False Generosity of the State: Parasitic Subjectivity in J. M. Coetzee’s Life and Times of Michael K

2019 ◽  
Vol 137 (3) ◽  
pp. 463-480
Author(s):  
Hossein Keramatfar ◽  
Sara Bavakhani

Abstract This paper holds that J. M. Coetzee’s novel, Life and Times of Michael K, demonstrates how apartheid, in order to preserve its domination over the nonwhite population of South Africa, as with other authoritarian regimes, commonly encouraged dependency. Its various institutions and camps aimed precisely to create a culture of dependence and to fashion subjects utterly dependent on the state. A dependent subject is a powerless, exploitable, and controllable subject; this is the right kind of subject for colonizers. The black majority of South Africa, then, could only have a parasitic existence, completely dependent on their white masters. The novel narrates how dependence is created through the false generosity of the state. As Paulo Freire in Pedagogy of the Oppressed argued, false charity is a state strategy that serves to reproduce the relations of domination. Coetzee’s novel, thus, suggests that to undermine the structure of domination, the oppressed have to reject the culture of dependence and the parasitic subjectivity that arise from the false generosity of the state.

1993 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 339-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette Strauss

The ruling National Party (N.P.) asked white voters during the 1989 election campaign for a mandate to negotiate with all concerned about a new constitution, an undivided South Africa, one citizenship, equal votes, protection of minorities, and the removal of stumbling blocks such as discrimination against people of colour.1 Although the N.P. achieved a cleat majority – 93 seats against 39 for the Conservative Party (C.P.) and 33 for the Democratic Party (D.P.) – the right-wing opposition made destinct progress by gaining 17 seats. After the C.P had captured a further three from the N.P. in by-elections, including Potchefstroom in February 1992, President F. W. de Klerk announced in Parliament that whites would be asked the following month to vote in a referendum in order to remove any doubts about his mandate. The carefully worded question which the electorate had to answer was as follows: Do you support continuation of the reform process which the State President began on February 2, 1990 and which is aimed at a new constitution through negotiation?


Obiter ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mokgadi Margaret Mokgokong ◽  
Moses Retselisitsoe Phooko

The history of South Africa is an unpleasant one. It was a society based on racial segregation with the promotion of Afrikaner culture and the Afrikaans language above all other languages. This can be traced to the architect of apartheid, the Afrikaner National Party, which introduced apartheid. Afrikaans-speaking people, through the Afrikaner National Party, dominated South Africa politically. Their language too, was promoted above all other languages. For example, Afrikaans enjoyed more privileges than other languages in that it was used for drafting laws, as the language of record in the courts and was also the only compulsory subject for learning. The apartheid government, through its racial policies, used the Afrikaans language as a tool to control Black South Africans in almost all spheres of life, including education, which had to be undertaken in Afrikaans. It is therefore no surprise that there were five universities that offered education mainly in Afrikaans. These are Stellenbosch University, University of the Free State, University of Pretoria, Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education (now North-West University) and Randse Afrikaanse Universiteit (now University of Johannesburg). The use of the Afrikaans language as an instrument for social control was not sustainable. The new constitutional dispensation ushered in an era wherein respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms is at the top of the South African agenda. The right to further education is constitutionally recognised in section 29(1)(b) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. Section 29(2) of the Constitution further recognises and embraces the diversity of South African society and provides that “everyone has the right to receive education in the official language or languages of their choice in public education institutions where that education is reasonably practicable” (s 29(b) of the Constitution). The State has an obligation to take reasonable measures on a progressive basis to ensure that further education is available and accessible (s 29(1)(b) of the Constitution). In ensuring “effective access to and implementation” of the right to further education, It is notable that, in its endeavour to make further education available and accessible, the State is required to consider several factors such as language policies. In an effort to facilitate the realisation of the right to further education, the Higher Education Act (101 of 1997) was enacted in order inter alia to “redress past discrimination and ensure representivity and equal access to higher education institutions” (preamble to the Act).In the UFS case (CC), the Constitutional Court applied section 29(1)(b) of the Constitution, which provides for the right to further education and the “right to receive education in the official language or languages of [one’s] choice”. This note centres on this decision and seeks to critically discuss and analyse both the majority and minority decisions of the Constitutional Court. The question presented is whether the Constitutional Court has given the public a solution to the issue surrounding the use of either Afrikaans or English as a language medium of instruction in the higher education sector and what the effect of this has been on the development of other languages. The case note is divided into five sections. The facts of the case, the issues put before the court for consideration and the finding of the court are discussed in part 2. Part 3 contains an analysis of the minority and majority judgments. Part 4 considers whether the court has given us any solutions. Part 5 sets out the authors’ recommendations and their conclusions.


Author(s):  
I Mc Murray ◽  
L Jansen Van Rensburg

Children being the most vulnerable members of society are the one's most affected by living in poverty. This unacceptable situation can inter alia be attributed to the disastrous effects of Apartheid. During this unfortunate period in our nation's history millions of people were unjustly evicted from their homes and forced to live in deplorable conditions. Moreover, many of these people were left homeless or without the necessary adequate shelter. Children who were born into these circumstances were denied basic resources such as proper shelter, food, water and health care services. These unfortunate circumstances existed at the adoption of South Africa 's democratic Constitution. The preamble of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa , 1996 reaffirms government's commitment to heal the inequalities of the past and improve the quality of life of all citizens. The Constitution is based on certain fundamental values, most importantly, human dignity, freedom and equality. The fact that these values are denied to those people living without access to basic resources such as adequate housing/shelter, food, water or health care services cannot be dismissed. To facilitate South Africa 's development as a democratic state based on human dignity, freedom and equality, the problem of poverty must be addressed. The Constitutional Court , in Government of the Republic of South Africa and Others v Grootboom and Others 2000 11 BCLR 1169 (CC), has recently stated that the effective realisation of socio-economic rights is key to the advancement of a value based democratic South Africa . Section 26 of the Constitution grants everyone the right to have access to adequate housing and section 28 that grants every child the additional right to basic shelter among others. By virtue of section 28(1)(b) the primary responsibility to provide children with the necessary adequate housing/shelter is vested in their parents, unless the parents are unable to fulfil their duty or the children are removed from their care. This does not in the least mean that the state has no responsibilities to children living with their parents. The state must still provide the framework in which parents can facilitate the realisation of their children's rights. The state can fulfil this obligation by taking reasonable legislative and other measures within its available resources to realise everyone's right of access to adequate housing progressively.  Therefore, it is submitted that the measures taken to realise section 26 also indirectly ensures the realisation of children's right to basic shelter (section 28(1)(c)). It has been largely accepted by the courts and academics alike that all fundamental human rights are indivisible and interrelated. Clearly then, the state's obligations in terms of section 28(1)(c) cannot be properly interpreted without referring to the interpretation of those obligations conferred upon it by section 26(2) and the other socio-economic rights in the Constitution. Hence, section 28(1)(c) must be seen in the context of the Constitution as a whole. Put simply, the state must take reasonable legislative and other measures within its available resources to realise children's right to basic housing/shelter progressively. This article will focus on the utilisation of the right to shelter of the child to alleviate poverty. Essential to this discussion is an effective understanding of the right to basic shelter as entrenched by section 28 of the Constitution in conjunction with the right of access to adequate housing conferred on everyone by virtue of section 26. This will be achieved by studying the general working of such rights including their limitations and enforcement. 


1986 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-228
Author(s):  
A. Roy Eckardt

“According to a long-standing Christian tradition relating to oppression, a particular tyrant or a particular tyrannical regime ‘forfeits the moral right to govern and the people acquire the right to resist.’ And this is the state of affairs in today's South Africa… Radical South African liberation thinking-praxis goes much farther than the non-revolutionist Social Gospel tendencies of much American black liberation thinking.”


Author(s):  
Ramodikoe Marishane

It is now globally accepted that all children have the right to basic education as a fundamental human right. This right must not only be guaranteed, but also fulfilled holistically to meet all children’s educational needs. This occurs when its three dimensions, namely access, quality and safe conditions are equally addressed. In other words, the right to basic education is fulfilled when all children have access to quality education in a safe school environment. For this reason, the state has a duty to promote and protect this right entirely. In South Africa, the state has put in place a legislative and policy framework to meet its obligation in this regard. However, despite the state’s efforts in creating child-friendly school conditions, children in schools still experience challenges that negatively impinge upon their educational rights. Such challenges include school dropout, grade repetition together with poor academic performance and achievement. The problem is rooted in the disconnection between access to education, school safety and quality education, putting the spotlight on the school principal’s leadership. This paper concludes that refocusing on the application of the school leadership theory has the potential to reduce the problem.


Author(s):  
Thuto Thipe

Two successive 2018 court judgments guaranteed people living in the parts of South Africa demarcated as communal areas the right to refuse to allow mining on their land. As debates around land restitution and redistribution gripped the country, these cases shone a light on land tenure security in people’s struggles to remain on their ancestral land in the face of continued dispossession after 1994. This article argues that in preserving core elements of the colonially created tribal administration system in the democratic landscape, the state has retained the structures and the imaginative framework that allow particular people to be treated as “natives” who can be moved and stripped of foundational rights, as tribal institutions were designed to do. The Maledu and Baleni cases are illustrative of struggles across the country in which people in communal areas are demanding full recognition and exercise of their rights as citizens.


Author(s):  
Gerhard Van der Schyff

This contribution considers the protection of fundamental rights in the Netherlands and South Africa. Both countries strive to be constitutional democracies that respect basic rights. But both countries go about this aim in very different ways. These different paths to constitutionalism are compared, as well as the reasons for these differences and whether it can be said that these differences are justifiable. This is done by comparing the character of the rights guaranteed in the Dutch and South African legal orders, the sources of these rights and the locus or centre of protection in both systems. The conclusion is reached that no single or perfect route to attaining the desired protection of fundamental rights exists, but that one should always enquire as to the state of individual freedom and the right to make free political choices in measuring the worth of a system's protection of rights.


1972 ◽  
Vol 1 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 25-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadine Gordimer

This is the text of an address given earlier this year in South Africa which illustrates some of the problems connected with the South African government's plans to abolish the right of appeal against decisions brought by the State Publications Control Board.


Author(s):  
Joyce Gotlib

This chapter examines and compares the legitimised objects linked to the right to land of black rural communities associated with the reparation policies in Brazil and South Africa. In the Brazilian case, legal recognition of landownership of areas occupied by reminiscences of quilombos (descendants of the slave population) is part of the affirmative action policies adopted by the federal government to combat racial discrimination since the proclamation of the constitution of 1988. In South Africa, the land restitution programme is aimed at the reparation of injustices committed during the apartheid. The chapter shows how the state legitimises ‘orders of grandeur’ of land that differ from its Western conception — which understands it only as an economic good — and converts them into state legibility. It also considers the different ways in which ancestral land rights are justified by the state in these research contexts, in which ancestors, saints and graves have agency as do human beings.


1988 ◽  
Vol 17 (10) ◽  
pp. 17-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulo Freire ◽  
Vivian Schelling

One of the key figures in the Popular Culture Movement, Paulo Freire is the founder of a revolutionary educational method which brought literacy — and political awareness — to thousands of the poor in Brazil. His books, which have played a key role in adult literacy movements throughout the world, have been banned by many dictatorial governments, including those of South Africa and, most recently, Haiti. Forced into exile from his own country following the right-wing coup in 1964, Freire finally returned in 1980. In São Paulo he talked to Vivian Schelling about his work


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document