Campaign against Steve Hofmeyr attests to double standards
AfriForum is of the opinion that the reaction to Steve Hofmeyr's remarks serves as confirmation of the gross double standards in force in South Africa and that these double standards contribute to many Afrikaners becoming further alienated from South Africa.
AfriForum regards Hofmeyr as a friend. There is an understanding in force between AfriForum and Steve Hofmeyr that Hofmeyr speaks for himself and not for AfriForum. In the same manner AfriForum speaks for itself and not for Hofmeyr. This means that AfriForum sometimes agrees with Hofmeyr's actions and sometimes it doesn't. AfriForum for instance agrees with Hofmeyr that there is nothing wrong with singing Die Stem at Afrikaans cultural occasions. AfriForum however disagrees on the desirability to become involved with a racial debate.
AfriForum believes in the furtherance of mutual recognition and respect amongst communities. This means that AfriForum respects all communities in the country, but at the same time has the self-respect to protect those things that are important to Afrikaners. Since its inception AfriForum has scrupulously kept to the principle that actions by the organisation must never be for the benefit of one group at the expense of another.
Die Stem
‘Die Stem van Suid-Afrika' is a poem written in 1918 by CJ Langenhoven, one of the greatest Afrikaans writers and cultural leaders. The poem was later set to music and the lyrics speak of the beauty of South Africa and of devotion to making this country a better place. Die Stem only became the national anthem of the then Union of South Africa in 1957. The song is included in the FAK songbook and is generally seen as one of the many cultural treasures born from the Afrikaans language.
The problem is not the singing of Die Stem at an Afrikaans cultural gathering, but rather the double standards in force in our society.
AfriForum wishes to voice its concern over the fact that this song is branded by so-called liberal commentators as an expression of racism. The silence from the same small group of commentators about real racist songs like that of a rap group from the Western Cape that incites violence against Afrikaners and farmers and claims that white people are inherently evil because of their blood line, and Julius Malema's "shoot the boer" song, is ironic. On the contrary, these commentators not only failed to take a stand against these songs, they attacked AfriForum because we dared take a strong line against it.
Hofmeyr still has a strong following because his music resonates with thousands of South Africans and because a great number of Afrikaners have developed an aversion to the double standards in our society. This aversion is only strengthened by the double standards applied by these commentators.
Generalisation about Afrikaners
To proffer a controversial statement by one Afrikaner as something that is damaging to all Afrikaners is a further example of double standards. The former minister of women, children and persons with a disability, Lulu Xingwana, not long ago made the statement that Afrikaner men are paternalistic and prone to being violent because of their Calvinistic upbringing. But this statement was not applied to black people as a whole. If AfriForum had implied that Xingwana's statement reflects negatively on all black people, as is now said about Hofmeyr, those same commentators would definitely have accused AfriForum of racism. Why should it be different with Afrikaners?
Liberal values, freedom of expression and hate speech
The opinions of these liberal commentators brings the ideology of liberalism into discredit since liberalism in theory is built precisely on the principles of individual rights, tolerance and personal freedom. The well-known saying goes that liberals may vigorously disagree with each other, but that they must defend to the death the right of their opponents to express themselves as such. It however seems as if tolerance and personal freedom for these commentators only applies when it is in agreement with their own political viewpoints.
A healthy approach would be to respect the freedom to express themselves of those with whom we disagree, even if we find their viewpoint deplorable. If this person is however guilty of hate speech or incitement to violence, then the boundaries of freedom of speech as defined in South Africa have been overstepped and action should be taken against that person. AfriForum is constantly confronted with deplorable comments, but only acts against a person if that comment constitutes hate speech. The alegations that form the basis of the witch hunt do not comply with the elements of hate speech.
A bright future? AfriForum's approach
The best way to make this country a better place is to be proud of our multiple identities and to conduct reasonable and well-argued debates that can contribute to the problems of our country being tackled in a constructive way. AfriForum's positive contribution as a middle ground organisation speaks for itself.
The small group of commentators trying to label AfriForum as extremist is conveniently silent on the fact that actions by AfriForum such as taking on mismanagement in municipalities, water pollution, corruption and more is to the benefit of everyone in the country. They also omit to mention the assistance AfriForum recently gave the "black" Wallmansthal Communal Property Association against illegal land occupiers and that AfriForum has repeatedly expressed itself against all forms of racism, including racism committed by white people.
AfriForum will continue to make a positive contribution by taking fair but firm action where necessary, without allowing ourselves to be labeled. AfriForum however views the personal witch hunt by a small group of political commentators as contra democratic and out of keeping with the spirit of the South African Constitution.
Ernst Roets is deputy chief executive officer of AfriForum.
Source: www.afriforum.co.za
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
