Violence threatens democracy
THE PEOPLE of South Africa who still believe in the future of our fledgling democracy must have been encouraged by the strong condemnation of the violence that took place at the State of the Nation address in and around Parliament.
But mere condemnation of the Sona violence is not enough to protect our emerging democracy. Before we can even contemplate what we could do as a people to salvage our democracy, we need to reflect on what is at stake and whether the disgusting, violent events mean the degeneration of our democracy, as some pessimists would like us to believe.
Our Rainbow Nation is founded on a constitution that, among other things, aspires to heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights.
Furthermore, the constitution articulates its intention of laying the foundations for a democratic and open society.
The scenes of violence in Parliament that we saw on our television sets compromise the noble intentions of our constitution to establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights. Violence in Parliament, whatever the cause, threatens the very foundations of our constitutional democracy. This is basically what is at stake: the supreme law of the land, its principles and the values it encourages the people of South Africa to uphold.
If we, the people of South Africa, were to condone the violence that happened in Parliament, then we could as well accept that Parliament has become an extension of a supposedly Mafia state. In spite of efforts to deal with the endemic problem of crime that plagues our communities, we remain essentially a violent society.
The violence that took place in Parliament perpetuates the perception that South Africans are essentially a violent people. The unjust, unwarranted display of force in Parliament could only damage the image of our country in the eyes of the international community.
Such violence also has a negative psychological impact on the fragile minds of our children, who are the future of our country. Research indicates that the type of violence our children are exposed to on television teaches them that aggression is a successful and acceptable way to achieve goals and solve problems.
Maybe the Speaker should have issued the usual standard warning to those who were viewing Sona on TV that the “show” would contain violent scenes that some viewers might find disturbing and that viewer discretion was advised. If we had been warned in advance, we could have spared our children from being exposed to what we saw.
The failure of Parliament to find creative and imaginative solutions to the problems at hand have sown the seeds for the culture of phumasibethane (a loose translation could be “get out and let’s fight it out”), meaning a way of life (usually in the townships or informal settlements) where at the slightest provocation people go outside to slug it out.
The EFF MPs cannot absolve themselves from the violence that unfolded in Parliament. When they took office, like all other MPs, they swore that they would be faithful to the Republic of South Africa and would obey, respect and uphold the constitution and all other laws of the land.
What we saw at Sona were members of Parliament who had forgotten that the political agenda of the party must not compromise the dignity of Parliament as an institution of democracy.
The time has come for the ordinary people of South Africa to demand a Parliament that is free of violence. In the words of Charles de Gaulle, former president of France, “politics are too serious a matter to be left to the politicians”. DR TUTU FALENI DA member of the North West Provincial Legislature