the triumph of evil over good
Diphapang Mofokeng
The triumph of evil over good
The value system of the South African society has
sunk so low that it can only be explained through the theory of the
relativity of bareness.
The premise of this new theory
is that, fundamentally, human societies are about a never-ending
struggle between good and evil. The triumph of evil over good shows
itself through the prevalence of a perverse value system within
society. Similarly, in a society where good prevails, the value
system is manifestly weaved around what is right, and it reflects a
loftiness of cultural civilization. But how do you practically
evaluate a value system?
Public discourse is one of the useful
instruments for grasping the collective mind of a society. In
our daily dialogues through the media, we exhibit our collective
attitudes to and feelings about key and trivial matters that affect
society. The questions we pose to our leaders, the topics that
preoccupy the minds of those who shape public opinions, the disgust
or cheerfulness we express in response to unusual stories are all
components of a barometer to measure our value system as a
nation.
While useful, public discourses are not
deficiency-free in measuring society’s value system. The
methodological deficiency of a public discourse approach is that it
is incapable of dealing effectively with a widespread human tendency:
pretence.
In a society such as ours, where honesty is
in short supply, public discourses can be riddled with grandstanding
and choreographed image projection. Have we not been shocked to learn
that a respectable public figure is a wife batterer, an alcoholic or
a serial womanizer? Yet, when such figures participate in public
discourse, they sound and appear like nuns or saints.
In
our society, very many people have mastered the art of using public
discourse to construct and project a good image of themselves. But it
does not mean that such people do not do terrible things when the
nation is resting at night. How, then, do you avoid being misled by
pretence when evaluating the value system of a particular
society?
In addition to gleaning skeptically from public
discourse, the ability to penetrate society’s hidden corners is an
absolute necessity. What do people say about social and
political questions when they are in coffee shops, in a bar, in clubs
and in similar private, social spaces? Privacy is the best
revealer of honesty. Where privacy is guaranteed, diplomacy is the
first victim. And where diplomacy prevails, honesty
suffocates.
While most people may hate to admit, the South
African value system today evinces the triumph of evil over good.
To understand this, you first need to grasp the pretentious nature of
our public discourse, and penetrate the hidden spaces of our
society.
Public vs private
In public discourse,
we project ours as a nation of citizens who abhor infidelity, but we
know too well that our husbands and wives have extramarital affairs.
Again, in public discourse, we all emphasize the importance of using
condoms, but we know too well that many people don’t.
When
we hear that someone was caught with another man’s girlfriend, we
use public discourse to express disgust, and wonder privately: why
did they not do it in a hotel, where they would not have been caught?
When we hear that someone used bank transfers to pay a bribe, we
laugh at the stupidity of such a person and, again, wonder privately:
why did he not do it like Willy Madisha?
In our politics, the
most unbelievable things also happen. When you think a person who has
been declared unfit and improper to hold a position of responsibility
would be removed from his job, the opposite happens. Indeed, our
value system is such that a person who was called a ‘liar’ in a
commission of enquiry by a competent judge is rewarded with the most
senior of positions in the public service.
A new political
culture also seems to be worming its way into vogue; it is called
‘rent-a-crowd’ or ‘hire-political-mercenaries’. When
there are allegations that a senior person is not performing in a
parastatal or that he has been involved in wrong doing, calls are
quickly made for members of political organizations to accompany such
a person to court as a show of support. Or a political leader
somewhere would quickly announce that they support the official who
is in trouble.
If you are still not convinced that evil has
triumphed over good in South Africa, think of a youth leader who has
no university qualification but who is welcomed warmly by students on
many of our campuses. Could there be a better explanation why
university students ululate and clap hands when listening to a young
person who had the opportunity but knows no university door? Even
more shocking, a university vice chancellor declares that the
uneducated youth leader understands issues better than university
professors. Such is how evil has triumphed in our own society.
How, then, does the new theory of the relativity of bareness
assist us to make sense of all of these oddities?
As is
evident, the preposterousness of the oddities in our society is so
bare. Given that good has already been defeated in its struggle
against evil, the key question is no longer about the difference
between right and wrong. We are now concerned principally with
the relativity of wrong.
While we know that absurdities in
our society are bare, our primary concern is: to what extent are they
absurd? So, when a person with a hollow credibility is given a
position of responsibility, a minor storm in public discourse twirls
and quickly subsides. Thereafter, life continues as if nothing
happened; as if wrong was right!
Within a short space of
time, following a minor storm in public discourse, wrong swiftly puts
on the garb of right. As if in a circus, it does not take long before
people place a halo on wrong. You will hear such statements as ‘he
is not so bad,’ ‘he has proven critics wrong,’ ‘he is better
than …’ or ‘we now have a …’
Evil
triumphs?
Once you hear such phrases, you
should know immediately that in the struggle between good and evil,
evil has triumphed. Essentially, this means that the theory of the
relativity of bareness is hard at work. The guiding
public attitude is: we know that it is bare, but it is relatively
less bare!
The only thing that awakens us from our collective
slumber is a crisis. As acclaimed theorist Roberto Mangabeira Unger
observes in his magnum opus, False Necessity, crisis acts like
a ‘midwife of change’. Without a crisis, our nation is quite
comfortable with wrong. If the wrong affects the underclass, the
elite would go about their daily business, and enjoy their fortunate
insulation from the burden of the underclass.
If it does not
affect them, those in the private sector would completely ignore the
fact that many poor South Africans do not have access to quality
health care. Talks of a national health insurance scheme provoke raw
sectoral instincts.
Before Cosatu escalated the issue of
labour brokers to a crisis level, none really cared about the plight
of workers who, for many years, have been exploited by unscrupulous
labour brokers with an insatiable appetite for money.
Before
the recent wave of service delivery protests, few in the corridors of
power took the grievances of ordinary citizens seriously. For years,
we watched corruption, incompetence and political arrogance converge
against the underclass of our country. It is only after the
crisis recently caused by the underclass that we began to hear an
admission that there is something wrong with a deployment
policy.
The problem with a crisis-dependent society such as
ours is that some crises are not radical in their manifestation, and
they softly eat away at the sinews that are necessary for the
collective health of society. For example, while there may never be a
destabilizing protest when a person with a badly injured credibility
is given a top position, it may take years to make society believe
that the public sector is a place for citizens with integrity and
credibility.
While it may not be true, perceptions already
exit that meritocracy is a concept alien to our civil service.
Unfortunately, such perceptions prevail alongside a real and urgent
need for the best skills in the public sector. When we promote
mediocrity and incompetence, we ipso facto repel merit, excellence
and talent. This is far above the kindergarten trivia of
arrogant knowledge; it is a question that distinguishes successful
from unsuccessful nations.
One of the signs that evil has
indeed triumphed in its duel with good is denialism. While we
all know that the observations we have made are correct, those among
us who are vocally gifted will always scream very loudly to convince
society that truth is not true. As they continue to deny,
society sinks further and further, and the theory of the relativity
of bareness gains validity and more explanatory power.
Mashele
is Executive Director of the Centre for Politics and Research
(www.politicsresearch.co.za), and a member of the Midrand
Group.