Since democracy, a culture of consumption has replaced ubuntu. It has promoted individualism and damaged our society, writes Dr Sakhumzi Mfecane.
Cape Town - Rape and violence against women are societal, not cultural, problems. The persistent rape of women and children in South Africa probably ranks as the lowest point of our democracy. Let’s be frank: Most cases of rape, as reported in the media, are committed by black men against fellow black women and children.
Does this mean black men are inherently violent and rapists? No.
What it means is that black men’s idea of their roles in society has changed significantly since 1994, the year South Africa gained its political freedom.
Historically, black men were community activists who fought hard to protect their communities from outside invasions and harm. History books are replete with stories of heroic black men who sacrificed their lives to defend their communities against the injustices of the past, like colonialism, apartheid and the unjust appropriation of land.
Names such as Maqoma, Nxele, Biko, Bambata and Mandela come to mind.
These men were firmly rooted in their communities and their activism was grounded on the belief that they were serving the collective interests of the society.
They fully embraced the idea of ubuntu and it encouraged them to put the interests of other people above their own.
The democratic era has replaced ubuntu with the ethic of individualism, greed and rampant accumulation of personal wealth, a change which was aptly articulated by Thabo Mbeki in his Nelson Mandela Lecture, delivered on July 29, 2006.
He noted that this mindset of individualism was characteristic of “capitalist political-economy” in general. He said “the values of the capitalist market, of individual profit maximisation”, had tended to “displace the values of human solidarity… the capitalist market destroys relations of ‘kinship, neighbourhood, profession and creed’ replacing these with the pursuit of personal wealth by citizens who have become ‘atomistic and individualistic’”.
I view the rampant rape and violence against women and children in South Africa as a manifestation of this culture of individualism.
Rape is not simply an expression of African culture, as some analysts and commentators like to say. Yes, African cultures are mostly patriarchal and patriarchy does countenance some forms of the violence against women because it generally constructs men as a superior gender and as being culturally entitled to women’s bodies.
But the type of violence against women witnessed in South Africa today is different from the one supported by African patriarchal structures. It is conducted by people who are generally individualistic and self-centred in their conduct.
They feel that they are not accountable to any societal structures for their conduct and they act purely to maximise their individual needs. They may not be rich economically, but they have internalised the ethic of the “market economy” and it shapes how they act in social terms.
I once read a horrific story of an HIV-positive man who raped his 2-year-old daughter because he believed it would cure him of Aids.
This is an example of an atomistic person who acts purely to maximise his individual needs. He does not care about the well-being of his own child, as long as he will be cured from Aids, as he wrongly believed.
We cannot blame African culture for this man’s actions because Africans do not promote the rape of children.
Therefore, the fight against violence and the rape of women and children has to move beyond merely addressing patriarchy and focus on changing the consumption culture of South African society. Mbeki noted that the current consumption creed in South Africa is generally driven by instinct to “at all costs, get rich”.
He said: “It is… obvious that many in our society, having absorbed the value system of the capitalist market, have come to the conclusion that, for them, personal success and fulfilment means personal enrichment at all costs, and the most theatrical and striking public display of that wealth.”
Under these circumstances, people no longer measure their success and personal “enrichment” in terms of the quality of social relationships.
They don’t care about the well-being of their neighbours because they “pursue mutually antagonistic materialist goals” (Mbeki 2006).
This impacts heavily on social solidarity as every man exists purely for himself: Survival of the fittest is the defining creed.
The weak and vulnerable have no one to protect them as those who are entrusted with their safety are busy chasing the realisable dream of getting rich.
Mbeki’s analysis of South African society was accurate and it should prompt every South African man – and perhaps some women too – to reflect on their individual conduct and pledge to act in the collective interests of society.
Kgalema Motlanthe was also correct when he called on men to stop using culture as an excuse for rape, during his speech at the SA National Aids Council in 2013.
But I find the cultural analysis of rape to be too narrow at times.
It allows most of us to feel that rape is not our problem, especially those of us who don’t see themselves as part of African culture.
Mbeki makes it clear that the social ills of post-apartheid South Africa, like rape and violence against women and children, are a consequence of broader patterns of consumption in the society and how we treat each other as citizens.
This means we are equally accountable for them and we should change.
* Dr Sakhumzi Mfecane lectures in anthropology at the University of the Western Cape.
** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.
Independent Media