Kameraad Mhambi is 100% a Van Rensburg.
I was therefore rather shocked to hear that somebody that shares my heritage would say at a meeting at the University of Cape Town (UCT) rugby club that:
“The problem with South African rugby is that it’s controlled by Dutchmen”.
Luke Watson – Stormers and Springbok Rugby player, originally uploaded by digitaldion.
That person was of course Luke Watson the talented Western Province flanker. Luke later went on to say that he can’t possible hate Afrikaners, because his ouma is a Van Rensburg.
Keo – the rugby blog – was the first place were I read of Watson’s inflamatory statements which included the fact that he wants to vomit on the springbok jersey.
And I have to admit, it made me really angry.
There was over the course of the week pretty good arguments in the blogosphere and SA press as to why his statements about the emblem Springbok emblem were wrong.
I would like to comment on the other the response or lack of response to his unfortunate “Dutchmen” comments.
Here, here and here are three examples of South African commentators either dismissing or at a loss for words with regards to these comments.
Bonga Ntshingila for instance says what matters is if what he says is true:
“If it is that he is correct, however, then let’s do the sensible thing. Accept the truth for what it is and not let the source cloud our judgment. Certainly there’s a good argument to be made for rugby seemingly dragging its feet on unity and transformation. And if this is due to a Broederbond-type clique then maybe this needs to be outed and dealt with.”
Hillary Joffe, the editor of the Business Day explained about the heroic role of Luke’s father:
“THE 1970s were a heady time to be a white English-speaking liberal in SA. As a post- Mandela black leadership began to define itself in the form of Steve Biko and other young activists, many white liberals began to see a relevant place for themselves in South African politics — they would be aiders and abetters of the revolution against apartheid.
Among them were two brothers in Port Elizabeth — Dan “Cheeky” and Valence Watson — who, throwing caution and possible Springbok careers to the wind, joined “nonwhite” rugby unions and played their rugby with blacks.
They were political heroes, let alone sporting ones. This editor can still recall the almost subversive pleasures of merely reading about their exploits in the papers.”
He ads:
“The truth be told, white liberal English speakers still smarted from the break with Britain and never made much distinction then between apartheid and its creators — nationalist Afrikaners.”
But although Joffe makes a valid point, he also fails to make the case that this was a racial slur. In a league with Andre Markgraaf’s kaffir comments.
What Mhambi finds so sad is how some pundits can’t fathom why these remarks are so offensive to Afrikaners. It’s as if calling an Afrikaner a ‘Dutchman’ does not have a history laden with prejudice.
To me it shows one of two things, a total disregard for Afrikaners or just complete amnesia to a big part of South African history: Afrikaners’s long held cultural inferiority and the subjugation of and lording it over by English South Africa.
What’s worrying is how, if you don’t get this, you can correctly analyse the abomination that was apartheid. The ‘Dutchmen’s’ inferiority complex and sense of injustice suffered directly fed the apartheid monster. Just like a sense of injustice feeds the likes of Robert Mugabe.
A letter writer to the Business Day, one Jaco Strauss, echoed my thoughts:
When revisiting past injustices, the supposedly “liberal” English press very seldom dwells upon the century of British colonial rule and associated atrocities.
The genocide caused by the English concentration camps, for example, had a nationalistic knock-on effect on the psyche of “Dutchmen” that cannot be over-emphasised.
But the best comments on the subject was by the ex Vrye Weekblad sports editor Charles Leonard. Leonard explains the day he was the only white on a rugby field and when his coach took him aside:
“As we sat down behind his maroon Beemer, away from the others, he started explaining the dos and — especially — the don’ts of nonracial sport in the 1980s. A bit superfluous, I thought, seeing that I had sought this township club out.
It was after university and I still wanted to play rugby. The mainstream part of the sport was run and played by white fascists, so it was a simple decision for me to follow the example of Eastern Cape’s Watson brothers who, a decade earlier, started playing nonracial rugby on “the other side” under the banner of the South African Rugby Union (Saru).
“That’s fairly obvious,” I thought, as Alexander ended his sermon with: “No racist comments are allowed on the field!” “
He continues that as Vrye Weekblad sports editor he had interviewed Cheeky Watson and found him inspirational. But what Watson Jnr had said was different, it irked him:
“It was not his disrespect to the Springbok that I found offensive in Luke’s speech, even though I think it should stay because it has long been re-appropriated (famously so, by Nelson Mandela at the 1995 World Cup). It was his use of the derogatory term “Dutchman” that irked me — and not only because I am one myself.”
He explains why -
“As our hooker was about to throw the ball into the lineout, one of the opposition supporters chanted “AWB! AWB! AWB!” to try to distract me. The referee, who was known as a karate expert, stopped the game immediately, pointed at the culprit and shouted: “Hey jy, fokof! (hey you, f*ck off!)”
Saru was serious when it said no racism was allowed on those fields — even when it was directed at a Dutchman like me.
That still applies today and Luke, who should be a role model for kids, should take that to heart. It may not save him the inevitable hospital passes and late tackles his unfortunate comments will cause next season when he play against other South African teams, but an apology is the least he can offer. He also owes it to the people who played township rugby, for whom nonracial principles applied in all directions.”
Related deployments:
Mnr,great blog.You may have read in mine though that I said if Luke’s words have no merit,let him hang by them.But if they do,push him to the side and deal with the issues before people can hijack them again.
Bonga, thanks for your comment.
I’m afraid I don’t agree with the premise you take. ALL South African institutions should be institutions of excellence and that should include the fact that they should be run in a non racial way.
Look at Football. It’s a mess. If somebody were to say it’s because its because its run by this or that group there would be an outcry.
Afrikaners are into rugby. There’s no denying that. But it seems that the premise other South Africans take with any thing where Afrikaners are involved is suspicion and prejudice. This is demonstrated with incidents like when the editor of Getaway magazine said that Afrikaners belong to the old South Africa.
Don’t they deserve the benefit of the doubt like other South Africans??
Anybody that think Afrikaners are unrepentant racist should just go to Loftus when Brain Habana is playing. The man is practically worshiped. Yes, there’s lots of men with mustaches, and here and there a boepens and perhaps you won’t understand all the Afrikaans. But if you dont get something, does that make it wrong?
Instead of continually expecting the worst of Afrikaners the rest of South Africa could also look to what they have done done right.
As for now, there is no evidence that he uttered the word, Dutchmen’, or referred to his family connections to the Van Rensburgs. But should he have said it, why then only focus on the ‘Dutchmen’ expression ? ( Let’s leave then aside the question why he would use such an expression, in the conversation, if he himself has a ouma in his closet)
If he did say all these, why would it be concluded that he hates white Afrikaanses, whilst he also allegedly said that his ouma is a Van Rensburg ?
I am asking these to show the selectiveness, to portray him in the media as another Afrikanerbasher, like the rest.
As for the vomit statement: My understanding is that he did not say, that he want to vomit on the Springbokjersey per se- he said (given the situation he found himself in last year, but moreso given the way people felt about the Springbok symbol in the past), he had to prevent himself from not vomiting on it because of himself realising the bigger picture of people dying for unified rugby, even though they also viewed the Springbok as such, a symbol of whites-only rugby. Here he felt safe to share his own struggles, given his background, but he also speaks of his own personal transformation and the role his father and his faith played.
Don’t we all sometimes share our own journeys and struggles in a safe space ?
Sorry that my comment is so long.
Reggie, welcome to my new blog. We welcome long comments.
First, he has not denied that he said what has been alleged he has said. He himself said it was given in a private conversation. That makes him a twee gat jakkels in my book.
Secondly, after all this came out he made the statement about the Van Rensburg in the closest.
I chose specifically to focus on the Dutchman comment and not the Springbok comment because so many commentators have gone at lengths to gloss over the first and focus on the second.
The only media that called him an Afrikaners basher as you state it was the Afrikaans press. Even at the heights of the Nationalist power English South Africa did not read the Afrikaans press and they certainly don’t do so now.
And there is a reason for this I assert. Prejudice against Afrikaners is one of the few allowed prejudices, not only in SA but in the English speaking world in general. Afrikaners is voelvry verklaar.
If Luke was genuinely interested in reconciliation and the team why not celebrate the historic victory of Pieter de Villiers at Dunedin with the team in which he played?
I watched Luke play in the very first match of De Villier’s reign against Wales. It was probably his best match so far. After an impressive move between them, Juan Smith runs over and high fives Watson and smiles. Hardly what you would call a hostile reception.
What I find interesting is the amount of latitude you give his opinions that the team is racist. Is this on account of his fathers reputation?
Brian Habana seems quit happy to play alongside Afrikaners in that team. Is he a fool? Is Ricky Januarie a fool?
If he denies what he said and their is no proof then I’ll apologise for this post. But its time all South Africans were ‘skeered met dieselfde kam’.
As the Sunday Times said this week “It’s funny how you find bigotry in the strangest places. Or rather, not funny.”
Well at this stage, there is no proof that he uttered these words and no indication of the context in which he used it. If the evidence is there, then, I admit, we have a different debate .
Secondly, I don’t really deal with the Áfrikaners is voelvry verklaar’ perception or reality. That is a different debate.
The point is simple: did he say it or not, but more so, did he meant it as the ‘commentators’ splash it ?
Lastly, I would not call Clinton van den Bergh as part of the bastion of the Afrikaner press or maybe I dont know him that well.
‘afrikaans press’, not ‘afrikaner press’. … oops apologies for the slip
Kameraad Mhambi,
The other thing Jaco Strausse deals with in his letter to the business day is the statement made in the original bus day article: “The one way the Watsons can be sure to “fix” the rugby racists they hate is to work towards an all-black, winning, Springbok side. That’ll get higher up the racist nose than merely giving them something else to moan about.” This is a racist statement in a well respected main stream newspaper, imagine the outcry if it read: we should work towards an all white winning rugby team. The reporter would immediately be fired and possibly never work again.
Through the liberal media it is always acceptable to bash white people, Jaco Strausse might have written a letter in response, no one else complained, no outcry of racism! Jaco Strausse is a right wing commentator so he had to watch his tone otherwise the leftwing media would certainly ignore his letter. The liberal media reasons as follow, : All white people are racist. All racist should die, therefore all white people should die. Me and a few friends have stolen an idea from the African-American nation, we now greet each other as racist on the phone we also call each other racist.
The best read on the matter can be found here: http://www.news24.com/Rapport/Briewe/0,,752-805_2411906,00.html
Then lastly to Reggie, you missed Mhambi’s point Puke Watson already admitted to saying it, he’s defense was that he said it in private.
Boeregroete
Attie you say the liberal press’ reasons come down in final analysis to one thing, that all whites should die. I think that’s a bit over the top don’t you think?! Much of the liberal press is controlled by whites by the way.
That is certainly an interesting letter that you linked to Attie.
Reggie, its interesting that we read the situation so differently. You give Luke a lot of latitude and I don’t. I can see where your coming from. I think one of the key differences is the suspicion among many Afrikaners that the non racial positions of English South Africa, was often inspired by their battle with Afrikaners. I think I will make this a theme of a post.
What I also have been thinking about the last few days is this, that if something like this angers me so, how much much anger black South Africans must experience because of racial slights they suffer.
Our country really needs people that have sympathy and an understanding for people’s various backgrounds.
It also needs people that speak out at racist behaviour. How many times do you hear racist comments at social gatherings from other South Africans and don’t tackle them for doing that? If you don’t do that you can’t much complain about Luke Watson.
I have to admit that I am surprised at the emotion the last week or so. But then, in the community where I come from, where people who wanted to vent their rage at white Afrikaanses. they did not referred to them as ‘Dutchmen’…they were referred to as ‘Boere’ ( and also others like me, who were lighter of complexion). So, now I read ‘Boeregroete’ and invokes a particular perception and emotion, as well.
The following happened to me in Centurion (old Verwoerdburg) near Pretoria, which was predominantly Afrikaans (roughly 1 English primary school for 5 Afrikaans ones, if I remember correctly)
I was a teenager of about 17 or so and went to the movies, there were some arcade games and I saw a little guy of about 10 playing a car game, we were the only guys at the games.
The game had a single gear lever for hi/low and I noticed that he never shifted gears, so I mentioned that he could shift gears and demonstrated by pulling the lever.
Now I’m an Afrikaner and this kid was English. He responded with “Dutchman!!! I’d rather be a pebble than a rock!”
I laughed, but it does illustrate some of the prejudice and the notion that “Dutchman” is used in some English circles as a derogatory term, whether taken so or not.
I get the feeling that some of the history of this can to be found in the history of “class prejudice” as can be argued for some of the racism in South Africa as well. Often the lines are quite blurry.
It’s classic that former oppressors remake themselves as victims in identity politics and that’s clearly the path you’re taking.
Perhaps, It’s also classic for victims to become oppressors.
If your lucky you belong to an identity that is perceived to be aloof from all this, and that just reports on the victims and oppressors ‘impartially’.