Exploitation of a generation

In his 1970 book Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Paulo Freire examines and explains societal challenges after a revolution similar to that of the ’90s in South Africa. Under the spotlight are oppressed people whose entire living generations were raised under oppression with no experience and notion of political or economic freedom. The oppressed’s only notion of freedom is often modelled on what the oppressors’ lived life is and what the oppressors’ privileges are or were during oppression.

Freire argues that the oppressor and oppressed’s destinies are bound. At issue is how they both work to restore the human dignity of the other through redress. This, in itself, is a separate revolution following a liberation revolution. Perhaps, a sort of Nelson Mandela concept of reconciliation and development. The oppressor seeks and demands that their status quo remain, as the NP, CP and DP (now called DA) strenuously argued during Codesa negotiations.

Freire observes correctly – and in a textbook South African case study – that the oppressed people require strong leadership that humanises them immediately, in our regard, the country found in ANC leaders, with this authentic and humanising leadership. This becomes a dual benefit for both oppressor and oppressed as the oppressed let go of thoughts of vengeance.

Freire argues that “washing one’s hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral”. This thesis was shared by Desmond Tutu when he stated: “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.” As South Africa remains a country divided between the powerful and the powerless, choosing what you side with remains a moral obligation. The test for this morality is on who possesses the real power.

Freire points out that the oppressed have a fear of freedom, which requires self-responsibility foreign to both the oppressed and oppressor. In South Africa, we have seen racism in parliament debates between blacks and whites, often showing fear for change and transformation. Whites, represented by the DA, often look at matters of law in the lenses of “fighting back” the revolution to maintain the privileges owned pre- and post-revolution.

For South Africa to work, blacks needed to be forgiving and accepting of their tormentors; whites needed to be magnanimous. The blacks have overdone the forgiving and acceptance, but been shunned and scorned. On the other hand, their tormentors have refused to be generous and meet blacks halfway.

First, through the NP and DP, white South Africans stood on the side of denouncing and arguing against redress or oppressed affirming laws. This has morphed into a complex where, as was during apartheid, there are blacks who argue the apartheid system was good.

Today there are blacks who argue that affirmative laws are wrong and racist, explaining Freire’s claim that “as long as the oppressed remain unaware of the causes of their condition, they fatalistically ‘accept’ their exploitation”.