To understand this blog post, you might want to read these two articles (here and here), which appeared on MyNews24.com, the opinion section of News24.com. Everything here is user generated, and therefore mostly pretty shitty, and biased, incited etc, in other words mostly as meaningless as Julius Malema’s rhetoric… (although, SHOCK! HORROR! I agree with him on THIS one tiny point he has about City Press… That’s off topic, so we won’t go into that here, maybe another blog post)
Lets discuss these articles. The first article, written by a non-black was posted last week, called “I am a Racist” by TheFridaFactor was actually quite well written. The writer was obviously tired and angry at a few people, and felt she couldn’t be angry with them without being labelled a racist. She wasn’t angry with them because they were black, but rather because they were stupid or arrogant or lazy… Some might say these are black traits, others will say I’m racist, but that’s the whole point! Allow me to explain…
I can label myself as many things. By doing so, it takes the gunpowder out of the potentially fatal bullet. I can call myself white. No big deal. I can call myself fat. You may guard your food around me, but again it’s no big deal. I could say I am a male. This means I can read a map, but also means I will pee on the floor around the toilet. I’m okay with that, so no biggy. These are all pretty obvious, and the list is endless.
But what happens if I say I’m a male chauvinist? By virtue I am saying I am loyal to my brothers in arms, my fellow toilet seat sprayers. Or if I say I’m anti-Semitic? Not a fan of the “black hair, glasses, big nose” look. By admitting these things, it means you are aware of these things, and you are also aware that I am aware of these things. This means that you can’t hurl them at me as insults, because they will have little effect.
This is compounded further, when I take known facts and generalisations to prove my point. I can prove that men are better than women, by not getting lost while using a map, and pee on the side of the road too. Or that Jews all have the Jew look by showing you 100 different pictures of Jews who all look related because of the Jew look. These are silly examples, but you get my point. I remove the sting by labeling myself these things, and when I can back myself up with a sound argument, these insults turn into facts that EVERYONE can relate to.
Let me give you a better example. There is a section of road on my usual path to work that is single lane in both directions. As this bit of road is usually very busy, it is almost impossible to overtake. Enter a taxi into this equation, and you can already see the slapstick hilarity that will soon unfold. The taxi is full to the brim with overweight passengers, of the well tanned older woman persuasion (fat black mama’s for short). At regular intervals, the driver, who I must assume is either mentally disabled, or an asshole, stops in the middle of the road to let out and pick up passengers. As this is his job, I HAVE to accept that he HAS to drop off and collect passengers in order for him to make money. What I can’t accept is stopping every 13 metres.
If someone on the bus needs to get out on this street corner, and another passenger needs to get out on the next street corner, it makes sense in my mind for them both to get out at the same place, instead of the taxi stopping, letting one person out, driving 8.3 meters and then stopping again. “Get out and walk you fat arse! It can only help!” is what I shout from my window, as we stop for the 11th tim in the last 17 metres.
AND the passengers waiting to board the taxi, if there is a recess where the taxi can pull out of the way of the rest of the road users, and collect all of them in one stop, this makes more sense than spreading out at arms lengths from each other so the taxi has to stop every few meters to collect each of them. The taxi driver could save wear and tear on his taxi too, by being a little more selective on where he will stop to load and unload passengers. This really happened this morning, had I been driving something bigger than my Polo, maybe something with a bullbar or cannon mounted on it, I would have forced the taxi driver and his passengers to keep driving all the way down the road. That taxi would not have had the opportunity to make any stops until we were much further down the road, where it widens out and I could drive passed. I would have had much applause from ALL the other drivers behind me.
Now we can draw all sorts of things from this example. I can tell you that I am impatient, and that I am a hypocrite, I’m not averse to confrontation, and am probably quite stupid. These are based on the fact that I am fat, and driving a car, so I should also walk my fat arse off, I got angry because of having to wait, and in the spur of the moment, I was willing to confront the taxi driver, which we all know never ends well for anyone! We can assume that the women in the taxi have large bums not only because its hereditary but also because they are lazy and don’t like to walk. The same goes for the passengers waiting to board. The taxi driver is a different case as there is no rationale behind the way he drives, so it will be difficult to pinpoint any specific reasons for his actions. The fact of the matter is this; should you be a driver stuck in a similar sort of situation, you would probably have wanted to do the same thing. If each of these things are assumed to be true, and each party involved accepts the labels, and wears them proudly, what do I shout out of my window at the driver and his passengers when I go roaring passed? What do the people shout back? There is no argument to be made in either case, as I already know what he is going to say, and he knows it too.
So The FridaFactor has a point. If you would like to label this white woman a racist for shouting at a black person for being lazy or arrogant, you can go ahead because she has accepted your biased reasoning, and your label, and is going to wear it proudly. From the 165 000 views the article has had, and the many many many comments from people of all creeds and colours agreeing with her wholeheartedly, what she has said resonates well with the general masses (at least the people intelligent and capable enough to read News24). Some of her logic may be a little flawed, but she made a valid point, and by her definition, anyone who doesn’t support the ANC, or has an opinion, or a brain, or skin (of any colour) is a racist, and should wear the title proudly!
What doesn’t make sense is the second article in response to this, titled “I am a racist too” (here for you lazy gits who didn’t read it the first time). The writer FaithKos tries to incite me as a white South African to feel sorry for the black population, using the traditional definition of a racist. I don’t mean the Oxford Dictionary definition, but the very definition that The FridaFactor had spoken against. Faithkos says that 400 years of Apartheid can only be undone by 400 years of black oppression of the whites. Now there are just too many flaws in her arguement for her to be any real threat to the new FridaFactor status quo. More than that though, FaithKos went on to show how bigoted she and people that think like her are. She pulls all the usual lines like my grandfather shot and killed her grandfather, and so I should work as her gardener before things will ever be equal. What FaithKos did in her article was highlight that she is the Oxford dictionary definition of a racist. This makes her very stupid.
For those who would like to argue that I missed the point of the second article, answer these questions for me:
1. If 400 years of whites suppressing the blacks got us to where we are today, if we do the reverse for 400 years won’t we just end up with the whites in the same position that the blacks were in, and therefore not have remedied the situation at all, but merely inverted it?
2. What happens if by some divine intervention, all the whites left/died/disappeared? Who is all the anger and frustration of a bygone era aimed at? Who pays for those sins? Who has to lose out in order for the blacks to win?
3. There aren’t enough white riches to be redistributed to make every single impoverished black person wealthy. Can the same be said for the Kenny Kunene’s and Patrice Motsepe’s black wealth?
4. During the past 18 years, a very broad black middle class has been created, to bridge the gap between poor and rich, as is the purpose of BEE. Is your understanding that BEE is going to create white maids and gardeners? If this is the point of BEE, when do you suppose this is going to happen?
5. For the whites to become maids and gardeners, they would have to give up the fight for equal opportunity in a free and democratic society. Isn’t that the opposite of what Nelson Mandela preached against when he was released from prison? Surely, when he said South Africa belongs to all those who live in it, there was no proviso that said “except if you are a wealthy white person”?
My point is this, be a racist for the right reasons… Be a racist because you can use something other than “because I said you are” as your justification. Be a racist because you hate stupid people. Be a racist because you are truly against the scourge that is tearing this country apart.
Don’t be a racist because your next door neighbour has a nicer house than you…