I find the debate over liberals, race and the ability to care for the poor pregnant with semantics. These are not binary positions — they are both/ands.
Liberals would be myopic not to admit that race matters, and that deprivation and blackness are correlated in SA. So, whether redress measures target race or deprivation, in practice it would be similar, except that deprivation would be more inclusive and in fact less mired in the parameters of race.
An example of this is some universities, where extra points are given for admittance in certain faculties. These points are based on an index on the quality of the tertiary school attended, and not colour. Why are they not accused of being racist liberals? What matters is action. Does a political party actually do something to improve the lot of the disadvantaged — such as bring about better schooling or health-care outcomes, or more liveable settlements?
On the other hand, some race-based redress policies may well be defendable for some time to come. For example, it has been difficult for black people to accumulate intergenerational capital, so policies that recognise this in granting government-backed investment funding would make sense.
People cannot be so easily pigeonholed; policy on race and redress requires nuance. These are not “one size fits all” matters.
Anthony Still
Waverley
JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an e-mail with your comments. Letters of more than 300 words will be edited for length. Send your letter by e-mail to busday@bdfm.co.za. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Writers should include a daytime telephone number.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.