Why did McKaiser focus on Hart?

I WRITE in response to Eusebius McKaiser’s article of January 8 concerning Chris Hart.

McKaiser could never have been flabbergasted that Hart had been referred to as “renowned” and “well respected” for the simple reason that Hart is, in his field, renowned and well respected.

If McKaiser intended to suggest that Hart ought not to be renowned and well respected, then, of course, that is another matter.

On the question of white people getting by on the basis of mediocrity, McKaiser would be well advised to re-acquaint himself with reality.

He has commented in the past on the merits and de-merits of affirmative action, so he would know that there is no better example of people getting by on the basis of mediocrity – nay, incompetence – than affirmative action.

The last time I checked, white people were not the beneficiaries of affirmative action.

I note, too, that among McKaiser’s talents is that of soothsayer, since he has very few doubts about anything. Statements like “I have no doubt that”, “there is no doubt in my mind” and “I am sure that” (the article is replete with the self-pro- fessed absence of any doubt on the part of McKaiser) are poor substitutes for evidence, facts or even informed opinion. Likewise, the repeated refrain that “he doesn’t know”. It is reassuring to know that McKaiser knows everything – except maybe the reality surrounding affirmative action.

In the same edition of The Star, there was a front-page article concerning the racist vitriol posted on Facebook by Velaphi Khumalo, an employee of the Gauteng Arts and Culture Department. That particular story broke a few days earlier so, to borrow one of McKaiser’s favourite phrases, I have no doubt that McKaiser would have been aware of the firestorm around that particular incident.

Yet, McKaiser chose to focus on Chris Hart’s Facebook posting. The one is blatant hate speech, the other is insensitive. There is simply no equivalent moral repugnancy, so I ask why did McKaiser choose to comment on Hart but not on Khumalo? Is it because in the mind of people like McKaiser, only white people are capable of hatred and racism or, in the case of Hart, insensitivity?

Get real Eusebius, as they say.

Is it because in his mind only whites are capable of hate and racism?

Joburg

WRITE TO US