Shaping AfriForum for constructive role

IF NOT careful, AfriForum, which has built itself a solid reputation as a distinctive civil rights organisation, will find it difficult to convince historically disadvantaged South Africans that it embraces post-apartheid rule.

Don’t get me wrong, for I do believe that in a vibrant democracy such as ours, we need the likes of AfriForum to keep the political elite in check.

Indeed, such organisations give teeth to civil society.

In the case of AfriForum, there can be no doubt that the civil rights body pursues its objectives with aplomb and vexation.

There are numerous issues on which AfriForum has taken on the government head-on, sometimes against the odds, and come out on top.

For the multitudes whose aspirations AfriForum champions, particularly when it tackles transformation-related issues such as affirmative action, a sense of gutsy determination most probably describes their collective desire to carry on tackling the democratic government.

On the other hand, there are millions of other South Africans who view AfriForum with deep suspicion and harbour a silent distaste for it.

They see the Afrikaans-led organisation’s modus operandi as hankering for the times of yesteryear when race adversely determined the destiny of most South Africans.

Right or wrong, that is a growing perception.

If AfriForum cares, it needs to address it as a matter of urgency.

This week I sat through a discussion in which a group of black professionals lamented the rise of AfriForum and its prominent role in our national agenda-setting.

They decried its penchant for hauling state institutions before the courts, arguing that such moves were intended to undermine the legitimate decision-making processes of a legitimate government.

At issue was the name-changing saga in the City of Tshwane, a process AfriForum this week attempted to frustrate through the courts – but failed.

Following the unsuccessful court interdict by AfriForum, the city hurried to implement the changing of 25 apartheid-era street names, renaming them after Struggle heroes including Jeff Masemola, Steve Biko, Robert Sobukwe, Stanza Bopape and Solomon Mahlangu.

Effective from this week, the lengthy Hans Strydom Drive, a busy road connecting the sprawling township of Mamelodi with the capital, will be known as Solomon Mahlangu Drive.

It was from that Mamelodi community that Mahlangu, a trained MK soldier, shouted before he was hanged in 1979: “Tell my people that my blood will nourish the tree of freedom.”

To many people in and around Pretoria, Mahlangu is a sacred symbol of their struggle for emancipation.

He embodies inspirational attributes to the kings and commoners in the black townships and villages.

In Mahlangu’s legacy, as is the case with other Struggle heroes and heroines, too many South Africans derive a sense of hope for a bright future.

I still remember vividly the seething anger that permeated our community when the apartheid government hanged Mahlangu after turning down last-minute appeals to spare the life of a young man who was fighting a just war.

But as a country we have moved on, haven’t we?

The historic year of 1994, which ushered in the first democratically-elected president in Nelson Mandela, also marked a break with our violent and divisive past.

It represented the beginning of a harmonious and peaceful co-existence of black and white South Africans.

Together, we made a pact that only through a legitimate process of public participation shall the winning political party govern over all of us.

AfriForum, I believe, has good intentions as we all endeavour to thrash out a common future.

However, it is entirely up to it to choose how it would like citizens outside its constituency to judge it.

In my view there cannot be any denying that as we attempt to reconstruct and develop the new SA, the gross socio-economic imbalances of the past decades are going to compel us to engage in some form of positive discrimination such as affirmative action.

It is one of the various ways through which we can normalise our man-made abnormal situation.

If AfriForum fails to recognise that as South Africans from different backgrounds we are bound to see things differently, methinks such a glaring lack of judgement will be detrimental to its cause.

The organisation need not fashion itself as an anti-government, anti-transformation civil rights group that is fighting to stop the tide of change.

That is unnecessary and provocative.

It would be such a wonderful development if AfriForum started to take up the cudgels on behalf of destitute black people who are often helpless in the face of injustice.

This would enhance its credentials and dispel the perception – real or otherwise – that the organisation is fighting for the privileges of whites who are opposed to change.

The truth is that thus far AfriForum has done little or nothing to dispel such a belief, and instead at times seems to revel in it.

Our democracy can only flourish through the plurality of voices, in the same way that our stability will rely heavily on socio-economic justice for the majority of the citizens.

The issue of land reform, where millions of claimants are waiting for land taken away from their forebears to be returned to its rightful owners, continues to be thorny.

Former president Thabo Mbeki’s diagnosis of our two economies persists for black people. Unemployment is a scourge that is growing unabated, particularly among our young people.

The wealth of our country is still skewed towards whites, with a few black multi-millionaires breaking into the “first economy”. These are the realities that AfriForum will be foolhardy to justify or defend.

It is AfriForum’s proper understanding of our dynamics, in totality, which could assist the organisation to exhibit a greater understanding and appreciation of the sensitivities of black attitudes towards its public posture.

Lest we forget.

l Makoe is the founder and editor-in-chief of the Royal News Services. His previous columns can be found at www.frankthought.co.za.