Malema’s statements equate to terrorism
JULIUS Malema seems to have rattled the Indian community with his proclamation that the majority of this community is racist. It didn’t seem to rattle the community as much when Constitutional Court Judge Zac Yacoob said the same thing.
The psychology of this response is so revealing of ingrained prejudices and power relations. It’s almost as if there is a sense of “how dare he!” How dare Zac Yacoob take aim at or expose the hidden prejudices of his own community? How dare Malema criticise a community that has suffered so much and has done so much good work?
I won’t explore the racism, sectarianism and gender issues embedded in these positions, but they are undeniably there.
So the community is getting bad press and is attracting criticism from all and sundry.
How ought one to respond to this, if at all? If you disagree you are branded a denialist, if you agree you are branded as weak, and, if you criticise you are branded as a racist.
But a cursory glance at the various newspaper columns and social media posts and resulting threads is enough to convince me that the problem exists and that racism and racist behaviour are overwhelmingly rejected.
My view is that there is a fundamental difference between in the intentions of Malema and Yacoob, even though they are saying pretty much the same thing.
Given the EFF’s propensity for violence and dramatic confrontation (Shivambu’s assault of the journalist outside Parliament, Malema’s reaction to Terror Lekota at the public hearings on land expropriation and the general behaviour in Parliament are glaring examples), it’s not a great stretch of the imagination to read his comments on the community as a form of terrorism.
The main objective of terror is not to foster positive change but to strike fear in the hearts and minds of the enemy. In Malema’s eyes, the community is the enemy. Terrorism is aimed at forcing people to live in fear and to manipulate them through the demons created by their own imagination.
Terrorism causes people to hate and distrust and, ironically, amplifies the behaviours that were unacceptable in the first place.
More than that, terrorism forces good people to doubt their goodness and to act in a way which is counter to their essential goodness. In my view, it is when this level is broached that we have a big problem.
And that level has been broached.
Good people are now doubting their goodness and are acting out of character. A good person responded to the onslaught on the community by calling, on Facebook, for positive initiatives of the community to be articulated so that people can see that the Indian community is not all bad.
Comment after comment extolled the charitable nature of the community, community organisations and religious organisations. They listed school-building programmes, educational programmes, social programmes and feeding programmes that demonstrated the magnanimity of the community towards the “less fortunate”. Good people doing good things.
This is why I call Malema’s statements terrorism: Good people never advertised their goodness before and certainly not as a defence for something unacceptable!
The Bhagavad Gita says that only a gift given without any expectation of appreciation or reward is beneficial to both the giver and recipient. A gift given with the expectation of some advantage is harmful to both the giver and recipient. Moreover: “A gift that is given without any regard for the feelings of the recipient and at the wrong time, so causing embarrassment to the recipient, is again harmful to both giver and recipient.”
Matthew warns us that we must beware of “practising your righteousness before men to be noticed by them; otherwise, you have no reward with your Father who is in heaven”. He say do not sound a trumpet lest you become a hypocrite.
Charity is fundamental to Islam. It is one of the pillars or Islam and, as Mufti Menk says, the one with the beautiful heart does not shout for attention. It is not to impress or show off but to please the Almighty.
All religions exalt the importance of charity, and they all warn about the ego. Islam reminds us that each time we touch the ground in prayer, it is to leave our egos there.
In my view, Malema is malevolent. He is about the ego. Even his claim to serve the people is tainted by his ego, and he does it because he gets paid for it. It’s not charity and benevolence. It’s about power.
He could well do with some kind of spiritual education as can the racists, sectarianists, bigots and misogynists.
In fact, we can all do with some spiritual education (and I don’t mean religious indoctrination), because it also worries me that good people are calling for racists to be punished.
Racism is learnt through experience (just like bad behaviours). I’m not convinced you can blame anyone for being a racist given the racial history of this country as I am not convinced punishing or criminalising racism will eradicate racism.
Religions also inculcate their own brand of racism within their practice. The apartheid regime based their ideology on the bible, the word “k***r” has Arabic roots, and the Hindus have their caste system.
In all of this, we have to return to the Constitution that envisions a non-racial, non-sectarian and non-sexist country. We have a right to personal safety, and Malema is threatening this personal security.
So how ought we to respond?
Well, we can subvert his divide and rule strategy by being united under the constitution. That, unfortunately, demands honesty, integrity and charity, because as Islam teaches us, forgiveness is the highest form of charity.
To contribute opinion pieces on topical issues, as well as those affecting communities, e-mail post@inl.co.za for possible use. A column is between 800 to 1 000 words. Also submit a photograph of yourself and your designation details and contact numbers. The piece needs to be clear, well thought out and constructive.