theron argues that “many Afrikaner young people are so ashamed about the history, so punch drunk because of all the accusations and insults and comments that they don’t want to get a degree in a country where they are not ensured of work. They therefore go for the easy way out. And that is English”.

From my perspective there is a lot that we should be ashamed of in our history and frankly from what I can see on social media the Afrikaner young people are often the ones doing the punching and insulting.

Faith in my language

However, there are many young Afrikaners, who have a strong sense of where they come from, with a healthy recognition of the sins of their fathers and thus their responsibility to make things right in the future. They accept that it includes changes to hurtful policies such the universities’ language policies. They are modern, global citizens who love South Africa and believe that they have a future here. And they still love Afrikaans and want to raise their children in their mother tongue.

Those young people are part of who I call “my people”, because ultimately they understand that our country requires far more complex thinking and a resistance to pulling lager and simple pro- and anti- positions.

I do not believe that the 22 June was the beginning of the end of Afrikaans as some prominent Afrikaners will have us believe. I have far more faith in my language. I saw with my children, who were educated in English, that if the language is spoken at home, the language will continue to thrive.

Post-Apartheid Afrikaans Culture : 10 things you probably didn't know

www.en.wikipedia.org

The emergence of Afrikaans as a language started as early as 1685. It was a version of Dutch being spoken in a new Dutch colony — South Africa. In 1905, Gustav Preller was determined to create Afrikaans as the “white man’s language” in South Africa. We know now that he didn’t succeed. Apartheid is the Afrikaans word for segregation. In 1925, Afrikaans was recognized as an official language and was closely tied to apartheid. So what happened to Afrikaans speakers when apartheid ended? Here are 10 things you didn’t know about post-apartheid Afrikaans culture.
1. Afrikaans was a major topic during apartheid-ending negotiations

When formal negotiations started around 1991 to end apartheid, the Afrikaner nationalists were committed to the constitutional equality of English and Afrikaans. The ANC wanted English to be the only official language of South Africa for political and economic reasons. If the ANC conceded to another official language besides English by accepting Afrikaans as an official language, they could not justify to their constituents why the other indigenous African languages were not included.
2. South Africa now has 11 national languages; Afrikaans is one of them

Afrikaans, like all 11 national languages of South Africa, is protected by the constitution. The South African Constitution of 1996 says one has the right to use the language of his or her choice and practice his or her own culture. The official languages must be treated equally. However, the national and provincial governments may use a particular language based on preference and needs of the population as a whole, but the national government and each provincial government must use at least two official languages.

3. Afrikaans speakers are on the rise in South Africa

According to the 2011 census study, there are 6.85-million first-language Afrikaans speakers in South Africa versus 5.98 million a decade earlier. Afrikaans speakers have a higher employment rate than non-Afrikaans speakers, so it pays to speak the language.
4. Afrikaans speakers are mostly coloured

Afrikaans is not a “white” language as some may argue. The majority of Afrikaans speakers in South Africa are what the country considers coloured. The term coloured is contentious. Coloureds are people of mixed lineage with origins from Europe, Asia, and various Khoisan and Bantu tribes of Southern Africa.
5. Afrikaans-only schools still exist

In 1976, high school students in Soweto protested Afrikaans instruction, associating Afrikaans with apartheid. Black South Africans wanted English instruction and many still do. The Soweto Uprising that resulted from the protest resulted in the death of 176 students. It is considered a catalyst of the movement to end apartheid and signifies South African resistance to oppression. Almost 40 years later, there are still Afrikaans-only schools in South Africa, although statistics show that many Afrikaans-instruction schools have been or are being transitioned to English-instruction schools. The South African School Act states that schools may determine the language of instruction subject to the constitution. There are still areas in South Africa where there are no English-instruction schools.
6. Some students still want to be taught in Afrikaans, but more prefer to be taught in English

The South African Bill of Rights mandates that everyone may receive an education in the official language of their choice. English is the preferred language of learning for 64 percent of pupils.




7. South Africa has a university that promotes Afrikaans instruction

The University of Stellenbosch in the wine region of Stellenbosch is committed to preserving and sustaining Afrikaans as an academic language. While the university is said to have a multicultural atmosphere, some classes are taught only in Afrikaans depending on the composition of the class. Although the university ranks in the world’s top 500 universities, language policy is considered by some to be evidence of the university’s reputation for excellence built on the oppressive apartheid system. Afrikaans instruction may still repel attendance by black South Africans for whom Afrikaans is not their language of choice.



8. Afrikaans music is alive, well and resurging

Post-apartheid South Africa saw dramatic growth in the popularity of Afrikaans-language music. Possible reasons include this: perhaps the end of apartheid meant the end of the privileged Afrikaans culture and therefore the Afrikaans-speaking community looked to music to represent pride in the Afrikaans linguistic and cultural heritage. Afrikaans music is currently one of the most popular and highest-selling genres on the South African music scene.



9. Afrikaans is an important advertising tool

The size of the Afrikaans-speaking community means TV and media must offer Afrikaans programming. The South African Broadcasting Corporation was restructured in 1996 for the new democracy and has been accused of favoring the ANC by cutting Afrikaans programs and broadcasting more in English. The Afrikaans-speaking community has criticized this.

10. Afrikaans is everywhere

There are an estimated 10 million Afrikaans-spears worldwide. Additionally, Afrikaans is taught around the world including Canada, U.S., Poland, the U.K. and Namibia.

The ANC Fight for Succession : Who will follow Zuma as President

The ruling party's most senior members have locked horns, promising a bloody presidential succession race




For provincial and national internal elections, a candidate who has eThekwini on their side has a huge advantage.

The ANC has had so many chaotic elective conferences, it is tempting to dismiss last weekend’s aborted eThekwini regional gathering as yet another episode in the long-running post-Polokwane soap opera.

But this would be a grave mistake. What happened last Saturday at Durban’s Greyville Racecourse has serious implications for the race to succeed President Jacob Zuma as ANC leader when he steps down in two years.

In case you missed it, here is a recap of events:

Earlier this year, eThekwini — the ANC’s biggest region in terms of membership figures — held an elective conference in which mayor James Nxumalo narrowly beat his rival, eThekwini councillor Zandile Gumede, to the post of regional chairman.

The elections were nullified by Luthuli House after Gumede’s supporters complained about one of the branches that had been allowed to vote although it did not meet the constitutional requirements for participating in the conference.

Last weekend, the conference was reconvened, with Nxumalo and Gumede still in the race. By all indications, the mayor — who also happens to be the SACP’s provincial chairman — was destined to win the vote again.

Then, a section of Gumede’s supporters apparently tried to sabotage the conference by initially staying away from the venue, in the hope that this would cause the gathering not to form a quorum.

When they realised that the strategy would not work — more than 260 of the 410 accredited delegates were already at the venue — the Gumede camp changed tactics and decided to attend.

Trouble ensued soon after the conference started.

A group of Gumede supporters disrupted KwaZulu-Natal premier and ANC provincial chairman Senzo Mchunu’s speech, protesting that one of the branches in their camp had been barred from attending the conference.

Not even the intervention of ANC national executive committee member Joe Phaahla, who tried to explain to the protesters why that branch’s five delegates had to be excluded, helped. The conference degenerated into chaos and party bosses eventually agreed that the branch be allowed to attend.

Immediately a problem emerged: the protesters now had a new demand. They wanted Mchunu and other members of the provincial executive committee as well as the ANC Youth League’s provincial task team to leave the conference. They did not trust them, they said, claiming they were involved in “rigging” the previous regional vote.

The conference collapsed. Nxumalo’s supporters believed this was the Gumede grouping’s objective all along because they had realised they would not win.

“Their numbers were low and they were hellbent on ending the conference,” said a provincial executive committee member sympathetic to the Nxumalo faction.

But why would the collapse of a conference in South Africa’s third-biggest metro have implications for those in the running to replace Zuma as the ANC’s next leader in 2017 and — if the ANC wins the 2019 elections, as expected — the next president?

With 75000 registered members, eThekwini remains the ANC’s largest and most influential region, despite having lost 25000 members since the party’s last national congress in 2012.

For both provincial and national internal party elections, therefore, a candidate who has eThekwini on their side has a huge advantage.

At provincial level, a Nxumalo victory is seen as something that would boost Mchunu’s chances of remaining KwaZulu-Natal premier and ANC chairman beyond 2019.

A Gumede victory would shift the balance of forces in favour of provincial party secretary Sihle Zikalala, who is said to be campaigning to replace Mchunu.

At national level, Zikalala is regarded as close to ANC treasurer-general Zweli Mkhize.

For months, Mkhize has been said to be campaigning quietly for the ANC deputy presidency on a ticket that would then have the current deputy president, Cyril Ramaphosa, as president.

The assumption was that Mkhize would run against current secretary-general Gwede Mantashe, a former unionist who has also served as the SACP’s national chairman.

Mantashe was seen as Nxumalo’s natural ally, given the association of the two candidates with the SACP. But a decision by Mantashe to nullify the first conference has left angry Nxumalo supporters accusing him of betrayal and making unsubstantiated claims that he had struck a deal with Mkhize that would see the two of them take over the ANC presidency in 2017.

“What is happening is that Mantashe and Mchunu fell out. Mantashe has now formed an alliance with No2 [Ramaphosa]. They have told him [Mantashe] that Ramaphosa will go back to business and Mantashe will be president and Zweli will be his deputy. Now he is doing all these things because of his presidential ambitions,” said an ANC-SACP leader closely linked to the Nxumalo campaign.

According to this theory, Mkhize would bring to the campaign KwaZulu-Natal’s huge support base and Mantashe would deliver the Eastern Cape, the party’s second-biggest province by numbers.

But Mantashe denied all this and said his detractors should not point fingers at him for the collapsed conference.

“Wait, you have presidential ambitions and you go use that at regional conferences? Not even provincial conferences?

“Don’t you think that’s an exaggeration of people who see themselves as very important? Where is the link? I want to be president? Then I am very ambitious. In other words, comrade Cyril is a wrong deputy ...

“It is rumours if they say this conference was collapsed by Gwede, who was not there, by the way. They disrupted it themselves,” Mantashe said.

Despite Mantashe’s denials, and clear evidence that the two attempts to have the conference were thwarted by the warring factions, perceptions of Luthuli House’s interference are now treated as fact by both sides to the conflict.

Whichever side eventually wins the conference would most likely align itself with whomever it believes had been on its side.

ANC members on the ground believe their top six leaders to be deeply divided over who should succeed Zuma. Party structures, at least in the largest region, operate on the basis that the presidential race will involve Ramaphosa, Mkhize, Mantashe and party national chairwoman and National Assembly Speaker Baleka Mbete — all of whom currently hold top-six ANC posts.

The only possible candidate outside of the top six would be African Union Commission chairwoman Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, who is said to have the backing of her former husband.

But it is the perception that four of the six top leaders are fighting over who should succeed Zuma that is causing damage to the ruling party, with every decision being perceived as being motivated by the need to advance their own careers.

As a result, these leaders are now unable to stop the kind of chaos witnessed at last weekend’s eThekwini conference.

After South Africa's withdrawal, how does the ICC stay relevant?

The Rainbow Nation's decision to withdraw from the International Criminal Court highlighted its increasingly shaky support from governments across the continent, but their reasons are more complex than headline-grabbing claims the court is racist.





View Caption

Shiraaz Mohamed/AP/File


PARIS — South Africa’s decision to leave the International Criminal Court (ICC) hardly spells the demise of the tribunal that tries the world’s worst crimes. But it is certainly a heavy blow to the young court.

“The existence of the court is not at stake,” says Luis Moreno Ocampo, the ICC’s first prosecutor. “But its relevance is a different matter.”

South Africa, whose justice minister announced last Friday that the government had launched the year-long process of withdrawal, is the first country to say it is leaving the ICC. But Burundi’s parliament voted last week to get out and a number of other African nations, from Kenya to Namibia, are making threatening noises.

Dewa Mavhinga, an Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch, warns of a “runaway train” on a continent that has always been central to the ICC’s raison d’etre.


In 2002, when the ICC was set up, Africa was the biggest backer of the court, which was set up to try cases of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes when national courts would not or could not hear them. Today, accusations abound that the ICC is racist, colonial and “anti-African.”
What has gone wrong?

Pretoria says it is leaving the ICC because the court does not allow diplomatic immunity for suspects it has indicted. South Africa last year welcomed Sudanese President Omar Bashir to an African Union summit on the grounds that local law offers immunity to sitting heads of state. The ICC indicted President Bashir in 2009 for allegedly directing atrocities in Darfur.

It has to be said that African leaders began turning against the court when they themselves and their peers began feeling its heat. After Bashir’s indictment, Kenyan president Uhuru Kenyatta and his vice president were indicted in 2013 for their reported role in stirring up severe electoral violence.

That year Ethiopian Foreign Minister Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus complained to an African Union (AU) summit that the ICC had “transformed itself into a political instrument targeting Africa and Africans.”

At first sight, that seems an easy case to make. All four men convicted, for crimes such as murder, rape, pillage, destroying cultural artifacts, and conscripting child soldiers, are Africans. All 32 men so far indicted are Africans. Nine of the ten investigations undertaken by the ICC prosecutor are in Africa.

But the reality is more complex.

Six of the nine situations under investigation in Africa were referred to the court by African governments themselves. The prosecutor was ordered to take up two others by the United Nations Security Council. In only one case, that of Kenya, did Mr. Moreno Ocampo lay charges on his own initiative.

“The prosecutor can’t be blamed for doing what states ask him to do, or what the UN Security Council directs him to do,” says Geoffrey Robertson, an international human rights lawyer who sat as an appeals judge on the Special UN tribunal for Sierra Leone.

The idea that the ICC unfairly picks on Africans mistakes the purpose of the court, says spokesman Fadi El Abdallah. “ICC intervention is not about targeting ten or fifteen suspects,” he says. “It is about protecting ten or fifteen thousand victims.”

And aside from that, El Abdallah points out, “there have been no referrals by the UN Security Council or by state parties [of the court] outside Africa,” except for one from Palestine last year.

In retrospect, some court observers wonder about the wisdom of indicting Bashir, a sitting head of state, in light of the resentment the move sparked among his fellow leaders.

“The message was incredibly important, that no one is above the law,” argues Laura Davis, a writer and consultant on matters of peace and justice. “Whether it was a smart thing to do is not so clear.”

It would have been more sensible, suggests Leslie Vinjamuri, head of the Centre on Conflict, Rights and Justice at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, “if the court had delayed looking at heads of state until after they had left office … and the conflicts they were involved in had been resolved.” That way, she argues, the ICC could avoid getting in the way of possible peace initiatives.
'Tearing down the traffic light'?

There is also a widespread feeling that the ICC should spread its wings more widely. “There needs to be more action outside Africa for this to be seen as a truly international court,” says Allan Ngari, an analyst at the Institute for Security Studies in Johannesburg.

The ICC has clearly got that message. Earlier this year prosecutor Fatou Bensouda opened a formal investigation into allegations of war crimes by both sides during the war between Russia and Georgia in 2008. It was the first time the court had begun investigating a situation outside Africa.

Ms. Bensouda has also ordered preliminary examinations of allegations concerning Ukraine, the Palestinian territories, and British army behavior in Iraq.

This is all very positive, says Dr. Davis, but there is no doubt that the court is operating today in a very different international atmosphere from the one that prevailed at its birth 14 years ago. Then, she recalls, the movement promoting international justice flourished in the optimism of the post-cold war 1990s, and the hope that a cooperative world order was within reach.

Today, Davis guesses, amidst the prevailing “fear and uncertainty,” diplomats would not be able to create something like the ICC.
Moreno Ocampo too blames a retreat “from collective effort … to tribalism, retaliation, enemies, and friends” for the assault on the court.

The ICC, he says, is like a stoplight. It is not always effective in preventing or punishing crimes against humanity; “sometimes the cars stop, and sometimes they don’t,” he acknowledges.

“South Africa is tearing down the traffic light,” says Moreno Ocampo. “My prediction is that there will be more accidents. The question is not whether the ICC needs Africa; it’s Africa that needs the ICC.”

DARLING! THE PIETER-DIRK UYS STORY

Pieter-Dirk Uys
After the show Foreign Aids in Berlin 2006.
Born	28 September 1945 (age 71) Cape Town, South Africa
Occupation	Satirist, performer, author, social activist

Pieter-Dirk Uys (/ˈeɪs/; born 28 September 1945) is a South African satirist, active as a performer, author, and social activist.

Background and early life

Uys was born in Cape Town on 28 September 1945, to Hannes Uys, a Calvinist Afrikaner father, and Helga Bassel, a Berlin-born Jewish mother. Hannes Uys, a fourth-generation South African of Dutch and Belgian Huguenot stock, was a musician and organist in his local church. Bassel was a German concert pianist whom the Nazis expelled from the Reichsmusikkammer in 1935 as part of their campaign to root out Jewish artists.^[3] She later escaped to South Africa and managed to take her grand piano with her, with which she taught her daughter, Tessa Uys (b. 1948), now a concert pianist based in London. Bassel spoke little about her Jewish past to her children. It was only after her suicide that they discovered she was fully Jewish. Uys and his sister had an NG Kerk upbringing and their mother encouraged them to embrace Afrikaner culture.

Career

He received a B.A. from the University of Cape Town where he began his dramatic career as an actor under the tutelage of Rosalie van der Gught, Mavis Taylor and Robert Mohr, among others. His performances at this time included roles in Little Malcolm and His Struggle Against the Eunuchs, The Fantasticks and Once Upon a Mattress. He later studied at the London Film School in the early 1970s. It was in one of his student films, an advertisement for milk, that he performed in drag for the first time (as a milkmaid). He then began a period in his dramatic career as a serious playwright. Several of his plays were performed at the Space Theatre, Cape Town and his 1979 play Paradise is Closing Down was performed in London, at the Edinburgh Festival (co-produced by William Burdett-Coutts), and later produced for Granada Televisionin 1981. He switched to one-man revues at the height of the Apartheid era.

Uys is particularly well known for his character Evita Bezuidenhout (also known as Tannie Evita), a white Afrikaner socialite and self-proclaimed political activist. The character was inspired by Australian comedian Barry Humphries's character Dame Edna Everage. Evita is the former ambassadress of Bapetikosweti – a fictitious Bantustan or black homeland located outside her home in the affluent, formerly whites-only suburbs of Johannesburg. Evita Bezuidenhout is named in honour of Eva Perón. Under Apartheid, Uys used the medium of humour and comedy to criticise and expose the absurdity of the South African government's racial policies. Much of his work was not censored, indicating a closet approval of his views by many members of the ruling party, who were not so bold as to openly admit mistakes and criticise the policies themselves. For many years, Uys lampooned the South African regime and its leaders, as well as the sometimes hypocritical attitudes of white liberals. One of his characters, a kugel (social climbing Jewish woman) once said, "There are two things wrong with South Africa: one's apartheid and the other's black people". This was later erroneously attributed to Uys himself.

Following South Africa's first non-racial elections in 1994, Uys starred in a TV series, Funigalore, in which Evita interviewed Nelson Mandela and other prominent politicians of the day. In the theatre, Uys/Evita's performances include You ANC Nothing Yet. He and his character are known for their tireless work in the frontline of HIV/AIDS activism and education. He is currently involved in teaching AIDS awareness to children and education in the use of condoms, travelling to schools all over South Africa. Uys also serves on the board of directors for the Desmond Tutu HIV Foundation, a non-profit organisation founded to provide treatment for and conduct research relating to HIV.

Art and Craft market at Evita se Perron

Uys converted the old railway station of Darling, where he lives, into a cabaret venue called Evita se Perron (Perron is Afrikaans for station platform) and performs there regularly. He is openly gay. During 2004, Pieter-Dirk Uys took part in a Carte Blanche story, dealing with genetics and unlocking the mysteries of race and ethnicity, entitled "So, Where Do We Come From?". Uys discovered that he haskhoisan heritage from his mother's side. Uys received the Special Teddy Award 2011 at the Berlin International Film Festival (Berlinale) for his commitment to AIDS education at South African schools and for his on-stage alter ego, Evita Bezuidenhout. An independent jury presents the Teddy Award to individuals for lifetime achievements for films with LGBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender) topics.

Awards and honours

• The 2011 TMSA Naledi Lifetime Achiever Award
• Special Teddy Award at the Berlin International Film Festival (Berlinale) 2011
• Reconciliation Award in 2001
• Mrs Evita Bezuidenhout was awarded the Living Legacy 2000 Award in San Diego
• The lifetime achievement award from the Cape Tercentenary Foundation
• Doctor honoris causa from
  • Rhodes University: D.Litt. (Hon.), 1997
  • University of Cape Town: D.Litt for distinguished, socially-responsible creative work in 2003
  • University of the Western Cape: D.Ed. (Hon.), 2003

Books

• Farce about Uys : A Legal Assembly in Two Riotous Acts (1983) Jonathan Ball and Ad. Donker Publishers ISBN 0-86850-077-1
• Selle ou storie: A play (1983) Ad. Donker, Johannesburg ISBN 0-86852-027-6
• Paradise Is Closing Down and Other Plays (1989) Penguin Books Ltd ISBN 0-14-048228-8
• Funigalore: Evita's Real-Life Adventures in Wonderland (1995) The Penguin Group (SA) Pty Ltd ISBN 0-14-025313-0
• The Essential Evita Bezuidenhout (1997) David Philip Publishers, Cape Town ISBN 0-86486-349-7
• A Part Hate a Part Love: The Legend of Evita Bezuidenhout (1994) Hond, Groenkloof ISBN 1-874969-08-6
• No space on Long Street ; Marshrose : two plays (2000) ComPress, Cape Town ISBN 978-1-919-83310-1
• Trekking to Teema (2001) Compress, Cape Town ISBN 1-919833-10-2
• Elections & Erections: A Memoir of Fear and Fun (2003) Zebra Press, Cape Town ISBN 1-86872-665-7

Films and documentaries[edit source]

• Skating on thin Uys, a 1985 comedy lampooning P.W. Botha
• Darling! The Pieter–Dirk Uys Story, a 2007 documentary by Julian Shaw

A Tentative Understanding - Demise of the ANC

In 1990, at the time of its unbanning, the ANC had unique prestige not because of the stature of Mandela alone, though that was an important factor, but because of its record in the struggle. There was powerful evidence of its willingness to throw everything into the struggle on a range of fronts, the sense people had that the organisation was theirs because its leaders truly championed their cause, engaged the enemy in battle to advance their interests and went to jail, were tortured or died while driven by those goals. The ANC may or may not have shifted ideologically. But more important is that the ANC no longer cares about the poor. It no longer cares about those who are more or less the same people as their own mothers and fathers from whose shoulders they previously pledged to lift the yoke of apartheid oppression and exploitation.

“The opposite of good is not evil, it is indifference.”
– Abraham Joshua Heschel

There is a growing sense that the ANC may be in the process of disintegration. Some assessments are based on electoral considerations, relating to the recent ANC setbacks. These do not spell out the causes and the wider social, political and even emotional meanings and consequences of the collapse of a movement that lived in the hearts and minds and homes of very many people. What are the reasons for thinking that the ANC may be collapsing or disintegrating?

It is important to understand what the ANC and the SACP to a significant extent represented to very many South Africans for at least 40 years, between 1950 and 1990. I specify these years because the ANC was not the hegemonic force within African nationalism that it later became for most of its first four decades, when it was overshadowed by the Garveyites and the Industrial and Commercial Workers Union (ICU). 

By the time the ANC became a hegemonic force in African nationalism and, increasingly for most anti-apartheid forces, it bound people on the basis of a range of factors. These included the exemplary leaders who inspired many people with a will to be free, and who trusted this leadership of the organisations – people like Chief Albert Luthuli, Dr Yusuf Dadoo, Walter and Albertina Sisulu, Lillian Ngoyi, Nelson Mandela, Bram Fischer, Ruth First, Chris Hani, Joe Slovo and many others.

People had a sense that the organisation grew over time. It faced adversity, but generally overcame its difficulties through evaluation of what had gone wrong and charted a course of action that made sense to many people. It learnt hard lessons and it changed and developed over time.

In the period to which I refer, the ANC was relatively self-reflective about its problems and tried to correct weaknesses it displayed. The most famous example of self-examination and reformulation of approaches may have been the 1969 consultative conference, held in Morogoro, Tanzania, whose strategy and tactics document is still quoted today.

This was at a time when the organisation confronted deep demoralisation among its members, notably MK soldiers who felt they were languishing in camps after the Wankie and Sipolilo campaigns. There was also a sense of despair in the face of the apparent invincibility of the apartheid regime.

The conference charted a path forward, after soberly indicating points of vulnerability of the apartheid regime and strengths of the liberation forces that had received insufficient attention. This fresh evaluation inspired its cadres and also drew in many new people who believed that it was a viable way of launching a fresh assault against the apartheid regime.

In 1990, at the time of its unbanning, the ANC had unique prestige not because of the stature of Mandela alone, though that was an important factor, but because of its record in the struggle. There was powerful evidence of its willingness to throw everything into the struggle on a range of fronts, the sense that people had that the organisation was theirs because its leaders truly championed their cause, engaged the enemy in battle to advance their interests and went to jail, were tortured or died while driven by those goals.

The SACP was also held in high esteem at the time: people sang praise songs about the organisation and its leaders. Unlike most communist parties in the world, many of which changed their names because they considered the words “Communist Party” to be discredited at that time, the SACP enjoyed great prestige. Because of its standing among the oppressed the SACP did not need to consider changing its name, because it was then associated with heroism and sacrifice. The SACP tied much of its political action to that of the ANC, a long-standing alliance. But it came to include linking its fortunes to the rise of and support for Jacob Zuma.

The ANC is in disarray and its future in doubt not simply by virtue of electoral setbacks but because it no longer commands respect as a bearer of values that people can respect. The factors that combine to pose a threat to the very existence of the organisation, at least as one that inspires people with values that promise to benefit its core constituency, include:

Killing an organisation by killing a dream

In the potential demise of the ANC one is not seeing wounds inflicted by the DA or the EFF in the main, but self-inflicted wounds. These wounds amount to killing what the ANC represented in the minds of many, becoming something very different from that which had previously drawn people to the organisation. It has become a “fat cat” organisation, as well as one that can no longer be trusted to be what it had previously meant for the oppressed. Indeed, it has come to be seen as one where its leaders look out for themselves at the expense of its core constituency, including at the cost of the lives of the most oppressed, as in Marikana.

Killing an organisation by rupturing the connection with its constituency

The organisation is no longer connected; it no longer has tight bonds with its core constituency, the poorest of the poor. This cannot simply be explained by Marxist categories like the embourgeoisement of the ANC or its succumbing to neoliberalism or accommodation with capital or representing the comprador bourgeoisie or similar Marxist or pseudo Marxist formulations. There may be such inclinations but we are talking about what Marxism cannot explain. People had been drawn into struggle often through seeing their parents humiliated under apartheid. The ANC and SACP took up their plight as their own and embodied their desire to be free as the very reason for their organisational existence. Today, in some instances, the ANC is party to humiliation of or is silent in the face of state violence against the people.

What we now have to explain is the rupturing of bonds of responsibility, solidarity, connection, care and many similar words that are not found or found in the same way in the language of Marxism. One can find assistance in feminist theology, feminism in general and various social scientists that care about the people they wish to help. One can also benefit from interrogating the emphasis that Rabbi Abraham Heschel, quoted at the beginning of this article, (who was a close comrade of Martin Luther King Jr), places on indifference to the wrongs done to others or their humiliation.

The ANC may or may not have shifted ideologically. But more important is that the ANC no longer cares about the poor. It no longer cares about those who are more or less the same people as their own mothers and fathers from whose shoulders they previously pledged to lift the yoke of apartheid oppression and exploitation.

It is no longer moved by their plight. It is no longer affected by whether they sink or swim. They must now bear their pain without ANC support. Their pain is no longer that of the organisation, whose empathy and compassion had previously bound them together

Killing an organisation by killing compassion for the poor and oppressed

The words empathy, compassion and passion go beyond understanding theories of Marx, Lenin and Engels, though Marx does write with passion of his pain and outrage at the crushing of the Paris Commune, among other works . But Marxist teachings, per se, do not interrogate this subjective factor, which leads Marx, Engels and Lenin to care and feel for the poor and others not to do so. In fact, many contemporary Marxists, who may be very learned, may not see this as imposing any responsibility on themselves to act to remedy these wrongs. They may not see the need to join their fate with that of the oppressed. That requires a sense of connectedness, solidarity and responsibility in relation to the people who are still often landless or unemployed or harassed and evicted and arrested for no good cause.

Killing an organisation by stealing from the poor to further enrich the already rich

At an objective level, and flowing from no longer caring about the poor, the ANC has done worse. It has stolen from the poor to further enrich those who have recently become rich or others who have always been or have now become privileged. The level of betrayal that this comprises is another of the blows that it has inflicted on its constituency.

Killing an organisation by rupturing the trust that bound it to communities

People loved the ANC. It was their one great love that competed with no other love and the great leaders clearly loved the people whom they served: yes, served not in the discredited clichéd sense of “public service”, which really means personal benefit and enrichment.

Killing an organisation by making common cause with previous apartheid operatives

In order to settle scores with those opposing the current looting and violence, the present leadership of the ANC has not hesitated to make common cause with former apartheid operatives, like General Mthandazo Berning Ntlemeza, head of the Hawks, and suspended head of Crime Intelligence, General Richard Mdluli.

The ANC may not die. The Congress of India continues to exist, but is a shadow of its former self, lacking integrity and vision. That may be the fate of the ANC. It is said by some that this is the fate of all liberation movements after 20 years in power. But nothing is inevitable in politics and this need not have happened. It is possible, though unlikely, that the ANC will recover its previous standing. My belief is that it has gone too far along a route that is anti-people and tramples on the gains that the organisation itself inaugurated.

The democratic project now needs to be driven by forces beyond (but not necessarily identified as antagonistic to) the ANC. That requires building new organisations or reviving the role of those that already exist. It means building alliances, sometimes between those who have never previously been bound together. It requires a broad vision that can bring such a coalition of forces together and capture widespread support, in order to rescue and revive our democratic and emancipatory promise.

A Tentative Understanding - Demise of the ANC

In 1990, at the time of its unbanning, the ANC had unique prestige not because of the stature of Mandela alone, though that was an important factor, but because of its record in the struggle. There was powerful evidence of its willingness to throw everything into the struggle on a range of fronts, the sense people had that the organisation was theirs because its leaders truly championed their cause, engaged the enemy in battle to advance their interests and went to jail, were tortured or died while driven by those goals. The ANC may or may not have shifted ideologically. But more important is that the ANC no longer cares about the poor. It no longer cares about those who are more or less the same people as their own mothers and fathers from whose shoulders they previously pledged to lift the yoke of apartheid oppression and exploitation.

This article first appeared on Creamer Media’s website: polity.org.za



“The opposite of good is not evil, it is indifference.”


– Abraham Joshua Heschel


There is a growing sense that the ANC may be in the process of disintegration. Some assessments are based on electoral considerations, relating to the recent ANC setbacks. These do not spell out the causes and the wider social, political and even emotional meanings and consequences of the collapse of a movement that lived in the hearts and minds and homes of very many people. What are the reasons for thinking that the ANC may be collapsing or disintegrating?


It is important to understand what the ANC and the SACP to a significant extent represented to very many South Africans for at least 40 years, between 1950 and 1990. I specify these years because the ANC was not the hegemonic force within African nationalism that it later became for most of its first four decades, when it was overshadowed by the Garveyites and the Industrial and Commercial Workers Union (ICU). (See Raymond Suttner “African Nationalism” in P Vale, L Hamilton and E H Prinsloo, Intellectual Traditions in South Africa, 2014).


By the time the ANC became a hegemonic force in African nationalism and, increasingly for most anti-apartheid forces, it bound people on the basis of a range of factors. These included the exemplary leaders who inspired many people with a will to be free, and who trusted this leadership of the organisations – people like Chief Albert Luthuli, Dr Yusuf Dadoo, Walter and Albertina Sisulu, Lillian Ngoyi, Nelson Mandela, Bram Fischer, Ruth First, Chris Hani, Joe Slovo and many others.


People had a sense that the organisation grew over time. It faced adversity, but generally overcame its difficulties through evaluation of what had gone wrong and charted a course of action that made sense to many people. It learnt hard lessons and it changed and developed over time.


In the period to which I refer, the ANC was relatively self-reflective about its problems and tried to correct weaknesses it displayed. The most famous example of self-examination and reformulation of approaches may have been the 1969 consultative conference, held in Morogoro, Tanzania, whose strategy and tactics document is still quoted today.


This was at a time when the organisation confronted deep demoralisation among its members, notably MK soldiers who felt they were languishing in camps after the Wankie and Sipolilo campaigns. There was also a sense of despair in the face of the apparent invincibility of the apartheid regime.


The conference charted a path forward, after soberly indicating points of vulnerability of the apartheid regime and strengths of the liberation forces that had received insufficient attention. This fresh evaluation inspired its cadres and also drew in many new people who believed that it was a viable way of launching a fresh assault against the apartheid regime.


In 1990, at the time of its unbanning, the ANC had unique prestige not because of the stature of Mandela alone, though that was an important factor, but because of its record in the struggle. There was powerful evidence of its willingness to throw everything into the struggle on a range of fronts, the sense that people had that the organisation was theirs because its leaders truly championed their cause, engaged the enemy in battle to advance their interests and went to jail, were tortured or died while driven by those goals.


The SACP was also held in high esteem at the time: people sang praise songs about the organisation and its leaders. Unlike most communist parties in the world, many of which changed their names because they considered the words “Communist Party” to be discredited at that time, the SACP enjoyed great prestige. Because of its standing among the oppressed the SACP did not need to consider changing its name, because it was then associated with heroism and sacrifice. The SACP tied much of its political action to that of the ANC, a long-standing alliance. But it came to include linking its fortunes to the rise of and support for Jacob Zuma.


The ANC is in disarray and its future in doubt not simply by virtue of electoral setbacks but because it no longer commands respect as a bearer of values that people can respect. The factors that combine to pose a threat to the very existence of the organisation, at least as one that inspires people with values that promise to benefit its core constituency, include:


Killing an organisation by killing a dream


In the potential demise of the ANC one is not seeing wounds inflicted by the DA or the EFF in the main, but self-inflicted wounds. These wounds amount to killing what the ANC represented in the minds of many, becoming something very different from that which had previously drawn people to the organisation. It has become a “fat cat” organisation, as well as one that can no longer be trusted to be what it had previously meant for the oppressed. Indeed, it has come to be seen as one where its leaders look out for themselves at the expense of its core constituency, including at the cost of the lives of the most oppressed, as in Marikana.


Killing an organisation by rupturing the connection with its constituency


The organisation is no longer connected; it no longer has tight bonds with its core constituency, the poorest of the poor. This cannot simply be explained by Marxist categories like the embourgeoisement of the ANC or its succumbing to neoliberalism or accommodation with capital or representing the comprador bourgeoisie or similar Marxist or pseudo Marxist formulations. There may be such inclinations but we are talking about what Marxism cannot explain. People had been drawn into struggle often through seeing their parents humiliated under apartheid. The ANC and SACP took up their plight as their own and embodied their desire to be free as the very reason for their organisational existence. Today, in some instances, the ANC is party to humiliation of or is silent in the face of state violence against the people.


What we now have to explain is the rupturing of bonds of responsibility, solidarity, connection, care and many similar words that are not found or found in the same way in the language of Marxism. One can find assistance in feminist theology, feminism in general and various social scientists that care about the people they wish to help. One can also benefit from interrogating the emphasis that Rabbi Abraham Heschel, quoted at the beginning of this article, (who was a close comrade of Martin Luther King Jr), places on indifference to the wrongs done to others or their humiliation.


The ANC may or may not have shifted ideologically. But more important is that the ANC no longer cares about the poor. It no longer cares about those who are more or less the same people as their own mothers and fathers from whose shoulders they previously pledged to lift the yoke of apartheid oppression and exploitation.


It is no longer moved by their plight. It is no longer affected by whether they sink or swim. They must now bear their pain without ANC support. Their pain is no longer that of the organisation, whose empathy and compassion had previously bound them together


Killing an organisation by killing compassion for the poor and oppressed


The words empathy, compassion and passion go beyond understanding theories of Marx, Lenin and Engels, though Marx does write with passion of his pain and outrage at the crushing of the Paris Commune, among other works (See the conclusion to +The Civil War in France). But Marxist teachings, per se, do not interrogate this subjective factor, which leads Marx, Engels and Lenin to care and feel for the poor and others not to do so. In fact, many contemporary Marxists, who may be very learned, may not see this as imposing any responsibility on themselves to act to remedy these wrongs. They may not see the need to join their fate with that of the oppressed. That requires a sense of connectedness, solidarity and responsibility in relation to the people who are still often landless or unemployed or harassed and evicted and arrested for no good cause.


Killing an organisation by stealing from the poor to further enrich the already rich


At an objective level, and flowing from no longer caring about the poor, the ANC has done worse. It has stolen from the poor to further enrich those who have recently become rich or others who have always been or have now become privileged. The level of betrayal that this comprises is another of the blows that it has inflicted on its constituency.


Killing an organisation by rupturing the trust that bound it to communities


People loved the ANC. It was their one great love that competed with no other love and the great leaders clearly loved the people whom they served: yes, served not in the discredited clichéd sense of “public service”, which really means personal benefit and enrichment.


Killing an organisation by making common cause with previous apartheid operatives


In order to settle scores with those opposing the current looting and violence, the present leadership of the ANC has not hesitated to make common cause with former apartheid operatives, like General Mthandazo Berning Ntlemeza, head of the Hawks, and suspended head of Crime Intelligence, General Richard Mdluli.


The ANC may not die. The Congress of India continues to exist, but is a shadow of its former self, lacking integrity and vision. That may be the fate of the ANC. It is said by some that this is the fate of all liberation movements after 20 years in power. But nothing is inevitable in politics and this need not have happened. It is possible, though unlikely, that the ANC will recover its previous standing. My belief is that it has gone too far along a route that is anti-people and tramples on the gains that the organisation itself inaugurated.


The democratic project now needs to be driven by forces beyond (but not necessarily identified as antagonistic to) the ANC. That requires building new organisations or reviving the role of those that already exist. It means building alliances, sometimes between those who have never previously been bound together. It requires a broad vision that can bring such a coalition of forces together and capture widespread support, in order to rescue and revive our democratic and emancipatory promise.


Photo of Raymond Suttner by Ivor Markman.


Raymond Suttner is a scholar and political analyst. He is a former political prisoner for activities in the ANC-led liberation struggle. Currently he is a Part-time Professor attached to Rhodes University and an Emeritus Professor at Unisa. His most recent book is Recovering Democracy in South Africa (Jacana and Lynne Rienner, 2015). He blogs at raymondsuttner.com and his twitter handle is @raymondsuttner

Former President Kgalema Motlanthe to ANC Get Your House in Order or Die

Former president Kgalema Motlanthe has warned the ANC that if it did not get its house in order, it faced being irrelevant and would eventually die.

Motlanthe was speaking during a two-day regional consultative conference of the ANC at the Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium in Port Elizabeth yesterday, where he addressed about 300 delegates on factionalism and renewal.

“Renewal cannot be just tampering with the structures. It means we must think very deeply about what the challenges are that our people face today. The ANC exists for one purpose only, and that is to address the problems of our people.

"If it [the ANC] is no longer addressing the problems of our people, we might as well begin writing the obituary of the ANC,” Motlanthe said.


He said it would not be the first time a glorious liberation movement lost its hegemony with the people, as this was what happened to other African countries’ liberation parties after they had been in power for 20 years.

Motlanthe said like empires and all living organisms, organisations also “rise and fall” because the rule of nature was that everything was in motion.

“Nothing is static. Nothing is permanent. That is why, when you are elected, you must understand that the platform of leadership that you have is not permanent.

"You serve in that capacity because members say so. Renewal must therefore be a function of understanding where we are, where we are heading to and what the challenges are,” he said.

For the 104-year-old ANC to continue to survive, it needed to adapt and have a long-term view to the future, as reliance on its struggle credentials was not enough for it to renew itself, said the former president.

“The minute we fail to adapt to the concrete conditions and the challenges of today, the organisation becomes irrelevant. And people realise they can continue with their lives and have progress without the ANC.

“That would be the end of [the ANC].”

As a governing party, the ANC was in a position to influence lucrative contracts that should go to the deserving people in the country.

But this was not the case, because some leaders managed to arrange that these contracts were being given to people with proxies from them as leaders in government, said Motlanthe.

“Once you do that, even if you get away with it, the reality is that this country will stagnate. And whatever we inherited, whether it’s infrastructure or whatever, will diminish,” he said.

His advice to the Nelson Mandela Bay region was for them to focus on rebuilding their branches and to ensure that they were properly constituted before they went to a regional elective conference.

In a what could be viewed a veiled attack at President Jacob Zuma, who enjoys singing during party gatherings, Motlanthe said it was only when the organisation was united, healthy and allowed thorough debates on what the challenges were – instead of singing – that it would find solutions.

“If we come together like this and we spend 80% of our time singing and glorifying the past, we will emerge with nothing.

“We will emerge from here not with any clarity, but with more confusion. There is no substitute to identifying the real problems,” Motlanthe said to loud laughter.

Deputy Finance Minister Mcebisi Jonas, who shared the stage with Motlanthe, had earlier weighed in on the singing issue.

“Politics are being suffocated by song. For the few years, we have been singing, but we have not addressed some of the core challenges we are facing,” Jonas said.

He said the recent election results confirmed what everybody already knew – that the movement was in trouble.

Former President Kgalema Motlanthe to ANC Get Your House in Order or Die

Former president Kgalema Motlanthe has warned the ANC that if it did not get its house in order, it faced being irrelevant and would eventually die.

Motlanthe was speaking during a two-day regional consultative conference of the ANC at the Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium in Port Elizabeth yesterday, where he addressed about 300 delegates on factionalism and renewal.

“Renewal cannot be just tampering with the structures. It means we must think very deeply about what the challenges are that our people face today. The ANC exists for one purpose only, and that is to address the problems of our people.

"If it [the ANC] is no longer addressing the problems of our people, we might as well begin writing the obituary of the ANC,” Motlanthe said.


He said it would not be the first time a glorious liberation movement lost its hegemony with the people, as this was what happened to other African countries’ liberation parties after they had been in power for 20 years.

Motlanthe said like empires and all living organisms, organisations also “rise and fall” because the rule of nature was that everything was in motion.

“Nothing is static. Nothing is permanent. That is why, when you are elected, you must understand that the platform of leadership that you have is not permanent.

"You serve in that capacity because members say so. Renewal must therefore be a function of understanding where we are, where we are heading to and what the challenges are,” he said.

For the 104-year-old ANC to continue to survive, it needed to adapt and have a long-term view to the future, as reliance on its struggle credentials was not enough for it to renew itself, said the former president.

“The minute we fail to adapt to the concrete conditions and the challenges of today, the organisation becomes irrelevant. And people realise they can continue with their lives and have progress without the ANC.

“That would be the end of [the ANC].”

As a governing party, the ANC was in a position to influence lucrative contracts that should go to the deserving people in the country.

But this was not the case, because some leaders managed to arrange that these contracts were being given to people with proxies from them as leaders in government, said Motlanthe.

“Once you do that, even if you get away with it, the reality is that this country will stagnate. And whatever we inherited, whether it’s infrastructure or whatever, will diminish,” he said.

His advice to the Nelson Mandela Bay region was for them to focus on rebuilding their branches and to ensure that they were properly constituted before they went to a regional elective conference.

In a what could be viewed a veiled attack at President Jacob Zuma, who enjoys singing during party gatherings, Motlanthe said it was only when the organisation was united, healthy and allowed thorough debates on what the challenges were – instead of singing – that it would find solutions.

“If we come together like this and we spend 80% of our time singing and glorifying the past, we will emerge with nothing.

“We will emerge from here not with any clarity, but with more confusion. There is no substitute to identifying the real problems,” Motlanthe said to loud laughter.

Deputy Finance Minister Mcebisi Jonas, who shared the stage with Motlanthe, had earlier weighed in on the singing issue.

“Politics are being suffocated by song. For the few years, we have been singing, but we have not addressed some of the core challenges we are facing,” Jonas said.

He said the recent election results confirmed what everybody already knew – that the movement was in trouble.