Culture of violence is embedded in South African society
THE recent events in Senekal in the Eastern Free State have, for the umpteenth time, thrust the related issues of farm murders, racial tension, violent crime and the responses of political leaders to these issues on the national agenda.
The latest outrage was sparked by the murder of farm manager Brendin Horner. On October 6, demonstrators – mostly white farmers – embarked on a violent protest at the Senekal Magistrate’s Court following the appearance of the two men accused of killing Horner.
According to reports, a gunshot was fired and a police vehicle set on fire.
In response, EFF leader Julius Malema called on his “ground forces” to attend the Senekal trial today to “defend” state property and democracy.
This response has generated a polarised reaction from the public, with some supporting this call while others criticised Malema for inciting violence and racial division.
This is playing out while the country is still reeling from continuing incidents of genderbased violence and violence against children.
This begs the question: Do we have a culture of violence in South Africa?
The concept of culture is often used (and misused) to refer to a range of different things. For some, culture refers to the observable distinctive traits of a particular group or collective, such as dress, food, or technology. For others, it refers to more abstract traits such as language, beliefs or customs and traditions.
For still others, culture refers to an appreciation for human expression.
Anthropologically, culture is a central concept that helps us to make sense of human social dynamics and behaviour across all times and locations.
As such, culture is seen as a complex system that both shapes and is shaped by humans within specific contexts.
Culture thus has three key characteristics that concern us here. First, culture is shared. Second, culture is learnt. Third, culture is symbolic.
As a country, we indeed share a history of violence. We share a history of multiple levels of violence, including structural, political, economic, social, and even cultural violence.
We also share in the mass media consumption of violence, be it through movies, television or even news reports.
Values, beliefs, customs, practices, language and many other symbols of culture are transferred from generation to generation through enculturation or socialisation.
Experiences of violence, whether as perpetrators or victims, or both, are inherited by successive generations. This is why we see many examples of history repeating itself in, for example, violent protests, excessive force by police or perceived violence inciting rhetoric.
What does violence mean in South African society? Violence has become like a language. It is a form of communicating or expressing a range of negative emotions and attitudes including anger, frustration, fear, anxiety, intolerance and disrespect for basic human rights.
It is still perceived by many as a valid symbol of resistance and may be justified on this basis. How often do we hear people involved in violent protests saying: “Violence is the only language the government understands”?
But what can we do about it? Perhaps the best way to address the culture of violence is to start with the successive generations.
Cultural values are more easily shaped and adopted by the youth than by older generations who tend to be more rooted and set in their ways of thinking and behaving.
If we want to change the culture of violence, we need to start changing the values, attitudes and traits that may engender violence.
How do we achieve this? By demonstrating proper leadership and by being the examples that we want our youth to become.
We cannot expect to dismantle the culture of violence if we have leaders who, whether intentionally or not, are perceived to be promoting the very values that encourage violence and anarchy.
It is imperative that we address the structural violence of an enduring social and economic system that continues to victimise and marginalise many.