Mandela Day - not just an event
Mandela Day must be about more than doing good deeds for one day – it must examine why they are needed
The year 2018 will mark the centenary of the birth of Nelson Mandela. It is therefore an appropriate time to reflect on his legacy, which has come under considerable scrutiny already. Of the many aspects of Madiba’s life, the one that has come under the most severe criticism of late was his approach to reconciliation.
It is argued that he did not do enough to get white South Africans to fully commit to reconciliation and that his actions left their privileges intact.
More scathingly, it is said that his approach did not make white South Africans abandon notions of their intrinsic superiority. The effect of this, it is argued, is manifested in the many incidents of racism today.
I think that this is unfair. I believe that the time and conditions prevalent during the negotiations and his presidency did not enable Madiba and those around him to fully think through what the content and process of reconciliation needed to be. Neither did it allow them to think through what the specific contributions of whites needed to be.
The conditions of a low intensity civil war, similarly, gave him little room to experiment with different models of reconciliation. Madiba, however, was clear on what reconciliation meant for him:
“Reconciliation means working together to correct the legacy of past injustice.” – National reconciliation day 16, December 1996.
“If we are one nation with one destiny, then our first task is the collective eradication of the legacy of the inhuman system of apartheid as a necessary step towards the reconciliation of our nation.” – Opening address, president’s budget debate, March 1999.
“Reconciliation was not an afterthought or an add-on of our struggle and our eventual triumph. It was always embedded in our struggle. Reconciliation was a means of struggle as much as was the end goal of our struggle.” – Speech at a conference of the International Women’s Forum, Tokyo, January 2003.
Our biggest failure, in my view, was to view reconciliation as an event encapsulated by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and a few symbolic actions.
I often respond to questions about whether reconciliation has failed by saying that we have failed reconciliation, by not detailing what more needed to be done beyond the TRC. Reconciliation’s biggest failure is its lack of continuous articulation and action by leaders of society.
A recent documentary on the Holocaust provided a glimpse of missed opportunities. At the end of World War II, General Dwight D Eisenhower instructed the allied troops to bring all the citizens of Berlin to the concentration camps to see first-hand what they had been supporting. The Germans had to look at the thousands of dead bodies piled in mass graves. For many, this was their first exposure to the horrors of Nazism and the lies of its propaganda machine. I think this laid a basis for Germans to confront the horrors of their past in a way we have never done here.
South Africa did not go through a similar exercise in 1994. While the TRC hearings exposed some to the horrors of apartheid, it did not reach the masses who needed to understand what it was and, more importantly, what it would take to eradicate its deep effects.
Similarly, the TRC did not show the masses the realities of everyday humiliation, housing and employment segregation that was the real apartheid in all its viciousness.
The result is the continuous refrain, mainly from white South Africans, that we must “move on and forget the past”.
This can only be because they don’t understand what they’re asking us to forget; what we are “moving on” from.
The jury is still out on the efficacy of the symbolic acts of reconciliation undertaken by Madiba. Having tea with the wives of former presidents and donning the springbok jersey at the Rugby World Cup. These acts might have given white South Africans a sense of security but did not get them to interrogate their responsibilities to make the country a more equal and just one.
In my view, these symbolic practices have continued today in the way Mandela Day is equated to acts of charity work without questioning why such work is required. Neither do we question whether those doing the charity are, in fact, perpetuating the systems and conditions that make these acts of charity necessary.
Take the blanket drive. While this brings much needed relief to those without blankets, I am not sure that the many who participate in the “blanket for Mandela” ask why people don’t have blankets in the first place.
Neither do they interrogate their own roles in creating and perpetuating the conditions of poverty and inequality that mean people don’t have the basics for their own shelter.
Mandela Day must, therefore, be more than “good deeds” for the day and an obliviousness to the welfare and well-being of millions for the other 364 days.
Mandela Day must bring forth one of the main aspects of Madiba’s life: that of being an activist and an organiser for social justice, in the first instance.
On Mandela Day we must ask whether our good deeds can be sustained for more than a day and whether they can also assist in creating the conditions for people not to need it in the future.
As we paint and fix schools, we must ask: how did these institutions come to be in this condition in the first place? We must ask: who did not do their job and what actions will be taken against them for maladministration? If not, we will be failing to build accountability and responsibility for the public, private and community sector.
As we dish out sandwiches to the hungry, we must ask what is wrong with a society wherein a small percentage of the population owns the vast majority of the wealth, while the majority of its people live in poverty and hopelessness.
We must also ask how do we work towards a society where all people earn a living wage. In that context we must be supporting efforts aimed at achieving a minimum wage for all workers.
All this brings us back to the importance of truly dismantling the institutions, culture and symbols of privilege which prevent true reconciliation. This would require an approach to reconciliation that must move beyond that started by Madiba and the TRC, however relevant that was to its time.
I think that one practical step we can take as a country would be to consider moving reconciliation day from December 16 to July 18.
This would bring a national focus to what reconciliation means and what needs to be done to achieve it far better than we do on December 16, when the country is in national shut-down mode for the festive season.
It would also be the most fitting tribute to the key symbol of reconciliation in South Africa: Nelson Mandela.