Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
24 March 2022 | Story Portia Arodi | Photo Supplied
Portia Arodi
Portia Arodi, Interdisciplinary Master’s in Human Rights, Free State Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law

Opinion article by Portia Arodi, Interdisciplinary Master’s in Human Rights, Class of 2022 Free State Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of the Free State.
Human Rights Day means different things to different people. For some people, Human Rights Day means commemorating the day of the 1960 massacre when 69 people were shot and killed by police in Sharpeville.   In my opinion, Human Rights Day not only symbolises the historical events that occurred in 1960, but it also provides evidence of the inequalities that currently exist in South Africa.   The labour market in South Africa is still racialised and gender biased. The black majority in the labour market earns way less than their white counterparts, even though both are immersed in the same working conditions. According to Statistics South Africa (2015), the differences in the income of South Africans remain heavily racialised. Furthermore, since 1994, bridging the gap between gender and race continues to be a struggle. On the other hand, black women experience the same inequalities as their male counterparts. The difference is that black females are subject to double discrimination, based not only on their race, but on their gender as well. Despite occupying the same positions as males and assuming similar duties and workload, their salaries remain low. 
  
Human rights in an unequal society

On the other hand, for some categories of people – namely the elite and those in power – Human Rights Day amounts to a democratic South Africa, a country where the constitution is the supreme law of the land and where everyone (without exception) enjoys freedom and human rights. For this particular section of the ruling class and elite, Human Rights Day attests to the effective transition from the apartheid era to a democratic society characterised by freedom, equality, and dignity for all.

For those who lack access to basic needs such as water, food, shelter, health care, electricity, and sanitation, their perception of Human Rights Day may be very different, as they live in poverty with no promising future prospects.  In fact, for the larger section of the population, democratic South Africa is nothing but a burden that does not have much to offer.  Indeed, how to explain that in 2022, the black majority still relies on the bucket system for sanitation; how to understand that to date, they still survive in squatter camps and go through days and nights on an empty stomach? 

It is my contention that the celebration of Human Rights Day has failed to consider a holistic approach to highlighting and raising awareness on critical issues, including poverty and inequality. The realisation of socio-economic rights by authorities exists only on paper but is yet to be done effectively. The provision of service delivery, health-care services, infrastructure, the right to food, education, and other basic needs remains characteristic of modern South African society. From this perspective, it means that we are celebrating one part while neglecting the other.

Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when there are still children studying under trees?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when there are children going to school without food?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when there are children who are not able to go to school or receive basic education?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when racism is still occurring in our schools and workplaces?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when children are being raped by their teachers at school?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when some universities are still using Afrikaans as their primary language?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when our students are being deprived of education due to the mandatory vaccination policy?
Would it be fair to celebrate Human Rights Day when white privilege still exists among university students?

Is Human Rights Day still worth commemorating?

What are we celebrating on Human Rights Day?  Are we celebrating the achievements of the minority population? Are we celebrating the few changes that have occurred since the advent of a democratic South Africa? Are we celebrating the Fees Must Fall movement that occurred in a contest where some students who were fighting for free education were arrested, shot, and even killed? Are we simply referring to what occurred in 1960? Why are we not celebrating the Fees Must Fall movement? Why are we not celebrating the Rhodes Must Fall movement? Why are we not celebrating the Steyn Must Fall movement? 

On 21 March 2022:

We need to celebrate the Fees Must Fall movement.  
We need to celebrate the Rhodes Must Fall movement.
We need to celebrate the Steyn Must Fall movement.
We need to fight for the voiceless. 
We need to get commitment from government to abolish the use of the bucket system.
We need to get a commitment from government to build more schools, hospitals, shelters, roads, and other infrastructure.
We need to get commitment from government to hire more teachers. 
We need to get commitment from government on protection against racism that occurs in schools and universities. 

We need to get commitment from government regarding the abolition of the mandatory vaccination policies at universities.

On Human Rights Day, let us evaluate whether the Constitution of South Africa is protecting and safeguarding the rights of all human beings, irrespective of their gender, race, ethnic group, socio-economic status … etc.  Is this the democratic South Africa we would want our children and great-grandchildren to have in 50 years? If not, then we have a responsibility to find better ways in which the Constitution of South Africa functions as intended. 

News Archive

NRF researcher addresses racial debates in classrooms
2017-03-24

Description: Dr Marthinus Conradie Tags: Dr Marthinus Conradie

Dr Marthinus Conradie, senior lecturer in the
Department of English, is one of 31 newly-rated National
Research Foundation researchers at the University of
the Free State.
Photo: Rulanzen Martin

Exploring numerous norms and assumptions that impede the investigation of racism and racial inequalities in university classrooms, was central to the scope of the research conducted by Dr Marthinus Conradie, a newly Y-rated National Research Foundation (NRF) researcher.

Support from various colleagues
He is one of 31 newly-rated researchers at the University of the Free State (UFS) and joins the 150 plus researchers at the university who have been rated by the NRF. Dr Conradie specialises in sociolinguistics and cultural studies in the UFS Department of English. “Most of the publications that earned the NRF rating are aimed to contributing a critical race theoretic angle to longstanding debates about how questions surrounding race and racism are raised in classroom contexts,” he said.

Dr Conradie says he is grateful for the support from his colleagues in the Department of English, as well as other members of the Faculty of the Humanities. “Although the NRF rating is assigned to a single person, it is undoubtedly the result of support from a wide range of colleagues, including co-authors Dr Susan Brokensha, Prof Angelique van Niekerk, and Dr Mariza Brooks, as well as our Head of Department, Prof Helene Strauss,” he said.

Should debate be free of emotion?
His ongoing research has not been assigned a title yet, as he and his co-author does not assign titles prior to drafting the final manuscript. “Most, but not all, of the publications included in my application to the NRF draw from discourse analysis of a Foucauldian branch, including discursive psychology,” Dr Conradie says. His research aims to suggest directions and methods for exploring issues about race, racism, and racial equality relating to classroom debates. One thread of this body of work deals with the assumption that classroom debates must exclude emotions. Squandering opportunities to investigate the nature and sources of the emotions provoked by critical literature, might obstruct the discussion of personal histories and experiences of discrimination. “Equally, the demand that educators should control conversations to avoid discomfort might prevent in-depth treatment of broader, structural inequalities that go beyond individual prejudice,” Dr Conradie said. A second stream of research speaks to media representations and cultural capital in advertising discourse. A key example examines the way art from European and American origins are used to imbue commercial brands with connotations of excellence and exclusivity, while references to Africa serve to invoke colonial images of unspoiled landscapes.

A hope to inspire further research
Dr Conradie is hopeful that fellow academics will refine and/or alter the methods he employed, and that they will expand, reinterpret, and challenge his findings with increasing relevance to contemporary concerns, such as the drive towards decolonisation. “When I initially launched the research project (with significant aid from highly accomplished co-authors), the catalogue of existing scholarly works lacked investigations along the particular avenues I aimed to address.”

Dr Conradie said that his future research projects will be shaped by the scholarly and wider social influences he looks to as signposts and from which he hopes to gain guidelines about specific issues in the South African society to which he can make a fruitful contribution.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept