To BEE or not to BEE...

Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) is regarded as either holy or evil by South Africans, depending from which vantage point it's looked at. For non-South Africans who may not be in the know - BEE refers to affirmative action policies, which are driven first and foremost by Government through legislation, as well as through so-called BEE Charters agreed to between Government and Business (mostly by specific industry's, e.g. Tourism).


While race plays a major role in how BEE is perceived in South Africa, it would be a mistake to believe that all whites are against it and all blacks for it. BEE was always going to be a necessary evil at best and at worse reverse* discrimination (*against whites as opposed to previous discrimination against blacks). It can probably be argued that it will always be both... My own preference has been towards labelling it a 'necessary evil'. That is, BEE should be seen against the country's history of colonisation (±300 years) and formal Apartheid (±40 years), which robbed the black majority of opportunities for education and development. To address these past injustices, a degree of discrimination is needed in the present day (affirmative action).

However, about a decade of BEE has caused many to re-evaluate their stance on this thorny issue. To be fair many, myself included, had a lot of caveats regarding support for BEE / affirmative action to begin with. These now strongly come into play, given the history of BEE thus far. In short a smallish group of the (mostly) political well-connected have benefited hugely from BEE. Some black labourers benefit indirectly through union participation in BEE deals, although the empowerment effect thereof at ground roots level is questionable. The vast majority of black South Africans are not really in a stronger position to advance up the economic ladder - some even argue that most are in a worse position today.

There are a few aspects of the current BEE experience that troubles me greatly. These include:

• The small number of people actually (disproportionally) empowered by BEE, as referred to above.
  
  
• It seems that the main focus is on filling top, influential, highly paid positions, with black faces - i.e. following a top-down approach.
  
  
• The previous point suggests that the only way to empower blacks is by getting rid of whites... That is, whites can't be trusted in playing a part in the great empowerment project. It has to be driven by blacks in high positions, by extension by driving out whites currently filling those positions. This is gross generalisation on my part, but it represents at the very least a worrying perception.
  
  
• BEE in South Africa, in my view, is based too much on the redistribution of wealth rather than the creation of wealth. In other words cutting the proverbial economic pie in smaller pieces, so that everyone can get a bite - rather than baking a bigger pie. (Obviously the 'shareholding' in a bigger pie can remain in the same lily white hands, which won't help either.)
  
  
• An experience which is bothering me more and more is listening to black commentators matter-of-factly stating that black South Africans must eventually dominate business, because of the demographics of our population. There is a culture of entitlement in these pronouncements that bugs me. If I as a white person build up a family business from scratch with years of blood and tears, am I required to simply hand over a majority stake to someone else, because of his black skin colour? Why can't a family business remain exactly that, irrespective of the family's race?
  

It would be naïve to expect that after 350 years of discrimination against blacks in this country an ANC Government would not opt for fast track empowerment, as they've done. But one would hope that this will be coupled with a similarly aggressive drive to empower blacks to compete on merit, not to be mere recipients of what virtually amounts to hand-outs? I fear this has generally not been the case.

The main failing of the ANC Government in my view has been the complete failure to deliver, or at least begin to deliver, quality education at (primary and secondary) school level. The fortunate black students that make it into universities (these days a very sizable portion of university populations) are either those who were able to get into historically white schools or the exceptional few who managed to reach the bar despite attending the average black township school (the average black township school being poor to useless).


At present universities attain their high percentage of black students not because of population demographics naturally leading to it. Rather, it is manipulated by setting different standards for different race groups. The bottom line is, if you're white you have to outperform black students by a clear margin in order to make it to university. Worse, if you're black a mediocre school performance will often do. The reason for this is not that black kids are lazy or have a lower intellectual capacity. It is rather that Government fails them - mostly in the poor execution of education policy -; school principals who are either unable to manage or don't care fail them; and ill qualified, poorly motivated and often totally uncommitted teachers fail them.

The baggage of school boycotts in the Apartheid era is also haunting us today. I'm amazed at how (black) school children still feature as cannon fodder in political struggles. Whether it be protests against poor service delivery by municipalities, provincial demarcation disputes or micro issues with particular education representatives the fact is that school children should be in classrooms being equipped for their futures - not out on the streets protesting. Parents and community leaders should ensure that children don't get dragged into these matters.

Yet, businesses are pressed continuously to promote black employees, often in preference of better qualified and experienced white co-workers. How can this be, if black schools are continuously allowed to sink further and further into the gutter? It all smacks of political expediency rather than a true commitment to empowering black South Africans. If you're serious about 'BEE' you need to empower black South Africans, first and foremost through dramatically improved school education, to compete.

The litmus test for BEE lies in abolishing affirmative action and then seeing whether you're doing enough for black school education to enable black children to naturally progress in big numbers into university and careers beyond. Blacks have the ability, as do any other race, to compete. They should be allowed to do so!

I didn't really have the stomach to wander into the above topic, but a talk by Moeletsi Mbeki (the brother of our infamous President...) got me fired up. While I've read about some of M Mbeki's opinions lately, I'm not able to vouch for his general positions, as they are mostly unknown to me. However, on this issue I think he's spot on. We need more (black) commentators who come out and address this important issue. I'm just hoping that enough do so to bring real change in BEE policies before my eldest child, born a decade after 1994 'democratic revolution', matriculates in about 2023... I'm not too hopeful though.

Below follows a report on Moeletsi Mbeki's talk as featured on News24.com:

'BEE no solution to poverty'
Johannesburg - Wealth redistribution is no solution to poverty, political analyst Moeletsi Mbeki told a conference on the world economy in Johannesburg on Tuesday.

"Redistribution can actually accentuate poverty and create social conflict," he said.

"I was one of the first to oppose Black Economic Empowerment (BEE), because if they're going to redistribute wealth, who is going to get what? Where are you going to get that wealth from?"

Broad Based BEE had only benefited top ANC leaders, Mbeki said.

"It benefits the people in power, but what about the poor? BEE is more of a problem than a solution."

He suggested that the government look at wealth creation rather than "fight the ghosts of the past. The ANC expends a lot of energy with BEE in an attempt to correct the past".

The only way to go bridge the gap between rich and poor was to sort out the education system and concentrate more on the development of small and medium businesses.

"BEE stops black from becoming entrepreneurs," Mbeki said.

"Black people are not necessarily against capitalism," he said, adding that it was only the model of capitalism that the apartheid National Party had promoted that blacks did not like.

He was however unsure if the ANC could market capitalism to the electorate.

"The ANC leaders are afraid of the unions - groups like Cosatu and the SACP - they think these groups deliver a huge constituency but they don't."

He said that the ANC had been "very good" at establishing a political system and the Constitution, but had not done well in economics.

"I never expected them to because they have never run a business."

He said that at least he and his brother, President Thabo Mbeki, had worked in the family's spaza shop as children.

"But when my brother gets kicked out as head of government, you won't have anyone there who has actually managed even a spaza shop."

Our hopes are being destroyed

The article lower down (with hyperlink) refers. Tim Modise is a well respected talk-show host and current affairs anchor person. He made his appearance on the national broadcaster's English television channel in the last years of apartheid (early 90's), as the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) grudgingly started reflecting the change that was underway in the country. Modise has a pleasant persona and quickly gathered quite a following. After a few years at the Corporation he faced the typical dilemma that many popular talk-show hosts / anchor persons have to grapple with, how long do I want to do this? If you think about it, these kind of positions probably loose their appeal quite quickly. To a large extent you're a figure head. Yes, you have to be able to think on your feet and have good interviewing skills. But all the challenging preparation, digging, research, etc. is done by someone else.

Modise was then appointed as chairperson for the Proudly South African Campaign that got of the ground a couple of years ago.

I find his article (see link below) both encouraging and perplexing. The encouraging bit is that a prominent black individual is highlighting serious issues that faces not only black South Africans, but do impact hugely specifically on that section of our nation. He asks critical questions about (black) African culture. It is not a popular line to take and for that he must be commended. Modise points out in no uncertain terms that black males, in his view, have become the 'bogeymen' of their own people. In his guest column he deals mostly with the position of women and their victimisation through heinous crimes such as spousal abuse, rape and murder.

What I find perplexing is his proposed remedy. I find it strange that he focus exclusively on males when it comes to addressing the above scourges. In his column it seems to be the male population that has failed society and it is the same section of our society that is called upon to remedy the situation. All of this has merit. But what about women? Is a view of society / community that places power and responsibility exclusively in the hands of men not part of the problem? I would argue that elevating women in terms of their position in society is a crucial ingredient in all of this. If women are to be the powerless recipients of all things good, rather than taking control of their own destinies - can we realistically expect any improvement?

My view is that the hierarchal position that men is entitled to in traditional patriarchal African culture is a fundamental part of this problem. The patriarchal approach to society is of course not unique to (black) African culture. It is very much present in the Afrikaans community in which I was raised. However, traditional (black) African culture seems to trump everyone else in this respect. I assume that Modise has simply chosen to address black males in his article and does not necessarily exclude women from the issue. However, in the broader debate it is crucial that the emancipation of women should be placed centre stage.

Our hopes are being destroyed: "I deeply appreciate that I have been given this opportunity to reflect on developments in the public arena as well as on current affairs in general. I suppose this will give me an opportunity to reflect on what our society talks about on radio and television as I enjoy a sort of front row seat into the psyche of our nation.

I was approached to write this column during the month of August, a month when our country, correctly, commemorated the role played by women in the struggle for justice and freedom.

The usual but unflattering issues were again highlighted. Women living in abusive relationships. Women living in fear of violence and being raped. Women still not socially and economically empowered enough to determine power relations in the scary era of the rapacious HIV and Aids pandemic. The era where the dominant family structure is the single-parent-mother-headed home.

Fifty years before, women had marched for justice and freedom, yet they were still living in fear of, this time, their own brothers and fathers. They were now more terrified and angry with the very men who made it part of the democratic state's agenda to have women empowered and represented fully in all spheres of society.

These observations made me ask troubled questions. Why would the men who historically have been the custodians of the fate of the African people become the bogeymen of their own people? These are men who for centuries negotiated difficult and hostile environments to create communities and cultures that sustain up to today."

Crime, grime and chickens

An interesting column by Georgina Guedes was posted on News24.com today (scroll down for excerpt and link). I agree with her, you see and experience as much as you choose to - unless you live in squalor in which case your choices are severely limited...

Furthermore, how you experience things are influenced by previous exposure to crime and grime - the effect thereof depending on whether you allow this exposure to enrich and deepen your insight or simply to irritate. Middle- and upper class South Africans, who choose to, are exposed to a lot of third world realities in their own back yard and are thus mostly well prepared for what awaits them in third world countries. That is if you define South Africa as a 'developing country' and not third world per se - which is not really in dispute. Most developing countries are home to the first and third world at once - which is definitely true of South Africa.

Yet there are many wealthy white South Africans who have never set foot in a township, never mind a 'squatter camp' - of which there are many. Most have however been affected by crime in one way or another. In the context of mass poverty in our society, 'wealthy' (whites) include middle-class white South Africans. Those black South Africans that escape a life of poverty, thankfully an increasing number, are still linked by family and friends to the townships and are thus well informed of the realities of poverty.

Strangely, from the perspective of someone who grew up in middle-class white South Africa..., many buppies (black up-and-coming professionals) seem to be involved in a new struggle - this time not against apartheid but a struggle to acquire material wealth. In the ten years of democracy since 1994, most economists agree, this spending spree by buppies has been a major contributor to South Africa's economic growth (building up scary levels of credit along the way). In that respect the spending spree helps to create jobs for the unemployed.

But in an ideal world, newly gained wealth would have flowed from buppies back to their extended families in the townships. In the process society at large would benefit - albeit slowly. According to the conservative (cynical) view of African culture, this would in fact hamper the progress of 'good blacks' (sic) who could prosper if not for the poor masses pulling them down - claiming their share of the loot... The irony and somewhat worrying fact is that many buppies, probably the majority, are proving very much adept at gaining personal wealth and looking after their own needs - rather than spreading the love around...

Anyways, I'm drifting away from the topic. An extract from the Georgina Guedes column follows below, click on the link for the complete version.

Crime, grime and chickens: "While travelling in South East Asia, my boyfriend Ter and I befriended a really nice Canadian couple.

They were clever, had senses of humour and even though they had come from somewhere as advanced, both in technology and social infrastructure, as Canada, they were having a wonderful time in the Third World.

One evening, we ended up discussing the differences between our expectations of the places that we had come to and what we had actually ended up experiencing.

The Canadian girl's mother, in particular, had been horrified by her daughter setting off for exactly the kind of environs that good Canadians had worked so hard to advance beyond.

She was further flummoxed by her daughter's seeming unwillingness to buckle up and speed along the career path that lay dazzling before her. But in the end, she was forced to acknowledge that however incomprehensible her daughter's wishes were, the adventure was going to be had, and there was very little she could do about it.

She managed to distil all her fears into one neurosis, and instructed her daughter to 'avoid all areas where birds might have been', in an attempt to thwart the bird flu virus that, in her mind, threatens to infect with every breath drawn in Asia. "

Johannesburg Rises Above Its Apartheid Past - New York Times

I'm a great fan of the New York Times (NYT) - online edition. Their articles are often on the long side, but very informative. While some may be put off by the fact that the NYT definitely caters for Democrats (as in supporters of the USA's Democratic Party), it mostly provides ample exposure for various conflicting opinions on the same issue - where applicable.

As a South African, active in our tourism industry, I'm always very curious to read foreign perspectives on our product in general, or specific attractions / destinations within South Africa or the greater region (Southern Africa).

Sometimes, with some of the enquiries we get at Africa Deluxe Tours for South African tours, potential clients will clearly state that they want to avoid Johannesburg at all cost. This is due to their perceptions of it being a very dangerous destination, because of high crime levels.

Truth be told, it can indeed be a very dangerous place - especially if you don't know it. We normally recommend visitors to include Johannesburg in their itineraries (depending on what they want to get out of their travels of course), but that they make use of a reputable operator in doing so. Otherwise they may well run into trouble. The main reason for using a reputable operator, in this case, has to do with safety considerations. However, a tourist guide -if (s)he's worth his salt- will also add a lot of value in unlocking an unknown city for you. This is especially true of a destination like Soweto (part of Johannesburg), which features a culture and way of life alien to most non-African visitors.

Today's NYT includes a very well written, very comprehensive, article on visiting Johannesburg by Michael Wines. One irony in this article, is the recommended hotel at the end of it, taking into account what the writer had to say about Melrose Arch... The same goes for the Moyo Restaurant, also located in Melrose Arch. Having said that, I agree with his assessment of Melrose Arch - and at the same time agree that both the hotel and restaurant would make a worthwhile visit for most tourists. The hotel is a very funky, designer-type, establishment with off-the-wall humor in its room interiors. It will appeal to a hip crowd, definitely not your style if you prefer colonial establishments. The restaurant provides a vibey, fresh, African experience - often with live entertainment.

I agree with the author that tourists should venture out of the wealthy northern suburbs, which may feel quite familiar to western visitors. Venturing into the city centre and Soweto, once again in the company of a local tour operator / tourist guide, will provide much more unusual experiences and insights. However, don't shun the northern suburbs, as here to, there is much to learn about modern-day South Africa.

Excerpts and a link to the article follows below:

Johannesburg Rises Above Its Apartheid Past - New York Times: "TAKE the M1 freeway south, past the spas and high-end restaurants of Melrose Arch, through the leafy suburb of Houghton and past the nearby clubs and galleries of Melville. Go past all that, and past downtown's concrete towers and the booming Newtown cultural district, and get off at Rissik Street. Just a block away, in the shadow of the elevated freeway's pillars, there awaits the finest selection of porcupine skin and baboon entrails in all Africa...

...Yet many South Africans insist that it is the one city that no visitor should miss. At more than six million people, it is the biggest city in South Africa and the most transformed. Twenty years ago, much of Johannesburg was the preserve of South Africa's white minority. Today, it is a stewpot of colors and languages, the fruit not only of liberation but also of a huge influx of immigrants and refugees. Johannesburg is a place where purveyors of muti - the porcupine skins, ground herbs and baboon entrails touted as cure-alls for everything from flatulence to flagging love affairs - hawk their wares a few blocks from skyscrapers....
...A proper place to begin is the Apartheid Museum (http://www.apartheidmuseum.org/), near Soweto, a powerful series of exhibits and multimedia presentations documenting the last century's oppression. Visitors begin the journey with a pass arbitrarily labeling them white or nonwhite; inside, the concrete-and-steel space, with nooses hung from the ceiling and exhibits caged in wire or trapped behind bars, brings home apartheid's brutality with unusual force.
Soweto, a city of more than a million people, is rife with reminders of that brutality. The Hector Pieterson memorial and museum in the Orlando West neighborhood recounts the 1976 Soweto riots, the event that sounded apartheid's death knell. Orlando West is also the world's only neighborhood that housed two Nobel Peace Prize winners, Nelson Mandela and the Anglican bishop Desmond Tutu..."