Today’s lecturer, Zwelethu Jolobe, focused the last part of his presentation on the nature and role of the TRC in South Africa’s reconciliation process. He made a point to explain that the TRC has had its fair share of critics, the strongest of which have been directed towards the reparation committee. How should people be compensated for their suffering? Who should get what and how much? When we visited Bo-Kaap later in the day, it occurred to me that a major hole in the TRC’s work was also a sort of legislative reform, legislative reparation.
When we first arrived in Bo-Kaap, Bilqees commented on a hotel that was built very high, blocking much of the gorgeous view that would have been available. Bilqees explained that the hotel was built despite the opinion and opposition of the community. This is due to a law that was put in place during apartheid, when the people who live there had no legislative vote. Their community will have to deal with the eyesore because of decisions made without any consideration of the their wants.
Right before this I had asked Professor Keasley if the people of South Africa had any control or received any economic gain from the valuable mineral resources, diamonds or gold. He explained that De Beers, a foreign-based company, largely owned the diamond mines. As Jolobe emphasized in his lecture, these mines play a very serious role in the history of the South African people; the mines negatively and heavily dictated the lives of non-whites. And now, when I expected the people to have some control over their own resources as a sort of reparation, the South African resources are still putting money in non South African pockets.
Legally, it seems, compensation for the apartheid has yet to bloom into fruition. The actions of the apartheid are still echoing throughout the South African populations. I, for one, expected there to have been more effort to correct the wrong doings. If the goal is reconciliation, shouldn’t legislative put in place to negate legislation formed by the oppressors, which harms the oppressed?
I noticed that both these instances, the hotel and the mines, are economically driven; they are not based on consideration for other people’s quality of life. In discussion today I mentioned that I was surprised to learn that apartheid was not mainly driven by a racist ideology but, rather, it was put into place for economic gain. On top of that, the end of apartheid was not due to the realization of the inhuman nature of apartheid but due to a shortage in options for the NP. In the eyes of the National Party, the termination of apartheid was not the right decision but the lesser of evils. This mentality still seems to stand. The economy, not community or human rights, is the strong hand in many of the people’s lives.
I find this interesting in light of the new Arizona immigration law legalizes racial profiling. The New York Times does a good job of explaining the law; “[t]he law would require the police ‘when practicable’ to detain people they reasonably suspected were in the country without authorization. It would also allow the police to charge immigrants with a state of crime for not carrying immigration documents. And it allows residents to sue cities if they believe the law is not being enforced.”* After learning about the economic elements that caused apartheid, I have had to reassess my thoughts on this law.
At first, like with apartheid, I assumed that this law came out of a racist mentality. I now, however, believe that there must be economic implications, which pushed this law forward. I wonder if the weakened economy and high unemployment rates have something to do with this law. Companies are loosing money, which would increase the demand for cheap labor. Illegal immigrants can be paid less because they are often willing to work for less. If the immigrants have jobs and the American born people don’t have jobs, the latter group is going to find a way to open up these jobs.
I have no idea if the job market is the root of this law, I’ve only taken one economics class five years ago, but it is one example of how the economy might be driving racist practices today in our own society.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/22/us/22immig.html
No comments:
Post a Comment