Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
13 March 2024 Photo Sonia Small
Prof Sethulego Matebesi
Prof Sethulego Matebesi is an Associate Professor and Academic Head of Department of Sociology at the University of the Free State.

Opinion article by Prof Sethulego Matebesi, Associate Professor and Academic Head of Department of Sociology, University of the Free State.


There was a time when weekly news coverage of South Africa was dominated by various forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance incidents that painted a grim picture of respect for human rights

However, in the history of contemporary South Africa there has been plenty of optimism about the prospect of deepening the understanding of human rights in order to entrench a human rights culture among citizens. This optimism is underscored by a range of deliberate actions by the South African government to promote, protect, and monitor the development and observance of human rights through, for example, the South African Human Rights Commission and the Commission for Gender Equality.

Yet, while these institutions – and many other policy instruments to ensure compliance – are central to creating an environment conducive to advancing rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights, citizens also hold significant responsibility to prevent the escalation of discrimination and racial tension. But many of us face an uncomfortable truth we have become accustomed to avoiding: the ability to show unusual restraint in the face of injustice.

The challenge of combating practices that glorify intolerance

Beyond formal political rights, human rights also entail the progressive realisation of the right to the structural social determinants of well-being, such as access to clean water, food, and a healthy environment. However, while the process of social change in South Africa has many unique attributes, the response to the process reflects two extremes.

There are, on the one hand, those who cultivate an image as defenders of the rights of the ‘oppressed’ and are predominantly black activists, and on the other hand, anti-transformation forces who stall the move of the country towards a more inclusive and egalitarian future and are primarily white activists. These activists, whether advancing the reclamation of rights, perpetuate legacies of the past instead of asserting a positive commitment to eradicating socially constructed barriers to equality.

These activists are found everywhere. They are part of our education, religious, political, and social establishments. Reflecting on the painful past of the country, these activists do not help foster diversity as an ethos but advance the conscious and unconscious practices of structural racism. Aided by hyper-personalised social media feeds, these activists can stretch the boundaries of logic and destabilise fragile and established democratic and human rights.

The problem, they claim, is that those who embrace diversity and want to find amicable solutions to longstanding social injustices are either advocates of white supremacy or want to abrogate their right to freedom of expression. In such cases, when people in a hate frenzy find something to hate together, they become bonded. And anything contrary to their beliefs goes into an echo chamber of mockery. 

I do not want to establish a potentially trivialising affinity with branding activists who assert their rights as an attack on human rights. But attention is drawn to instances where noble objectives to confront the tentacles of human rights abuses have been weaponised against what is perceived as ‘the other.’

But how can we navigate this fundamental societal defect? Collective agency to advance the ethos of human rights

After three decades of democracy, attempts to eliminate systematic and institutionalised under-privilege must be welcomed. Likewise, our response to the perceived threats to efforts to enhance diversity as an ethos in public institutions and society matters. In many instances, when subjugated to hatred, hostility, or even violence, there is a tendency to believe that the best approach to such an absurd situation is more absurdity. At its most benign, such a response is not helpful to efforts to embrace diversity. At its weirdest, it garners public sympathy for hate groups and activists.

While there have been concerted efforts internationally and nationally for the progressive realisation of social rights and efforts to strengthen democratic resilience and rights-respecting societies, South Africans have been passing the buck. Rights-respecting citizens have a choice to make. They can continue to pass the buck or help build a culture where everyone achieves their potential and develops into responsible citizens.

I am convinced that beyond formal politics, the attainment of respect for cultural diversity and professing the freedom, equality, and unity of all peoples are contingent upon our collective activism and shared commitments to these values. This collective approach – although some may view it as illusory – is, in fact, our most potent weapon. Reinforcing its commitment strengthens our collective agency and resolve to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms.

News Archive

Krieket - Kovsies klop SUT
2005-01-31

Johan de Jager - Volksblad OFSKOON die spanne nie op volsterkte was nie, was die superligawedstryd tussen die Universteit van die Vrystaat (UV) en die Sentrale Universiteit vir Tegnologie, Vrystaat (SUT), Saterdag op Tokkiepark in Bloemfontein 'n toonbeeld van goeie klubkrieket. Die Kovsies het hul onoorwonne rekord behou toe hulle met ses paaltjies geseëvier het. Hulle het die wenteiken van 233 lopies in die 48ste boulbeurt oortref. Die voormalige kaptein Gerald Fourie (95 nun) het die aanslag gelei, terwyl die wenspan se Ryan McLaren (2/46 en 46) 'n veelsydige vertoning gelewer het. McLaren het hom op 'n driekuns bevind toe hy die laaste twee paaltjies ingeoes en toe byna 'n vyftigtal gemoker het. Die tuisspan het goed begin. Hy het egter ses paaltjies in die laaste tien boulbeurte verloor. Die Kovsies het mooi herstel nadat hulle 24/2 gehad het. Die tuisspan se Dewald Pretorius het met 2/11 ná agt boulbeurte gespog . Die wedstryd op CBCOB se veld tussen die tuisspan en SUT II is ná 'n ruk se spel aanvanklik afgelas omdat toestande as te gevaarlik bestempel is, maar is later die middag hervat en oor 25 boulbeurte aan 'n kant beslis . SUT II is vir 82 lopies uitgehaal, waarna CBCOB die wenlopies behaal het met nog vier paaltjies staande . Schoemanpark was in Mangaung met vyf paaltjies aan die wenkant teen Rocklands, terwyl Polisie sy tweede agtereenvolgende nederlaag in die tweede ronde gely het nadat die Peshawars hom naelskraap met 'n paaltjie op die UV-ovaal geklop het. Die tuisspan se Ferdi Botha (116) se honderdtal het gehelp dat die Peshawars die wedstryd met nog twee aflewerings oor kon wen nadat Polisie vroeër 221/8 aangeteken het. Die beknopte telkaarte is: SUT 232 (I. O'Neill 37, H. von Rauenstein 67, G. Liebenberg 26, G. McLaren 28; C. Deacon 2/47, R. McLaren 2/46, G. Perry 2/29, C. Ingram 2/44); UV 234/4 (R. McLaren 46, G. Fourie 95 nun, C. Linde 27, E. Weirich 27 nun; D. Pretorius 2/29). Kovsies wen met ses paaltjies. SUT II 82 (J. Labuscagne 21, A. van Deventer 16; J. Chemaly 3/11, M. Mashimbyi 2/7, J. Malao 2/19); CBCOB 84/6 (M. Mashimbyi 22, T. van der Westhuizen 21, P. Stander 21; R. Daniël 2/6, R. Wessels 2/17). CBCOB wen met vier paaltjies. Rocklands 107 (D. Makopanele 22); Schoemanpark 108/5 (J. Smith 37; N. Sefuthi 2/14). Schoemanpark wen met vyf paaltjies. Polisie 221/8 (W. Nel 86, B. Hector 62; N. de Bruin 4/49, J. Mostert 1/19, R. de Kock 2/50); Peshawars 222/9 (F. Botha 116, J. Mostert 26; W. Thies 3/30, E. van Niekerk 3/43). Peshawars wen met 'n paaltjie.

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