Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation

Explaining Endemic
Violence in South Africa

by
Graeme Simpson

Translated into German and published under the title "Gewalt in Südafrica", in Weltfriedensdienst Quersbrief, 3, pp. 10-15, 1993.

Graeme Simpson is a founder and former Executive Director of the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation.

Introduction

It has been argued that the legacy of apartheid has bequeathed to South Africa a "culture of violence". This has been rooted in the notion that violence in South Africa has become normative rather than deviant and it has come to be regarded as an appropriate means of resolving social, political and even domestic conflict. This is quite easily visible across the entire political spectrum, where violence has been sanctioned as a means both of maintaining political power, as well as an accepted means of attaining change or resolving conflict.

The consequence has been that, despite the prospects of peace heralded by the process of national political negotiations, the past four years have been amongst the most brutal in this country's history.

Part of the explanation lies in the fact that the era of negotiations established the terrain for an intensified political contest. For the first time in this country's history, the key political interest groups had to establish their credentials in terms of their national representivity if they were to occupy a seat at the negotiation table with any degree of clout. The resultant power struggle, involving all the key political interest groups has, almost inevitably, played itself out through the style of violent confrontation so firmly established in the preceding decades.

The racially-based, hostile stereotypes generated by apartheid, coupled with the resultant political intolerance, have continued to articulate closely with the experiences of economic impoverishment and encroaching poverty for the majority of South Africans. In the absence of an effective social welfare net and in the context of dramatic levels of unemployment, conditions are created which offer a solid foundation for the social, political and criminal violence which pervades South Africa.

Yet, considering the extent to which bread and butter issues such as housing, jobs, rents, wages and education have become politicised in South Africa, it should come as no surprise that people have developed very high expectations of the process of political change. The constant stalling of negotiations has created a climate of extreme impatience and frustration which has enhanced the prospect of violence. Once the collective inhibitions on resorting to violence as a means of resolving conflict have been overcome within this broad political culture, it is inevitable that the resultant violence will begin to spill over into the social and domestic arenas of society - the workplace, the home and in the communities. The result is that violence begins to intrude into all these dimensions of social life, often manifesting itself through conflict over the most basic resources within impoverished communities.

Individuals, feeling powerless or helpless in the face of dramatic social and economic upheaval, frequently symbolically reassert their power through violence in those dimensions of their lives in which they still feel they hold sway. This results in much aggression which, although social or political at root, is expressed through displaced violence within the family and in the home.

It is not possible in a paper as brief as this, to document, analyse, or even describe the violence in South Africa in all its complexity. What this brief outline should demonstrate is that the search for mono-causal explanation is fruitless. The convenient terms in which the violence has been labelled, by politicians and the commercial media, often does more to disguise complex causation than it does to explain it.

The violence has been variously labelled as "black on black" violence, ethnic conflict, conflict between hostel dwellers and squatters or township residents, conflict between ANC and IFP supporters, or between the police and township residents. It has been referred to as violence between the poor and the very poor, conflict generated by government or by a "third force", or it has been described simply as violent crime. None of these descriptions is simply wrong. Yet none, on its own, will properly explain this complex situation. It is only when South Africans accept that we are dealing with a host of overlapping causal factors that we can begin to address the problems constructively.

Even statistical information is an inadequate yardstick of the problem. The notorious lack of reliability and the politically contested nature of most of the statistics which are generated about political and criminal violence, make it difficult to rely on this sort of information. There has been a prolonged "battle of the statisticians" on this issue, relating not only to political violence, but to crime statistics as well. It is argued here that, at very best, the sort of "body count" statistics generated, if taken together, only give us a limited indication of what is actually going on. They are generally plagued by the problems of under-reporting or by perceptions of bias by those gathering the data. At worst, it could be argued that the picture which is painted in statistical terms has the ironic effect of numbing us to the human suffering which the statistics ostensibly convey - instead of guiding us in the development of the remedial and preventative steps which need to be taken.

Some Recent Trends in the Violence

Despite what has been written above, some trends over the past years remain discernable and are instructive. Amidst the competing claims over who is most responsible and over whose political interests are best served by the violence, certain trends remain clear:

Some Social-Psychological Factors

It is probably true to say that apartheid society was premised on the marginalisation of whole communities who were denied a political voice and who were educationally and economically disempowered. In this manner, and through their very lifestyles, South Africans on all sides of the political spectrum have been substantially dehumanised. This has fundamental implications for the capacity of individuals to engage in acts of violence and brutality - and is exacerbated by the high levels of fear and insecurity in a society which is experiencing dramatic social transformation. The result is that much of the violence that is perpetrated is in fact rationalised as being defensive in nature, by people who experience themselves as disempowered and under attack.

In explaining the complex trends in violence in South Africa today, insufficient attention has been given to these social-psychological aspects of the problem. This involves not only examining the effect of violence on its victims, but also demands that we give some attention to the psychological motivations of many of the perpetrators. A primary characteristic of perpetrators of violence is that they feel powerless. For them violence is a means of reasserting control. In reasserting his power, the perpetrator also reaffirms his manhood. Since violence mainly involves men in South Africa, whether it be in youth gangs or hostels, the affirmation of manhood through violence takes on even greater significance. Linked to the issue of powerlessness is the marginalisation that offenders experience as a result of unemployment, under-education and political voicelessness.

Grappling with Solutions

The multi-causal explanations of violence which have been outlined here demand that we seek multi-layered solutions to the violence. More than anything, this also demands that we are realists. It is therefore important to distinguish between the short, medium and long-term solutions which are proposed.

Short Term Solutions

There are a range of short-term solutions which must be sought immediately if we are to simply contain the damage caused by ongoing violence. This may involve the negotiated consensus-based control of law enforcement agencies, the bolstering of the structures under the National Peace Accord, the development of a business role in spreading the relative peace of the workplace and the development of comprehensive victim aid strategies.

Medium Term Solutions

In the medium term we need to look to issues of reconciliation and the de-escalation of political conflict through political settlement, a national election and the negotiation of a new constitutional dispensation, the establishment of consensus structures with credibility, the modification of expectations of change and the process of nation-building.

In the Long Term

In the long term we need to look to socio-economic reconstruction of South Africa in order to eliminate the conditions which underpin much of the violence and negligence in our society. This can only be rooted in the generation of economic growth coupled with effective education.

The following proposals should be viewed in terms of these staggered processes of social recovery and are aimed at tackling the problem in all its complexity. The range of solutions posed is by no means exhaustive, however.

Conclusion

There are at least two principal reasons why societies such as South Africa don't change. These have fundamental implications for issues of reconciliation in the social context of transition and a negotiated political settlement.

Firstly, the example set by civil law enforcement agencies including the routine use of daunting force in even the most innocuous situations, is sanctioned and official. The Commissions of Enquiry which today almost inevitably follow, whether it be at Boipatong or at Bisho, have taken on the form of a kind of ritual following "the slaughter" - an inadequate substitute for any real remedial or proactive measures. The "cowboy mentality" of those in authority sends a message just as clear and no less pervasive than the political assassins and the criminal killers.

In the current crisis of uncertainty in South Africa, a kind of certainty and self-sufficiency is to be found looking down the barrel of a gun. In a land of ever-growing crime, racial friction, economic recession, uncontrolled urbanisation and the consequence of shattered urban lives in undeveloped squalor, the resort to violent "self-defence" is hardly unusual or exceptional. In this context even lunatic ideology is captivating for the simple reason that it gives people something to believe. To re-inculcate a sense of human value, we need to empower the disempowered and aid the victims. National reconciliation is the only vehicle - and it will have to be achieved through a process of nation-building and participative democracy.

Victim aid coupled to an institutionalised system of restitution is vital to any programme of reconciliation in South Africa. The failure of such restitutive measures will undoubtedly result in widespread processes of revenge and retribution - already beginning to plague this society. Failure to institutionalise such a system of restitution will similarly result in the likely meting out of informal justice, with the consequence of increased violence. The simple fact is that justice must be done and must be seen to be done. The past must be engaged with and acknowledged, rather than merely ignored. In practical terms, this means that the trauma of victims of violence or of human rights abuses must be recognised and publicly acknowledged, and the perpetrators must be penalised in some public way for their past actions. The politically convenient solution of a general amnesty for political crimes may simply not be an adequate solution to the long-term problems posed by victimisation and marginalisation. Realistic reconciliation programmes of this sort are an essential precursor to the rebuilding of a new and different national identity.

© Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation

 
Home | Programmes | Research | Consultancy | Coming Events |
Staff | Internships | Annual Report | Background | Aims |
African Transitional Justice Research Network |
Justice in Perspective | Links

eXTReMe Tracker