Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
29 June 2023 | Story Dr Ina Gouws | Photo Supplied
Dr Ina Gouws
Dr Ina Gouws is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Political Studies and Governance

University of the Free State

We find ourselves on the other side of another Youth Day in South Africa. I acknowledge the importance of this anniversary, although I recognise that it is not for me to fully comprehend the profound significance of commemorating the events of 16 June 1976. I therefore refrain from presuming to address the depth of pain, both enduring and otherwise, that this commemoration signifies.

Let me then stay with the broader significance of Youth Month in my deliberations.

Cabinet approved the theme for Youth Month 2023 to be: “Accelerating youth economic emancipation for a sustainable future”. In 2022 the theme was: “Promoting sustainable livelihood and resilience of young people for a better tomorrow”, and, in 2021 the theme was:  “The Year of Charlotte Mannya Maxeke: Growing youth employment for an inclusive and transformed society”.

Cooperation and partnership between government and the youth is fractured

For a government known for abject failure especially regarding education and economic policy, these are lofty ambitions for which we have not seen positive results. I fear that most of our country’s youths are not aware of these themes or else take note with understandable cynicism.  The trust they should have in our government to expect positive outcomes for policies and plans simply does not exist. The cooperation and partnership that needs to be forged between government and the youth in South Africa is therefore fractured to say the least. Consequently, a sense of disillusionment has taken hold.

Feelings of marginalisation and being unheard have bred disengagement, apathy, and even resentment. It appears this government can only talk a great game. None of this is news, is it? The problem is that the breakdown in trust undermines the foundation of a healthy democracy, hindering the government’s ability to effectively represent and address the needs of our youth. The effect of this failure has disastrous consequences for young people to the very core of their dignity.

It is therefore crucial to recognise the profound human consequences that come with unemployment and dire prospects. The impact of unemployment on young individuals is not to be underestimated or only boxed into aspects of economics, as it significantly disrupts their sense of self and place in the world way beyond that. I believe the approach in South Africa should therefore also recognise the intrinsic value and dignity of the youth beyond their economic productivity. As it is,  I fear they have ended up finding their self-worth in only ever being prone to confrontation and protest, instead of constructive problem-solving. It is then no surprise that a grim view of the future can hinder the formation of new social connections and limit opportunities for networking, further exacerbating the isolation experienced by unemployed youth which feeds this apathy and disinterest the majority seem to have in the political process.

What is to be done?

I don’t see any purely political drive or approach to provoke widespread youth participation being successful in this context. What is to be done? We must start with ways to create ‘willingness’ first. For that, purpose beyond politics, in which they have lost trust and interest, is necessary. I have no doubt that the country’s youth care about their communities even if they feel disconnected and have little to offer to assist because of their dire socio-economic realities. We must create spaces for dialogue, storytelling, and collective reflection to challenge societal narratives surrounding work and success, promoting alternative measures of value and worth. Emphasising the importance of empathy, compassion, and community solidarity can help combat the stigmatisation and isolation faced by unemployed youth.

Moreover, recognising the agency and potential of young people is essential for the nation's future development and prosperity. It would be best to first focus on independent initiatives and collaborations outside of the government’s sphere of influence. Emphasising grassroots movements, civil society organisations, and community-led efforts that can drive change from the bottom up, could get the youth involved without focusing on politics alone. By focusing on initiatives that bypass or work independently of the government, youth can still actively participate and work towards their goals, and I believe that willingness to participate lies just below the surface.

Change will take time

The challenge, and perhaps frustration, is to recognise that long-term perspective and focus on building a sustainable foundation for youth political engagement will be necessary. With the damage that has been done, change will take time and involve continuous efforts beyond any specific government’s tenure. And relying so heavily on any community’s resilience should be seriously questioned, especially when it comes to the youth. There must be a more positive outcome than what they have thus far lived, after showing such perseverance. I believe we can help recover a willingness in our youth to again or for the first time participate in constructive ways to promote necessary change for themselves and their communities beyond a day or a month; for a lifetime.

News Archive

Middle East activists speak about peace on the Bloemfontein Campus
2012-03-15

 

Bassem Eid (left) and Benjamin Pogrund discuss the situation in the Middle East.
Photo: Johan Roux
15 March 2012

Peace is a big word in the Middle East, particularly amongst Israelis and Palestinians. After years of conflict, people yearn for peace; they want an end to the killings and the uncertainty. The problem is that both sides are actively doing things that undermine the prospect of peace. There is also double talk, lies and evasion with each side pointing fingers. This was the word from Benjamin Pogrund, an Israeli peace activist, addressing staff and students on the Bloemfontein Campus of the University of the Free State. He and fellow peace activist Bassem Eid, a Palestinian, visited the campus to speak about the situation in the Middle East.

Both men agreed that peace efforts were hindered by the Israeli and the Palestinian leaders. According to Pogrund, neither the Palestinians, nor the Israelis are leading the way in accepting that the conflict must end.
 
“Both Israeli and Palestinian leaders say let us get together with no pre-conditions. Then the Israeli leaders say, Jerusalem we cannot share, that is not for negotiation. And, they say to the Palestinians you must recognise Israel as a Jewish state. So, what they say is unless you agree to these pre-conditions there can be no talks without pre-conditions.
 
“And the Palestinians in turn say the settlement construction must cease immediately, and unless that happened, there is no point in meeting. And they say we will never acknowledge you as a Jewish state so do not even bother talking about it. And we insist on the right of return of Palestinian refugees. So they also say unless you acknowledge these pre-conditions there is no point in meeting with our pre-conditions. So as you can gather each side blames the other side, each side points the finger and says you are responsible for the lack of progress.”
 
Pogrund said both the Israelis and the Palestinians could demand legitimacy in that part of the world.
 
“Both Jewish and Arabs can say we have history on our side. We have religion on our side, culture.”
 
To compare Israel to Apartheid South Africa is wrong, he said.
 
“It is an occupation, it is repression, but it is not Apartheid.”
 
Eid, who is the director of the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, said the Palestinians were close to having a complete independent Palestinian state from 1994 to 1999.
 
“But in one rocket former Israeli Prime minister Ariel Sharon destroyed it.”
 
He said Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip in 2005 did not bring political unity.
 
“We, the Palestinians, were supposed to start building the infrastructure of the Gaza Strip but unfortunately Hamas started dancing on that Israeli disengagement and considered it as their own success because of their military resistance against the occupation.” He also said Hamas is satisfied with its hold in the Gaza Strip and Fatah is also very satisfied with its hold in the West Bank. According to Eid, it is convenient for the Israelis that the Palestinians are separated.

 

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