Saturday 17 January 2015

Truth and facts don't suddenly become hate speech simply because one wills them to be so


The FF+ recently laid a charge of hate speech on President Jacob Zuma with the with the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC), on this basis of him having said the following “Van Riebeeck’s arrival was the beginning of all the trouble… the numerous struggles, wars and deaths…the grabbing of land and the denial of indigenous people’s political and economic power” during a speech he gave at the ANC’s 103rd birthday celebration. According to them "Zuma's words construed whites, coloureds and Indians as non-indigenous, creating a dispensation where they are regarded as second-rate citizens, as colonists."

Why does the FF+ (and Afriforum along with like-minded bodies) like "tagging" other races in order to underhandedly and wrongly add weight to their argument, aggrieving other races plus dragging them into arguments which don't directly affect them? Unless of course the subject, Jan van Riebee, was Indian/Coloured - which is highly unlikely.

It is and shall forever be true and accurate that they are not indigenous, and Whites are indeed colonists, but that does not necessarily mean they, together with Coloureds and Indians, are second rate citizens. Whites in North America (USA&Canada) and Oceania (NZ&AUS mainly) are not indigenous there too, and they are colonists however many generations deep. You cannot erase one's legacy or true identity, only hide it (i.e. not showing race in application forms, deeds office or IDs, etc for selfish reasons under the guise of nation building), but it's there.

However in all those areas - North America, Oceania and Africa, the White man is anything but second rate. He is far superior to the Aborigine, American and African, economically and many other ways. In fact, the White man in those lands (particularly the one in Africa) enjoys a status, privilege and self-worth far higher than that of his European brothers and sisters, by virtue of the still largely subservient native's historically affected psychology.

What about coloureds? In our culture in Africa, which I'm certain is the same for other natives, paternity dictates what you are. European influence, Civil law, modernisation along with other encroaching social dynamics may all attempt to change it, but our beliefs and stand on this are everlasting.

We say “Intonga entle igawulwa ezizweni”, so the product of that union doesn’t cease to be African or belong to different race other than his/her father simply because one married a White/Indian woman, not African, and the skin colour of the offsppring might be different as a result. If you're Xhosa and you marry a Venda, the child is Xhosa; and if you're a Massai and you marry an Algerian Arab, the child is Massai. It follows therefore that if you're Xhosa/Massai and you marry a White/Indian woman, the child is African (Xhosa/Massai respectively) not Coloured. Just as we don’t have cousins in our culture (children of two brothers are brothers&sisters not cousins), we have no classification of Coloured among African children, only Africans, except unique in pigmentation.

Sadly due to the "balance" of colonisation, Apartheid and the slave trade, we all know who was banging who - and it was almost never the other way - so those Coloureds are not Coloured, they are European, descendants of Whites. Unfortunately the White man never accepted the Coloured as his child and rightly assimilated him/her into his race and culture where he belongs. He rejected him and created a race for him – the Coloured or Mixed Race. Just as Trevor Noah's father I presume, doesn't take him to be German/European like himself. He has given him up to his mother's race and culture – Xhosa, albeit wondering if he was an Albino while growing up.

Granted some of the younger coloureds are of African blood, due to coloureds marrying Africans, not just fellow coloureds, as the years went by, so they are rightly African. However due to their rejection by White fathers and their families, as well as concealed documentation of one's lineage in order to make an easy distinction, we have ultimately accepted ALL of them (Coloureds/Mixed Race) as Africans, refer to them as such, and should like to think and hope they consider themselves such despite the fears sown in the Western Cape majority by the Demonic Alliance for political gain.

Indians on the other hand are just like Europeans/Whites (not to mention both their embarrassing inability to converse in African languages while claiming to be African 'by virtue of being here for hundreds of years'). The difference lies in how and why they came here. The latter as pillagers and masters, the former as slaves.

They played a role not just in South Africa, but in parts of Central Africa too. Most of the Indians in Central Africa were migrated to England in organised fashion and resettled even better there than here due to "pressing" circumstances in that region at the time, while the Indians in South Africa had no chance of that assisted relocation as late as 1994, neither was it necessary as this was their home too. However, the role they played does entitle them some benefits normally due to Africans alone, even though that hand has been overly extended by certain complicit policymakers we blindly voted into power.

Nonetheless they remain Indian, Asians. They cannot and will never be indigenous. They are fully aware of that themselves, and merely refer to themselves as Indigenous/African purely for the economic benefits it avails, "security" to ward of non-existent fears of what they might lose by fittingly referring to themselves according to their heritage. No doubt Gandhi himself is turning in his grave at the prospect of his fellowman referring to himself or being referred to as an African, the very African he thought little of and considered highly inferior to his people.

His descendants - the likes of Vivian Reddy, the Shaiks, Dr Iqbal Surve and other ordinary people of that race - might not say it outright but they certainly share his feelings. The Times Live article "Fans haul soapie actors over coals for TV adultery” - proves as much. So hospitable we have been to their descendants that even their brothers the likes of the Guptas have abandoned their richer abode India and decided to follow them here to the Dark Continent, albeit not in slave boats this time, and for that they've been richly rewarded.

Yes, truth and facts don't suddenly become hate speech simply because one wills them to be so.

No comments:

Post a Comment