Andile Mngxitama (National Convenor, Black First Land First) Is a Decolonised University Possible in a Colonial Society? University of Johannesburg 16 March
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Andile Mngxitama (National Convenor, Black First Land First) Is a decolonised university possible in a colonial society? University of Johannesburg 16 March Draft in progress. Please do not copy or cite without author’s permission. You can contact the author on: [email protected] "The European élite undertook to manufacture a native élite." Sartre Decolonisation as political and philosophical question was put back on the South African national consciousness by the student movement almost a year ago. The UCT Rhodes Must Fall (RMF) movement should be credited for making the call just as the neo-colonial settlement engineered by Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu was entering its third decade after proving itself to be nothing but an extension of the colonial settler rule which privileged whiteness at the expense of blackness. The democratic transition has ensured that blacks remain at the bottom of the social, economic, political and cultural life of the South Africa. The past two decades have settled the argument of who democracy actually serves. Blacks have been rendered a voting powerless black majority. What explains this state of affairs, this positionality of black as permanently marked by exclusion? We argue, the answer is the continuation of colonialism by other means under a non- white administration of the ruling party. Significantly, 1994, did not end colonialism, but more correctly the political settlement was not meant to end it either. The first hurdle to quickly overcome is the correct characterisation of SA today. We move from the premise that SA is as was for the last 350 years or so. 1994 did not signify a rupture with the past. So correctly SA is still beset by the problem of white racism as the main defining reality, which operates as colonialism. Steve Biko's injunction for a dialectical conflict as a prerequisite to ending white power has not yet occurred and, therefore, the "thesis" remains white racism, we haven't yet reached a point of accumulating enough black forces to present an antithesis. There is no new synthesis as we speak. SA is a colony! It must be remembered that the terms and even rhetoric of the struggle in the last phase (1980s) led by the ANC through its many proxies under the rubric of the United Democratic Front (UDF) perceived the fundamental problem to be "apartheid" and, therefore, the fundamental antidote, to be democracy, human rights and in particular "one man one vote" (we say nothing about the sexist language of the demand itself). The struggle waged by the ANC since its inception has been for inclusion into not obliteration of the colonial reality crafted since 1652 with the arrival of the violent rapacious dispossessing Europeans. 1 It’s not an insult to say the ANC have been fighting for the vote not the land. But as the Pan-Africanists like Sobukwe had warned fighting for the vote without the land, would not give you the land. This blind spot is a direct consequence of the adoption of the Freedom Charter (or was the FC merely a confirmation of the accommodationist politics of the ANC?). The whole mind set of the "congress" tradition is to do things according to the "law" (the military wing of the ANC MK found its hands bound by the Geneva convention, listen to president Zuma or even the EFF speak about doing things within the constitution, but the constitution is the thing that takes away black people’s land rights, or should we say, where is the land? It’s the constitution that made the things that made the land not to be there). This self-limiting political position is ingrained in the DNA of the FC. so according to this "law’s first" logic, you first fight to control the instrument of making law (political power, and then use it to address your problems). This is the old electoral story of, "vote for us first, then we shall serve you once in power". It’s a fraud! This same logic is at work today even by political formations that purport to be "radical". This mind-set speaks to the two main responses Africans developed with regard to the colonial question. The two main responses matured in the Cape’s long battles against the invading forces including the hundred years’ war of the Xhosa speaking people against the colonialists. The two ethics developed were to be known as the Qaba and Gqoboka divide. basically, amaqaba are those who refused western modernity by any means necessary (the children of Okonko of Achebe's THINGS FALL APART, and on the other hand, amagqoboka, or those who accommodated themselves into western modernity (the first real coconuts). We shall in a moment return to this in some details. This new call for decolonisation by university students kick-started a movement that is pegged back to the single symbolic act by Chumani Maxwele of throwing human waste on the statue of the uber symbol of colonialism, Cecil John Rhodes. This act connected to real and felt frustrations and pain that had been suppressed by the dictates of decorum and respectability of the liberal academic setting at UCT (this is true for all liberal campuses). One had to appear to be "civil", despite being suffocated by the weight of institutional racism that has become as naturalised as the permanency of the statue of Rhodes. As we know the statue is gone, but the spirit of Rhodes remained. We also know some black associate professors also got their full tenure, but the syllabus remains colonial, so too the iconography of the university. In fact, across the while university sphere, there is a sense of "fast tracking" going on for blacks to be promoted into the professoriate class even if one has nothing to profess. The pressure to sort out representivity is on. This is so because representivity is the best mechanism to absorb pressure and continue business as usual. This rhythm has already been tried and tested with the "Flag Independence process". The call to decolonise the university seems to be operationalised into five demands in the main, first, sorting out the skewed race and gender representation in the 2 academic staff, secondly; the transformation of the curricula from the current Eurocentric into a more Afrocentric one, thirdly; expanding access to the university by black students (overcoming fees and language barriers), fourthly; the incorporation of workers into the university family or insourcing with benefits they currently don't enjoy; fifthly, and more difficult to define, demanding institutional cultural reform (this may include values and symbols but not limited to those). Whilst a big discussion is ongoing about the nature of these demands and how they link up to the project of decolonisation, there is consensus that the call is in the main university centred. In the four moments in the movement we shall allude to in a short while, we shall show that, in the first moment in the movement, there were discursive attempts to imagine decolonisation as a project beyond the university and centered on the land demand, but this particular move has not yet found practical expression as a point of mobilisation by the student movement. There is not yet "back to land campaign" as part of the decolonisation dance. The key point is that the decolonisation call by students is a battle based immediately at the university and for the university. This is an interesting turn away from the first generation of black consciousness movement led by Steve Biko in the 1970s through the South African Students Organisation (SASO), which saw itself as a liberation movement not a student's movement. Its main demands were for societal change not so much improvements of life in the university. The university was used as reference point for the broader society as we saw with the 1972 powerful and courageous speech by Abram Tiro. We also recall Sobukwe at Fort Hare linking up with workers struggle outside the university. This difference of emphasis, comes with the ideological orientation that informs the 1970s and the one of the 2000s. SASO perceived their challenge as a challenge of black people in general, because one was a black before one was a student. The new student movement perceives its challenge (in practice) as one of the university which is not transformed, the emphasis is on student affairs (the media and ruling party has been pushing this separation of students from the black community outside the varsity gates). For Biko and SASO, the problem was political, for today's movement the problem is in the main policy (admitted with some important gesturing to politics). This explains why SASO fought for the liberation of black people and today the call is for the "decolonisation of the university". SASO seems to have appreciated that the university is an instance of the "colonial super structure" of the "colonial economic base" (to borrow and muddy the Marxian rubric). Let us permit ourselves to allow a Marxian frame work to help us locate the university, so that we are able to pose the question; ‘Is a decolonised university possible in a colonial society?’ We need to define more accurately, more or less what is the thing we call university, what is its history and what is its function in our society and other societies. 3 It’s interesting that the university system in Africa as we know it today is a colonial construct, literally! Of course we note that Africa is the cradle of the university system, but we here now refer to the re-emergence of the university after slavery, specifically, during the "second coming" which is colonialism.