Wealthy put on blinkers when democracy dawned
After 1994, a new class developed in SA — a group of people who regard what is happening in the country as normal. Apartheid was dismantled, everything turned out fine, and the future is bright. Finish and
South Africans who still cannot see the debilitating consequences of apartheid in their daily lives must surely be blind. The beggars at the robots, the potholes in the streets, the crumbling infrastructure and the lack of skills; compared with shiny cars, suburban villas, comfortable restaurants and chic shopping malls point to something seriously wrong.
It is strange but true, there are many who appear blind to this huge problem.
For this class of people, it is business as usual in SA: they charge high interest rates on loans; expect immediate, First World-standard service in every shop they visit; ask for sizeable monthly payments for subscription television; amass considerable personal wealth and buy expensive racehorses while living in a country that is a sea of poverty.
Unfortunately for these people, things have changed over the past month or so.
The people who think everything is normal have received a severe jolt and things have become uncomfortable.
The Steinhoff implosion, the attack on Capitec and the controversy surrounding MultiChoice have some effect on the life of ease and luxury some South Africans expect.
It would not be unreasonable to take the view that Markus Jooste thought it perfectly normal to expand Steinhoff’s business in Europe. Or for Christo Wiese to amass $5.3bn of wealth at one point. Or for Gerrie Fourie to refinance a loan for a distressed consumer over a longer payment period.
Or for Koos Bekker to lobby the government against encryption. Or for Bob van Dijk to defend a deal with the Gupta family as devoid of corruption.
The problem is, SA is not a normal country.
No one can remain immune to the staggering levels of inequality in the country, no matter how hard they try. Inequality remains the source of all the ills in SA.
Yes, Brazil has inequality and India has similar problems. And the ANC is overwhelmingly corrupt. And President Jacob Zuma is a bad leader.
However, these views surely must be subservient to this question: how can these captains of industry possibly believe that the usual rules apply to doing business in SA?
It was especially prescient for the University of Johannesburg to honour eminent economist Sampie Terreblanche last week.
For years, he has been pleading in the wilderness for the issue of inequality to be tackled. He has said it is the most crucial problem in the country and that SA is not normal; that colonialism of a special kind was a reality.
Terreblanche has eloquently described the ravages of “unbridled capitalism” and the secret deals between big business and the ANC before 1994, which now benefit the business people from the Western Cape more than they could ever have imagined. The response has been predictable. Terreblanche has been vilified from that corner as an eccentric and someone out of touch.
All this while Hermann Giliomee’s book, The Afrikaners, has been feted.
This raises the question: is it coincidence that most of the businesspeople who believe everything in SA is normal are from Stellenbosch or the Western Cape? There where the so-called Afrikaners are still ensconced in privilege behind a mountain range?
I think not. It is not a coincidence that Giliomee’s book on Afrikaners will surely be found on more bookshelves of Afrikaner homes in the Western Cape than Terreblanche’s treatise on inequality in SA.
For decades, the view in the Cape has been that Afrikaners, or Afrikaanses, or the Stellenbosch mafia, or whatever you call them, are special people entitled to special treatment. These views have become entrenched.
The rest of the country should be thankful for their role in ending apartheid — never mind that they created it in the first place.
This falsehood was first mooted by Piet Cilliers when he was editor of Die Burger, continued by Giliomee, who did not deem it necessary to define what an Afrikaner was.
Instead, he sketches a picture of a historically wronged group of people worthy of special treatment as a minority group.
And now we have the practical consequences. A glaring lack of understanding of the daily challenges of living in poverty, experienced by most South Africans on a daily basis. Translated into condescension of the worst kind.
This was evident when Fourie said Capitec was always willing to reach an accommodation with a Capitec client when she could not keep up payments in the event of pregnancy. Or when Bekker interacted with Zuma at Davos a few years ago, bowing his head to the new man in charge.
The miracle of 1994 opened the door for many people to reach levels of wealth thought to be unattainable before, and then left millions of black South Africans mired in misery and poverty.
The recent happenings at Steinhoff, Capitec and Naspers present a perfect opportunity for these businesspeople to become contrite.
To open their hand again. To present plans on how to reduce inequality. To tackle the problem. But will they?