Zwe Nxumalo
OPINION - On May 11, 2008, there was an eruption of violent clashes between black South Africans and those from other African countries in the densely populated Alexandra township of Johannesburg. During these bloody clashes, it emerged that the motive of the violence was a phenomenon called xenophobia.
Since then, confrontations that transpired between black African people in South Africa have been wrapped under the same blanket of xenophobia.
Old images and videos of people being attacked and scorched by fire are deliberately dispersed in the media and other social media platforms in the interest of fuelling and spreading this narrative across the African continent and the world.
Following the recent incident in Krugersdorp, west of Johannesburg, where a group of illegal immigrants is alleged to have sexually abused eight women, the conversation about xenophobia has again come to the fore.
This time, it is in respect of a violent attack on people who are perceived as illegal miners by angry community members in the same area where the rape incident took place.
In light of this, the article seeks to interrogate the meaning of xenophobia, and the basis on which it is alleged to find expression in the black communities of South Africa.
According to the definition, xenophobia means hatred for what is foreign (in this case foreigners). It is a dislike for people from countries outside your own.
However, there are noticeable limitations to this definition of xenophobia in explaining the complex questions of identity in South African society.
For instance, there is no factual basis to the claim that South Africans despise people from other African countries. Black South Africans mingle freely with other Africans on university campuses, schools, and in the workplace.
And in these sectors, no incidents of violent clashes have ever taken place or been reported. Why, then, if South Africans are inherently xenophobic does this not take place?
The truth is that part of the continent's post-colonial reality is a leadership failure, lack of opportunity, and political instability.
Thus, many Africans descend on countries like SA in search of better opportunities for their lives.
Upon arrival, they find a local crisis whereby locals are without jobs or any economic activity as a legacy of apartheid and colonialism.
And the ripple effect is that by virtue of their desperation, they are forced to compete for these limited resources for their survival.
That is to say, the battles only find expression at grassroots level because people scramble with each other for jobs and limited economic opportunities.
Consider the scenario: you have one piece of meat in hand, but are surrounded by four starving pit bulls. If you threw the piece of meat in the air the four pit bulls would battle and eat each other in a quest to acquire the piece of meat for themselves.
Essentially, the battle for limited resources is a colonial construct in South Africa whereby the black majority is forced to battle for the crumbs that fall from the white table.
Additionally, in the context of South Africa, the conflict has primarily been between locals and those they perceive to be in the country illegally. In other words, it is not all foreigners who become the target of the attacks or bad treatment.
Interestingly, some political leaders like the president of the EFF, Julius Malema, have argued that borders are “colonial” and “artificial” and ought not to be obeyed. He has said there are no borders in Africa.
He is right in his historical account of the borders, however, in our ideological appreciation of black relations in Africa, there is also a fundamental commitment to the rule of law that was made by the forebears of our constitutional democracy.
Do we then abandon the laws of the country in pursuit of this ideological path? Why do we not adopt the same approach as far as other laws are concerned? Who decides for us what laws to obey and what laws to undermine?
The principle is simple, those who come into the country must do so within the legal frameworks of the country.
Those who have gained entrance, must not involve themselves in illegal activities like cash-in-transit heists, the drug trade, and even the rape of women.
“Pan-Africanism is not merely a unity of colour but a unity of common condition,” said Walter Rodney.
To support Rodney's view, Ngugi Wa Thiongo argues that Pan-Africanism is congruent with the African humanist – those at whose heart is universal citizenship, unity, love, harmony, sharing, and co-operation.
Therefore, our brand of Pan-Africanism cannot be based on illegality because then, we give credence to the false notion that we are a barbaric and disorderly people.
We ought to be united by a common condition as Africans. And we ought to be the first ones to reprimand any bad conduct by any one of us.
A good relationship is generally grounded on honesty and transparency. There should be no fear to confront and tell each other off if we are truthful to the principles of Pan-Africanism.
Zwe Nxumalo is an activist, law student, and writer in the process of publishing his first novel.
IOL