Managed dialogue works better

Devi Rajab, the chairperson of the Democracy Development Plan, responds to the open letter written by Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi ‘Keep the dialogue going towards reconciliation’ (POST, October 17 - 21) in relation to her earlier column ‘The futility of race dialogues’

OVER the years, I have watched Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi meaningfully engage with members of our diverse communities.

He came to our homes and stayed with families and engaged with our children.

He enjoyed good relations with many prominent South Africans like Chris Saunders, Ray Swart, Peter Soal, Fatima Meer, Pat Poovalingum and Alan Paton. More than any other leader, this great son of our nation has always held his ground with the distinction of a real statesman.

In all his deliberations he has been influenced by sound rationality and a deep abiding sense of patriotism.

What I have learnt most from this principled leader was that, like Nelson Mandela, he truly embraced people of all race groups with warmth and affection and lived the motto “South Africa belongs to all the people who live in it”.

I therefore read with great interest and deep respect the open letter penned to me, which appeared in POST (October 17-21) about the importance of keeping the dialogue on race relations constantly on the boil.

While I am in full agreement with Dr Buthelezi that interracial dialogue is an important aspect of building a socially cohesive society, I add the proviso that unless the dialogue is managed constructively it can amount to being nothing more than a cathartic experience.

I say this out of a sense of frustration because as a social psychologist, I am cognisant of the importance of social parameters.

Sensationalism

Dialogues in open forums lend themselves more to sensationalism and less to constructive engagement.

Instead managed dialogues by skilled facilitators tend to produce more positive outcomes in intergroup relations.

During the sessions on social cohesion held separately by the Durban Local History Museum of the eThekwini Municipality and the University of KwaZulu-Natal in partnership with the UmAfrika newspaper, free-floating unbridled racism was unleashed.

When dialogues are encouraged around specific race groups in isolation to the bigger picture of institutionalised racism and the ubiquitous nature of prejudice itself, such discussions can be counter productive.

Without analysis or context or reason, race dialogues descend into a litany of personal frustrations that, if taken out of context, can actually hamper social cohesion instead of building bridges.

However, the session held by DUT with the Democracy Development Plan and other partners was planned and organised with professional and institutional support.

In my estimation, this is the strategy we should be using when we deal with racism in our province. For many years, I have run workshops entitled Through Different Eyes: Intercultural Understanding for Educators, Students and Women’s Groups and the level of real love and understanding of self and the other was clearly discernible after such sessions.

On one occasion, we had a group of rural women meet township women across the racial line and through interpreters they shared recipes on how to feed their families on small budgets.

More than erudite talk, this simple exercise of warmth, love and humanity crossed years of separation.

A colleague once said that poor race relations can best be overcome by good manners and kind acts of generosity.

When the late John F Kennedy attempted to awaken the American national spirit he said: “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”.

I fully agree with Dr Buthelezi that South Africans have to reach out to each other if we want to build a strong nation and in this respect every effort should be made at individual and institutional levels to address this important issue of social cohesion.

So the challenge lies in going beyond what is wrong, to what can be done about it.