Why does the k-word roll so easily off the tongue of some whites? I’m not talking about those
unredeemable, unrepentant right wingers here, but about people like the personal trainer
working in a gym in the cosmopolitan city of Cape Town, and whom I see quite comfortably talking
with his black colleagues and gym members. But when speaking to me about job opportunities in
the Middle East, he proceeded to say to me “hulle wil ne k* daar he ne”. Is it historically
ingrained? Is it ignorance of the impact that word has? Or is it just another word to him?
When I questioned him on this, he gave the expected “that word is not offensive, as it really
means non-believer” response. He continued, “besides there are other words that are supposed to
also be offensive, like boer and rooinek, but I’m perfectly ok being called a boer”. And that to me
is the crux of the issue: white people have a total lack of appreciation of the impact that Apartheid
had on the psyche of this country. He did concede that we as a South African nation need to stand
together to confront the issues that we face, and that black and white must meet halfway. I had to
point out the irony, that the whities have thus far fallen way short of their 50%.
To continue, for me there are three levels to this issue.
First is the obvious one; namely that the general population should not be using this word for
obvious reasons.
The second point is that, in the event that people like the personal trainer actually resist using that
word, using instead the more politically correct terms like “swarte”, there is a fair chance that in
his own mind he is saying the k-word anyway, but for the reason of wanting to appear to be
politically correct, he uses the more correct terminology. My mind wanders to a hypothetical
situation where each individual has an inbuilt racial thermometer that alerts whoever that person
is engaging with to the degree of racism within their consciousness and sub-consciousness. That
way you know in advance where this individual stands on this issue, and can continue the
engagement accordingly.
This leads me to the third point, and that is, it is all very well legislating against hate speech, but
banning someone for using a certain word does not liberate that person’s own mind. In fact, there
could be a fair chance that it could entrench racial feelings within them. Obviously I am not
advocating that everyone should be permitted to say whatever they want to. I’m saying that
issues of racism run far deeper than just the use, or non-use, of certain words (not ignoring the
vital contribution that words can make towards either racial harmony or racial hatred). One
cannot legislate an attitude, a feeling. I am always amused when I see the “say no to racism” so
prevalent on television at overseas soccer matches. As if by holding up a banner on a soccer pitch
will instantly convert a soccer fan with racist tendencies towards a liberated future.
It is through education, where people are constructively made aware of the impact our segregated
history had on the minds of the majority of our population, both black and white, combined with
an invitation to white people to awaken their own minds to the possibility that maybe, just
maybe, their minds contain a myriad of ill-conceived perceptions that cloud their opinion of other
races, that we can hope to achieve a more socially cohesive nation.
We live in an environment where the western, white culture has dominated, and continues to
dominate. It has created an “us versus them” scenario, where the “them” – the majority of the
population – continues to feel excluded and side-lined on a psychological level. It is my belief that
a significant number of white people interact with their counterparts of another race in a different
way than they would with someone of their own race. Maybe it is their racial feelings coming to
the fore, or maybe they are doing it sub-consciously after years of conditioning. They are not even
aware of it, such is the automated response.
Through my own life’s journey, I wish to demonstrate that a “we” situation is not only possible
and preferable, but maybe necessary and vital, if we are to preserve our democracy.