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

Shimlas had the right attitude, says Scholtz
2016-02-10

 Description: Shimlas first match 2016  Tags: Shimlas

The lively Shimla flanker Daniel Maartens, who was the leading try scorer in the 2015 Varsity Cup, made a good impact as substitute against Ikeys in Cape Town.
Photo: Johan Roux

His rugby team had the right attitude to win in difficult conditions in Cape Town.

This is what Hendro Scholtz, Head Coach of Shimlas, had to say after the University of the Free State (UFS) started its Varsity Cup campaign on 8 February 2016 with a victory of 23-17 over Ikeys.

According to him, the UFS had to sweat hard until the end on a windy Green Mile, which has been the downfall of many opponents before. His substitutes also had a great impact.

Troublesome Cape wind

Shimlas have a tough draw this year, and to start in the Mother City was a huge task. Scholtz and his men have only three home matches and will play against most of the major teams in away matches.

“We knew it would be difficult in Cape Town. With the wind blowing as it does, one can't play as you would like to during the rest of the season,” the coach said.

“The guys had a will to win.”

The former Springbok believes that too much cannot be read from the first round results. The Shimlas will play their second match on 15 February 2016 against Tuks in Pretoria.

Replacements with good impact

Only the prop Rudolph Botha, flanker Fiffy Rampeta, and prop Teunis Nieuwoudt, who started against Ikeys, were involved in the 2015 final against Pukke.

Other big Shimla names, such as the prop Ox Nche, hooker Elandré Huggett, prop Conraad van Vuuren, and flanker Daniel Maartens, were sent onto the field in Cape Town after half-time.

“We had a plan with the replacements for the second half. They made a huge difference,” Scholtz said.

Rampeta was named Man of the Match, but it was Maartens and Co who turned the game in their team's favour in the second half.

Matsoele could be out of action for long

The Shimla fullback, Sechaba Matsoele, had to leave the game against Ikeys early because of a knee injury, and could be out of action for some time.

His scrumhalf, Zee Mkhabela, was also injured (by a blow to the head), so Shimlas will have to keep their fingers crossed for his quick recovery.

Scorers:
Shimlas 23 (7): Tries: Arthur Williams, Nardus Erasmus, Mosolwa Mafuma. Conversions: Stephan Janse van Rensburg (2).
Ikeys 17 (0): Tries: Khanyo Ngcukana, Nathan Nel. Conversion: Hilio de Abreu. Penalty: De Abreu.
Other results (home team first): Tuks 15, Pukke 38; UJ 19, Madibaz 12; Maties 40, CUT 0.

 

 

 

 


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