Pain of being the ‘other’
“WE, the people of South Africa, recognise the injustices of our past,” is the preamble of the South African Constitution.
The debate on human and what makes us human has been long argued.
In J Bourke’s book What it Means to be Human: Reflections from 1791 to the Present, she posits that the classification of “human” was only constructed so that there could be an “other”, an animal or “less human”.
The creation of “the other” is deliberate allowing the classifier ownership of the centre, the privilege of being the “original”, the standard, the norm, relegating the “other”, less than, less human and/or animal to the margins.
If something is less human or an animal, it seems to justifyatrocities throughout history, such as humans as cockroaches.
When FW de Klerk said that apartheid was not a crime against humanity, it could point to the belief that such atrocities cannot be constituted a crime against humanity, as the victims weren’thumans (read: “white humans”).
In South Africa, white, black and brown citizens co-exist, share space, and engage, but always through a thin film that separates us. A thin film I call, and borrowing from the Netflix Original show, Stranger Things, the Upside-down: a dystopian and chaotic parallel universe that exists alongside the “normal” reality.
Which side of the parallel universe one exists usually runs along race and class lines and changes how we see and experience South Africa.
De Klerk confirmed that on one side of the upside-down, violence occurred but it wasn’t “that bad” because they weren’t that human to begin with; that we are 25 years into democracy so it’s time to “get over apartheid”.
And on the other side, the pain and violence of a system that still oppresses, remains unacknowledged. We are 25 years into democracy but still “I’m sorry Mr Mahlangu, the apartment isn’t for rent anymore”.
I think the De Klerk comment, and the reactions on all sides of the race divide, once again illustrate white South Africa’s continued distancing from the South African social cohesion project.
This distancing is fuelled by a continued lack of social education around our past – what is exclusion, power, diversity, identity and privilege ?
In my work on equality, diversity and inclusion, I seek to address some gaps in the education and corporate spaces. To understand how to achieve social cohesion, I have developed the following acronym: RAID. For me, social cohesion is created when individuals and organisations: Recognise that history has systematically, unjustly excluded groups of people from social, political, economic spaces. Historical structures and behaviours of exclusion are not easily dismantled and still exist in our democracy today.
Become intolerant for this continued exclusion.
Drive toward meaningful inclusion of those who have been historically excluded by focussing on behavioural structural change. RAID separates our parallel universes. It is the opening line of our Constitution ‘we, the people of South Africa recognise the injustices of our past’. It is the tool that allows to drive the social cohesion project for the betterment of all.
Roy Gluckman is an attorney and chief executive of Cohesion Collective, an equality, diversity and inclusions consulting and implementation fir.