Wednesday, 18 February 2015

To Loot Or Not To Loot



The country has once again experienced a hate crime, a crime committed from a place of detestation. Some, however argue that this is not so, these are crimes committed purely due to people living in poverty, which is a result of unemployment. Whatever side of the argument one falls in, we have to agree on one point, it is still a crime. The looting of shops that are owned by people who are foreign but reside in our country is nothing short of shameful. Incidents were widely reported in Soweto, where many stores were looted, leaving shop owners with little to recover their businesses in order to provide for their families. A case has also been reported in Atteridgeville, Pretoria where a young boy was allegedly shot dead by a shop owner during the act of looting. A case was also reported in Durban, where two foreign men were shot dead when robbers were attempting to steal from their shop. In citing these events, I hope to illustrate that this is a sickness that is attempting to spread all over the country.
South African people, for some reason, believe violence to be an appropriate response to any situation. This can be seen in the xenophobic attacks, violent service delivery protests and the recent looting of foreign owned shops to mention but a few. I am of the idea that looting is a response, a response to what exactly I do not know. But South Africans responded in the only way they know how, through violence. Wessel Bentley[1] (2012:54) a South African theologian relates that the violent behaviour of South Africans cannot be separated from their past.  Bentley states that this country has a past that is not only violent, but also divided. One not only has to take into consideration the apartheid regime, but also the fact that South Africa, like most African countries, was subject to colonial rule. Succinctly put, South Africa is the epitome of a nation in conflict, we are a violent people. Bentley then asserts that as much as we have enjoyed the transition from an oppressive past to a democratic nation, we still are a people born of violence. Another African scholar, Chielozona Eze[2] (2005:2&3) who is of Nigerian descent takes an interesting standpoint when dealing with African states that have a history of violence and oppressive rule. He asserts that Africans in post-colonial Africa have no sense of responsibility. He argues that this is not particularly because of oppressive regimes (colonisation & apartheid) but the attitude that was and is adopted towards it. Elaborately put, the lack of responsibility refers to African leaders and Africans alike refusing to be held accountable or to have a sense of accountability. This is because, Eze argues, they believe that it is someone outside of their space or circle that has caused things to fall apart. This conviction leads Africans to believe that the people responsible for things falling apart should be accountable for picking up the debris. Someone out there is responsible, but the African is not. Eze continues to argue that since the African leader is not responsible for things falling apart, s/he is able to look at him/herself in the mirror while pilfering his/her nation’s wealth. This also means that the normal South African can violently kill, steal, loot and still be able to look at themselves in the mirror. This is a mess Africans feel they did not cause, and are therefore not responsible for cleaning it up.
Upon observation, I therefore argue that South Africans are not only violent because of their past, but the past makes them feel justified in their violence. African people need to free themselves of the hate that is oppressing them. The fact that they feel that they are not responsible is because of the hate that the past has conjured up. This makes them unable to look into themselves with a critical eye, to put their leaders and what they are doing to each other under critical observation. The sooner the African people realise that no one will save them but themselves, will be the day they free themselves of the hate, or as Eze puts it, resentment. Once this happens, they will cease to feel justified in their violence. Eze puts this brilliantly when he says “If African intellectuals can ever come to the idea of nation building it has to begin with letting go of inherited spirit of rancour against some foreign enemy, who is forever bent on demolishing Africa and whose nature is essentially evil; Africa has to free itself of resentment, and face the tasking demands of our global era” (2005:13).


[1]
Bentely, W., 2012. Is Love Enough? - Towards a Theological Ethic of Nonviolence in South Africa. Journal of Theology for Southern Africa, 144(142), pp. 53-68.

[2] Eze, C., 2005. Resentment and the African Condition: An Inquiry. Michigan: MPublishing. pp 1-21

No comments:

Post a Comment