Patriotism, nationalism and the rest...

The country, at the moment, is going through a surge of patriotism. There are flags everywhere. Sometimes they are the right way up and sometimes not. Sometimes cars have socks over their rear-view mirrors. Sometimes they have flags on the aerial. Sometimes they have flags on the boot, the bonnet, the windows. And sometimes, on all of these.

What I find astonishing is that white people who, a year or two ago were sneering, and saying we would never be ready, and the crime rate, and bemoaning how boring soccer is in comparison to rugby, these are now festooning their cars with flags. And, don’t get me wrong, I don’t see anything essentially wrong with that.

Is it that there has been a sea-change in the way in which people are looking at their country? Are they displaying pride in the achievement of getting ready for the event? I hear discussions about the 2010 FIFA World Cup in the changerooms at the gym. Whereas before, white men would be dismissive and churlish about it, suddenly they are speaking authoritatively about it. They have opinions on who is going to win. They have all been to see something in the stadium – and they are impressed. They like this player, that team and this coach. It is a remarkable and noteworthy change.

Clearly, the sport of football will never be the same again in this country. Young children are bewitched by it – mine are, and I am not a soccer fan. The blue eyed boy of apartheid – rugby – is now joined by a fairly well resourced competitor. At the moment, there is only one game in town and its balls are round.

And it is true that when you watch television broadcasts of South Africans singing the national anthem, a lot of whites still do not know anything other than the English and Afrikaans parts of it, while a lot of blacks either do not know (or refuse to sing) the English and Afrikaans, or they refuse to sing it.
But generally, despite things like this, there is a general outpouring of patriotism.

Now, simultaneously with this experience, I have been having some – well, “discussions” would be too grand a term for these things – but let us say “interchanges” with a range of my friends on Facebook, about Israel and the recent international outrage which the Israeli government has committed with the “Freedom Flotilla”, leaving 9 people dead. Some of my harder core Jewish friends – maybe even Zionist friends – are infuriated that I should even think such a thing. Because to them it seems, Israel is not capable of doing wrong. It is only “them” - Muslims, Arabs and non-Jews who do terrible things to Israel.

It has frequently become extremely nasty indeed, these Facebook inter-changes. It happens whenever I, or anyone else associated with me, takes a negative view of Israel. And it has given me pause for some serious thought on the issue of patriotism.
Because, if I am honest, I have to say that I am deeply suspicious of patriotism, in any form and in any guise. When I see flags fluttering in the wind in numbers, I see Nazi Germany. I see the kind of fervour which that maniac Hitler was able to whip up and the way in which that entire nation, young and old, were enthralled. And I hate it with every fibre of my being. It is that kind of stuff which enables evil to be baptised good. And I cannot but see the same thing happening in Israel today. It is a strange and curious irony indeed.

I think, in the case of Israel, that the land has been deified. To the extent that it needs to be served unconditionally. To the extent that it has power to demand absolute loyalty and allegiance. To the extent that some people are prepared to defend it against any and all odds. To the near hysterical responses to even the mildest criticism. This is the behaviour of a worshipper – a devotee - not a citizen.

And it is this worship of the land that I fear so much. Here, the xenophobic attacks that have happened are usually based on gross ignorance; on lack of analysis and education; and on huge doses of selfishness and ingratitude. But what it finally based on? It is based on this thing called being “South African”. And that “being South African” can somehow be used to justify terror, murder, robbery, and that thing which the bible (in the story of Sodom) identifies as virtually unforgivable, inhospitality.

It is the same with Israel. It was the same in Nazi Germany. It was the same in apartheid South Africa. It is horrific.

The Final Draw - Cairp Tahn goes soccer crazy

Long Street, in Cairp Tahn is normally a fairly quaint, very ordinary kind of street. It has lots of restaurants in it - some of which are rather questionable. But at night, Long Street is "The" place to be for the younger set. Awash, I suppose, with the normal kind of recreational drugs - I don't know this, I assume it. Parking is quite impossible to find and the blare of music of various genres assaults you at every turn.

The crowd is not really trendy - it is somewhat more downmarket. There is a lot of smoking of cigarrettes and a lot of wearing sunglasses at night. It seems quite a happy place, but one would be slightly concerned about one's teenage son or daughter.

When Long street is not pumping with the close to 17 000 people it gets on a Saturday night, it is just like anywhere else in Cairp Tahn. Enjoyable. Unreconstructed. Fairly laid back.

Long Street today, however, is the site of the Final Draw (for the 2010 FIFA World Cup - in case you live on a different planet) party. 75 000 people are expected. Screens have been erected, to ensure that people can watch which teams are drawn against which teams. The cordon of security around the International Convention Centre - which is where the draw will actually take place, is vice-like. I virtually had to give a DNA sample to get accreditation for this evenings event. Not that I will be going to the actual event, you understand - that is reserved for Kings, Presidents, Joseph Sepp Blatter, visitors from Mars. (Queens don't qualify).

So, "the people" will be revelling, blowing Vuvuzelas, singing, dancing and wearing soccer jerseys, until the early hours of the morning, in Long Street. I heard on various radio stations that everyone is duly excited. Even the stations which mostly white people listen to. This is unusual. Because white people in South Africa, mostly, do not have any clue about soccer. And white people in South Africa, mostly, can only see doom and gloom. To see white Capetonians wandering around in soccer jerseys, I want to tell you, is a fairly amazing sight.

So, this really is a moment for national unity. This really is a time to shine. And we will. Of that I have no doubt. I have no doubt at all.

One small point though - the three random young women in the photograph asked me, as soon as I had taken it - whether I had accommodation for 2010. Perhaps the sudden soccer enthusiasm may have been tinged with just a touch of lip-smacking at the wonderful prospect of easy money next year. Maybe. Just maybe.

Roof wetting the Cape Town Stadium

Cape Town Stadium - and the view FIFA demanded

So, I get this invitation – very glossy, very smart - very welcome drinks; followed by light snacks; followed by speeches; followed by concert; followed by supper; followed by more concert. I sort of knew it was going to be “popular”, so I didn’t take the instruction to wear smart clothes terribly seriously.

Parking was a bit chaotic – we were asked, in the middle of the street (before being requested to do a U-turn away from the site which was shown on the invite for parking), whether or not we were VIPs. So security, I would say, was a bit of an issue!

The outside of the stadium, now almost complete, looks like a large Afro-chic hat. The inside looks very much, to me - well, like a stadium! There is a green patch of grass in the centre, seats and a great halo of open space above you. The one thing which caught my eye was the grey colour of the seats. There are lighter and darker shades – randomly spaced, giving the impression of Mother-of-pearl, or the inside of a shell, or something like that. Of course, the entire effect would be lost if the stadium was full – but I thought it was quite a clever, and classy touch. (For almost five billion Rand – the very least I would expect was a nice touch, here and there.)

The speeches were as one would expect – everyone praising everyone who had anything to do with the construction of the stadium. Endless clapping this or that thought about how wonderful, how unique, how special and how beautiful it all is. The Premier, Helen Zille gave a rabble-rousing speech, preceded by one that was, (how can one put this gently?) less engaging, by the Mayor of Cape Town, Dan Plato.

Then on to the concert. Now, before I say anything, let me say how much I genuinely admire Richard Cock, the conductor. He is an extremely humble man and one who certainly knows how to bring music to the people. I don’t think he is a great conductor – but he is a populist supreme - and a gentle one at that. He knows what buttons to press amongst the musically uneducated and he really manages to get real rapport with them. This is a good thing – but I do have some slight problem about the actual level of musicality he seems content to allow in his efforts to do so.

Nevertheless, we started with what he called the “FIFA theme”. Apparently this is a piece of music owned by FIFA. (I was somewhat surprised that he didn’t announce that for the period of the tournament – FIFA owned ALL music – but he didn’t. Note to FIFA – this is something you may have missed for Brazil...). Needless to say, the FIFA theme was awful. Dreary, tub-thumping crashes and bangs which sounded not unlike the theme from “Dallas”. Indeed, it could have been the theme from “Dallas”, because who would remember the theme from “Dallas”?

Then we had the “Twenty Tenors” – (Geddit? Twenty Tenors???). Well, we had twelve of them, because (due to the fact that the stadium costs have ballooned from 1.8 Billion to a mere 5 Billion, in the space of three years),apparently the budget for the roof wetting needed to be somewhat limited. The singing was mediocre. But, and here is something worth noting, at least the singers were mostly black! They stood in the sharpest of contrast to the Cape Town Philharmonic Orchestra, which was, not to put too fine a point on it, blindingly white.

And then, there was a group called the “Sterling Electric Quartet”. It consisted of four women playing an electric cello, violin, viola and flute. They wore dresses the size of serviettes and they seemed to be doing practise moves for the filming of the female part to the Karma Sutra. The audience loved them. Cameras flashed. Men approved. They can play – of that there is no doubt – but dear Lord! Why did they bother? It was a bit like watching porn with strangely shaped musical instruments.

My overall impression was one of sadness. Not at the kind of music the majority of the crowd seemed more than content to endure, but at the fact that this huge stadium can really only be used for three things: Soccer, Rugby and concerts. No Athletics. No cricket. Perhaps the occasional boxing match – who knows? Why? It has no athletics track because when the price was thought to be R1.8 billion, it was thought to be too much, so the size of the stadium was reduced to exclude an athletics track.

And sad, because I don’t buy the argument that the stadium is in the right place. Greenpoint Common is not a central point for Cape Town and nor is it, in my opinion, a developmental node. It will simply benefit the already rich of the area, who are mostly white. I have listened to all the arguments, over the years and I have to say, that I just don’t buy them. The reason why the stadium was put where it is, was quite simply, because that is where FIFA wanted it to be. And FIFA wanted it there for the view of Table Mountain.

Old Pictures of Greenmarket Square - Cape Town

Greenmarket Square Slave Market, Cape Town

Rights to this picture are owned by The Western Cape Provincial Archive

Greenmarket Square, Cape Town

Rights to this picture are owned by the Western Cape Provincial Archive


Greenmarket Square

Rights to this picture are owned by the Western Cape Provincial Government

I work on Greenmarket Square. It is a really vibey cobbled square in the centre of the CBD, with good restaurants all around it and interesting looking buildings looking over it. The Square has a very long history, dating back to the slave trade, when slaves were bought and sold at the market, but for the most part, the square was the centre of trade in goods and supplies to the hundreds of ships that passed the Cape of Good Hope en route to the Indies.

The Square was originally known as the Burgher Watch Square and was built on the corner of Short and Longmarket streets in 1696. It soon became a fruit and vegetable market, obviously from where the name derives and in 1961 it was declared a national monument tied to the history of slavery. Slaves used a tavern next to the Old Town House for drinking and gambling. There was also a fountain on the square from which slaves fetched water.

Important notices and proclamations were read from the balcony of the Town House, including the slave code, which read:

* Slaves must go barefoot and must carry passes.
* Any slave who stops in the street to talk to other slaves may be beaten.
* No meeting in bars, no buying of alcohol, no groups on public holidays.
* No gathering near church doors during a service.
* Any slave out after dark must carry a lantern.
* Curfew - slaves must be indoors by 22:00.
* No singing, whistling or noise at night.
* Not allowed to own and carry guns.
* Flogging and chaining for insulting a free man or making false accusations.
* Any slave who dares to strike a slave-holder must be put to death.
* Free black women are not allowed to be as well dressed as respectable burghers' wives and they must carry passes.

Presently, in time for the 2010 FIFA World Cup, the Square is being fairly extensively upgraded.

Children at risk during the Soccer World Cup

The Soccer World Cup in 2010, is going to bring with it a range of (what do we call them these days?) … “challenges” to our already over-challenged society. Like on our roads, and infrastructure, challenges to our police services and our drug teams and our tourism operators. But consider this. All schools will be on holiday for the entire month. Most of the big matches are going to be played at night and, in my now fairly extensive experience of Fan Parks, kids will be either brought to these Fan Parks and dumped, or they will just arrive there and be there, completely unsupervised. That has got to be a rather large “challenge”.

More, there will be child predators on the loose in a way in which we have just not experienced before – so we are led to believe by the National Intelligence Agency. It is, apparently, a feature of major events such as this, the world over.

Several years ago, that eminently sensible director of Childline, Joan van Niekerk, was interviewed in television. She was asked, in a leading kind of way, whether she thought it would be a good idea to start a register of “known pedophiles” so that “these people could be exposed”? A night or two earlier, we were shown footage of a house in the UK (where such registers are kept), having been attacked by a crowd because the crowd wanted quick justice for someone who had been “named” on the register.

Joan van Niekerk said that all the research had shown that keeping a register of known offenders appeared to have no effect whatsoever on either the dissemination of child pornography or on instances of abuse. And surely, those are precisely the things one would want to have an effect on. But what the evidence (rather than the emotion) seems to show is that keeping such a register appears to have no effect at all, except in perpetuating the fondly held myth that this kind of “punishment” is an effective deterrent. The evidence does not back up the belief. But, I suppose, like with the generally held beliefs about capital punishment, the evidence shouldn't deter us, should it? I mean, who bothers about things like that?

The other points which she made were, to my mind, of real importance to the issue. She said that behind every instance of child porn, there is an abused child. A child who has been, perhaps, physically held down and forced into sex acts by people who exercise power over that child. A child who, most likely, will be damaged psychologically or alternatively, a child whose social circumstances are so awful that in order to survive, they have no alternative but to allow themselves to be abused in this way. It is a sad reality that it is often the very people who shout loudest about exposing and punishing pedophiles that care least about the condition of children in the broader society, abused or otherwise.

Another point which Joan van Niekerk made (and it is a well known one) was that it is frequently the case that child abusers were themselves victims of abuse, and so the terrible cycle perpetuates. This is not to condone their actions, for goodness sake, but it is to at least acknowledge some societal, and not simply individual responsibility for the whole thing. The cycle of abuse will continue in the kind of social conditions which encourage it and you won't stop it by putting a few people here and there on a register.

We need to ask ourselves, though, why there is such a big reaction when children get abused sexually? What about all the other forms of abuse we seem quite happy to live with, like poor education? And forced underage labour on our farms? And social conditions which force children into sex, just to eat? These seem to elicit considerably less rage and angst in South Africa. In fact they are frequently just ignored.

The 2010 soccer event is proving to provide something of a magnifying glass to some aspects of our rather damaged society. The risk posed to our children is one of them. But let us not suppose for one single moment, that the risk is primarily external, nor that it is an isolated risk. Children are raped and abused on a daily basis in our society. Children live in absolute poverty and have very poor access to anything like a good education. For some reason, these things seem to be of less concern to people.

2010 World Cup Legacy - 1 year to go

I remember exactly what I was doing when the Sepp Blatter announced that South Africa would be the 2010 host for the FIFA World Cup. I was trying to get one of my children trussed up in a car-seat in a shopping centre in, Rivonia. There was no warning, but suddenly the centre erupted into screams and shouts and dancing and car hooting. Taxis started behaving like jumping castles. Vuvuzelas appeared out of nowhere and deafened innocent passers-by. Hitherto silent shops suddenly produced massive loudspeakers and made shopping an even more unpleasant experience than it already was. People were very happy, that is the truth.

Well, to be honest, mostly black people were happy. White people were either irritated, or long-suffering, or habitually sceptical. And during the past year and a half that I have been working in the 2010 environment, I would have to say that the amount of white people who, (when they discovered what I do for a living, looked pseudo-concerned and said the words “Do you think we will be ready?” compared to the number of blacks asking the same question), outnumber them by 65 to 1.

It is, of course, common cause that in South Africa, peculiarly, football is a game mostly supported by black people. This is not something germane to the game itself. It isn’t as though you need a dark skin to run up and down a soccer pitch and kick a ball into the goals. The fact that mostly blacks support and play football in this country is no accident at all. There is a social and political history behind this fact, which is to be found in the way in which one game – Rugby – was resourced, encouraged and managed by a government that wanted to maintain it for the benefit of the white race group, to the detriment of another – Football.

At schools; around the braai; on television; in church; on the farm – everywhere, white boys were encouraged to play Rugby. And when they did so, they were provided with extraordinary incentives, scholarships, prizes, prizes and laudation. It was promoted everywhere. It became part of white identify. (And I am not denying that there were extraordinarily significant black examples of rugby prowess during this time – but they did so against all the odds.)

Blacks were expected to play soccer – even encouraged to play soccer – but they were given no resources to do so. And it is this point –coming at the issue from the perspective of our skewed history, which should make the FIFA 2010 World Cup so sweet. The massive expenditure on stadia, is but one aspect of redress. It is strange to me, that some people (even today!) appear to resent them. “But couldn’t that money have been spent on housing?!” they argue, as if this is some kind of new insight. I dare say it could have been. But if it were, would we have achieved the level of international interest in the country that 2010 will bring? Would we have the massive tourism spin-off which will last for many years to come? Would we have had the infrastructure upgrades in roads, airports, railway stations that have been fast-tracked and brought forward because of the benefits of requirements and the benefits of the tournament? No, we would not. We would have houses – and believe me, I don’t want to knock houses, but that is all we would have.

There is one question, however, which I don’t know the answer to. Can we ensure that the stadia are going to be used after 2010? That is, it seems to me, a very important question and I think it is one which is going to need to be addressed long before the final whistle of the FIFA 2010 World Cup. What I do know is that the World Cup will give us better resources for football than we have ever had before. The imbalance will be well redressed ion the area of infrastructure. But the legacy, if it is to be sustained, will need to be not so much in looking outwards, to foreign nations coming to play on our soil, but amongst our own people.

In other words, it really is no good redressing the balance, if football is not properly resourced; if coaches are not adequately trained; if clubs are not encouraged and schools do not have basic facilities. The next step beyond building stadia, is building capacity. If we are serious and as single-minded about this as we have been about building infrastructure, the results will be staggering. It is not too difficult to show that young people in sport are less likely to participate in any number of available forms of anti-social behaviour. In a phrase coined by the Department in which I work – “A child in sport is a child out of court”. That needs to be the legacy of 2010, if anything is.