No defence for Sparks’ comment
In the space of a few short weeks national attention has shifted from a student leader talking about admir ing Adolf Hitler to a veteran journalist speaking about Hendrik Verwoerd’s intelligence. Allister Sparks made a mistake, and his continued defence of the point will make it worse. Speaking at the DA federal congress, his comment plays into the hands of anyone willing to point out holes in the DA’s credibility. The issue is trying to divorce someone’s morals, their contribution to history and crimes against humanity from an IQ measurement or shrewd scheming ability. On top of that is the context. In this case the context is two-fold: South Africa is heaving on a daily basis because of its history and the aftermath of apartheid. Secondly, the forum where the point was made was the federal congress of a political party. At times the context and subtext of a comment is much more important than the comment itself.
Imagine the outrage that would result from calling Boko Haram leaders intelligent or praising the politically clever, marketing genius of Islamic State. The latter is light years ahead of many NGOs in terms of their online profi le and international reach: how, in all conscience or as part of a world threatened by their barbarity, can we admire their marketing nous?
In the same way that disgraced former Wits SRC leader Mcebo Dlamini was wrong to defend his comments, so too is Sparks. In his response, Sparks speaks of “evil genius”, which means a person exerting the influence of an evil nature. It cannot be denied Verwoerd did exert influence, and his actions and brain resulted in an internationally recognised crime against humanity.
Freedom of speech is guaranteed by the constitution, but so too is moral outrage. Separating Verwoerd’s actions, the deaths and suffering that emanated from his influence, from a trait such as cleverness is a futile exercise. Even the most diehard comedy fans struggle to separate Jimmy Savile from the sexual abuse scandal that erupted after his death. Using words such as “smart” and calling Verwoerd a clever man leaves a bitter taste, no matter the intention behind the words.