The
‘real’ third force
The death and destruction caused by the amorphous mass commonly
referred to as the ‘people on the ground’ has elicited a major response from
ordinary citizens, civic organisations, the government itself and the
international community. Outrage abounds at this recent treatment of foreign
nationals in this country.
 |
| <Pic sourced: www.mg.co.za> |
They are three factions in this scenario. On the first category are
those who believe that these violent actions are justified and indeed necessary
to get rid of foreign nationals. The second category contains those who see
this as a terrible crime against humanity and preach tolerance and acceptance.
There is a third juncture to this conversation, however.
Those in the third faction are quick to point at the ills of ineffective
border control and the ineptitude of authorities in controlling the presence of
foreigners; especially those from the African continent and parts of Asia. They
argue that it’s not about the mere presence of foreign nationals but the sheer
number of foreign nationals; especially those deemed to be undocumented.
The authorities of the day speak of a ‘third force’ that seems to
be coordinating this whole thing.
For the past three weeks I have listened to various radio stations,
read numerous publications and the one thing I have picked up is that all sides
are unequivocal in their argument for or against the presence of foreign
nationals.
I have listened carefully to
many arguments and debates pertaining to the recent spate of xenophobic
attacks, and have realised that the government is right. There is a ‘third
force’ but this so called force isn't who the government alleges but is the
government itself.
Just the other day a caller had called in on a certain talk radio
station. The caller began her argument with ‘I don’t condone the killing of
people but…’ this immediately put her in the second category. After she had
pointed at the underlying factors that have caused this scourge of violence,
she and the radio presenter finally agreed that the ‘masses’ had valid
grievances and that however that did not necessitate resorting to the barbarism
we have witnessed.
 |
| <Pic Sourced: www.bdlive.co.za> |
They had further agreed on the fact that there needed to be
decisive enforcement of the immigration laws we already have. Upon further
going back and forth the radio show host finally managed to get out of the
caller as to who was to blame; ‘the government!’ she said out loud. ‘Okay now
that we know that the government is to blame, what should be done?’ Asked the
show host.
The caller came up with all sorts of initiatives and suggestions,
but the show host kept insisting. ‘You and I have pin pointed that the
government is to blame. Right, then what do we do about the government?’
persisted the presenter, to no avail.
You see the truth dear reader, is that the caller knew exactly what
the radio presenter was driving towards and thus, the solution. It didn't matter because she kept avoiding it.
Now let me ask you dear reader. Now that we have realised that the
government is to blame for there being this ever-widening inequality gap and
that this rampant and blatant corruption actually eats at the funds needed to
deliver services, what should be done dear reader? Should we wait another
twenty years and hope that the people in government finally realise the error
of their ways and mend them?
If the latter is our approach then what is the point of universal
enfranchisement? What’s even the point of this democracy we fought so hard for
and keep praising if we want to live in a de facto one party state that is ran
by a party whose members keep pointing at the evil that is capitalism from the
balconies of mansions obtained through the very same economic system?
Dear reader, the national party was voted out because of being
outright evil. Now why can’t an inept regime that is clearly concerned with
enriching its members instead of pealing back the corrosive effects of
apartheid be shown the door as well?
