Transformation this time, not revolution

 

A friend of mine works in the transformation office at the University of Stellenbosch. If there is an institution that is in radical need of transformation, it is Stellenbosch University. She has found the work rather challenging primarily because the very people who are quite comfortable keeping Stellenbosch as is; entrenched in Afrikaans culture, exclusive and alienating to the other races; have been tasked to carry this transformation on their shoulders. You can just imagine the dragging of feet; Resistance with a capital R. One of the things that kept coming up during workshops is the sympathetic response from white staff members. The appropriate response is one when everyone realises we (South Africans) are in this together and we have to help each other navigate the new South African terrain together, with our rather complicated history. As I echo Thabo Mvuyelwa Mbeki’s words: ‘[South] Africa belongs to all who live in it’ and that attests to its resources as well. The problem with the response of sympathy is that sympathy places the sympathizer at arm’s length from the victim. The action then that follows this type of response is charity as opposed to sharing. Since the word charity has fallen into disrepute (it leaves an unsavoury taste in one’s mouth), it has become replaced with the word philanthropy but both these words have been misconstrued and we have moved away from their original meanings. Dambisa Moyo has a lot to say regarding the disenchantment of philanthropy in her book Dead Aid. I’m disenchanted as well with philanthropy as we know it and advocate for the return to its original meaning.

 

The word charity etymologically referred to the love between Christians. The word philanthropy has Greek origins meaning love of man. Both these words have love as the primary response. To be charitable is to love and to be philanthropic means to love. No sign of sympathetic responses here. The ‘ag shame’ sentiment pervasive in South Africa is insufficient and is altogether rather infuriating. Not only can a sympathetic response only take place where there is distance between the parties involved but it’s also a hierarchical response. The sympathizer places themselves above the marginalised and sends sympathy down to the marginalised. They feel sorry for them but in no way identify themselves with them. They are in effect saying ‘We see you down there in the trenches and we are in no way joining you. Sucks to be you.’ The Christian charity is the Jesus type of love, the sharing of bread and fish amongst all who are present type of love. It is not decadent gala fundraisers and golf tournaments where a Davos type of setup takes place with a handful of people making decisions on behalf of those on the other side of the world. The space between is the very reason love cannot take place. No intimacy, no love. No brushing up against each other in the trenches, no love. Jay Z has a line in Sade’s remix to The Moon and The Sky where he says ‘I guess it’s in the stars for me to love you from a distance’ Great line. Sounds fantastic but in reality it doesn’t hold. Love is a product of proximity which brings us back to Stellenbosch.

 

My disheartened friend felt as though her skills could be better utilised elsewhere and could have a bigger impact than they currently have at Stellenbosch. She was saying that it seemed that the only way Stellenbosch would change is through a complete board overhaul; all twelve of those white men with vested interest keeping Stellies as is should be replaced by people who actually want transformation to take place. She is calling for a revolution; a change from the outside in. Completely understandable but revolutions are a high stakes game; because even those who win lose. They miss out on a collaboration with those who have been overthrown. So I would like to echo Jamie Wheal’s word in his book Recapture the Rapture: ‘This time the aim isn’t revolution; its transformation’. South Africa’s not so distant past is testimony that collaboration is in the best interest of everyone. Our transition to a democratic country has been far from seamless and there are still resentments and injustices that many people are still contending with regarding the transition. To say the apartheid government was reluctant to transition is an understatement. That reluctance can still be felt to this day. The main reason why F.W. de Klerk’s government capitulated is because of the external pressure that the apartheid government was receiving through sanctions. We were being watched and so we needed to act accordingly in the eyes of the world. And so the apartheid government reneged and the ANC came into power. C. S. Lewis’ quote comes to mind: ‘There is no use saying you choose to lie down when it has become impossible to stand up. That will not be the time for choosing; it will be the time to discover which side we really have chosen… now, today, this moment, is our chance to choose the right side.’ The apartheid government did not choose to do the right thing; they did so begrudgingly and so it beggars the imagination why their leader would be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for acting with the world twisting his hand behind his back. Transformation is the right side, it is the right thing to do. History has shown us how it goes down otherwise. It would behoove Stellenbosch to cotton on to this historical lesson and climb on board before the revolution.

 

Recent global events show us that we are at the mercy of the vagaries that threaten to annihilate us as the human race; those we have brought on to ourselves and those completely out of our control. There are bigger threats looming over our heads and we have to triage those threats over anything else. And we have to be united in order to do so. One could ask what the global crises have to do with a small town in the Western Cape of South Africa? Everything. ‘We need to foster more localized solutions to global challenges’ says Jamie Wheal and then we scale up. The privileged and disenfranchised have to work together to make their small place peaceful, free and liveable for everyone before any effort can be channelled towards global challenges. This working together is the very process of transformation where there will be a sharing of space, resources and knowledge and where peace is achieved through justice. And no one knows better than those who live in those spaces daily what will be required to foster transformation there. Not the philanthrocapitalists (what an oxymoron). Us. We have the gnosis. And besides we have learnt from the infamous story of the well, the taps and the angry women; and we have learnt from Bill Gates’ mosquito nets faux pas that the solution cannot come from the outside in. It must come from within. Transformation this time, not revolution. None of the figureheads business either, it fools no one.

 

Even though my friend’s passion for working at Stellenbosch is waning, this is perhaps the time where she and her team knuckle down. They hold the liminal space. They are doing the Samsonian work of pulling the privileged and disenfranchised together. They are dissolving the distance. They are engineering the intimacy required for love of man to take place. They are the ‘men in the arena… daring greatly’. They are the hope and they are compelled to make being a hope a contagion. In Cornel West’s words: ‘The question’s not having hope, the question is being a hope. Having hope is still too detached, too spectatorial. You have got to be a participant. You gotta be an agent.’ And while they set the example, we have the even greater responsibility of being open and vulnerable enough to viscerally feel each other’s pain and to ‘metabolize that pain’ (Jamie Wheal) as fuel for love. To unite. To simply refuse to let other South Africans live in a way we (the privileged) wouldn’t.  We can no longer remain as we are. There are three essential nutrients for humans to flourish as articulated by Jamie Wheal: Beyond, Becoming and Belonging. We then need to move beyond our comforts and avarice, to becoming a people transformed and united, belonging to all of South Africa. ‘They are how we wake up, grow up and show up. Again, and again, for as long as it takes’ (Jamie Wheal).  It really is time for us to wake up, grow up and show up.

A case for Generosity

 

Dedicated to: Sannie Ncube   

Whose generosity has split over in to many different lives.

 

There is a theme that has been recurring in books I’ve been reading, from fiction to non-fiction and even in music. I think it may just be a universal law; not as in a universally known physics law but rather a law on how the universe works. I think it boils down to the fundamental concept of generosity. The law is that when you save or help others, you inadvertently or perhaps even ultimately help yourself. In Susan Newham- Blake’s As If Born to You, Ana, who is a psychologist describes how she went into the field because she was in a way attempting to help herself. Garth Japhet (Like Water is for Fish) suffers from dysthymia throughout his childhood where he had to change schools often and spent a great deal of his childhood in tears when on the surface, nothing seemed to be wrong with his life. He decides to become a doctor when all the academic signs are pointing towards his studying law. He writes that in deciding to become a doctor, he wanted to help others but in effect he was trying to help himself, especially since he was not then aware of what was wrong with him.

Lupe Fiasco runs a similar thread in his album Drogas Wave. In his song Alan Forever, he rewrites the story of Alan’s life centred on this motif. Alan Kurdi drowned during the European immigration crisis when his family was trying to leave Syria. He was three years old and a picture of his washed up body was taken by a Turkish photographer and went viral. In Lupe’s song, Alan becomes an Olympic swimmer, Michael Phelps, with the ambitions of becoming a Jacques Cousteau of sorts, someone who is very comfortable in large bodies of water. A young child falls into the water and Alan saves the child and there are happy endings as opposed to Alan’s real-life endings. In his song Lupe raps: “

‘You should really feel good that you gave your help
Might get you into heaven, might raise your health
Might get a lot of blessings, might raise your wealth
Bet you ain't even know that you saved yourself’

It is in the last line where the motif is echoed. Later in the album, another song titled Jonylah Forever, which carries the theme as well. Jonylah Watkins was a 6 month year old baby who was shot in Chicago. She was with her father in a car and she was killed when a retaliatory attack took place against her father. In Lupe’s song, Hadiya Pendleton who died when she was shot in the back while standing with friends, lives instead and grows up to be a doctor. She decides to go back to the South Side to help the communities there when she could have had her pickings with regards to a job in the medical profession. In returning to Chicago working at the free clinic, Lupe writes:

‘And that's where you (Hadiya) heard the shots and quickly ran outside
And saw a man and a van and a bleeding baby (Jonylah) in his hands
Fading fast, but you knew she could survive
Did everything you could to keep this girl alive
Stabilized until the ambulance arrived
And in that moment, where you gave your help
I bet you didn't know that you saved yourself’

 

In a way, Lupe seems to be articulating that it is only in helping others, that we truly become immortal and we live forever. Richard Powers in his book, Generosity, writes that it is not a coincidence that the word gene appears in the word generosity. To be fully human, is to be generous. I, for one, support this whole idea with élan. As much as I get Richard Dawkins’ selfish gene, I am behind the generous gene. I have seen how life is all the more better for those neurons having fired together. N.E.R.D. was on to something with their band title. No one Ever Really Dies; perhaps the ones who give of their lives are the ones who never die.

Or In Lupe’s words:

You live… FOREVER!!!

 

 

LL Moeketsi