Ashamed to be South African today
Watching the news reports about Burma (now called Myanmar by the military junta) in the last couple of days made me ashamed to be a citizen of a country that voted, six months ago, against a UN Security Council resolution that would have:
…urged the Government of Myanmar to release all political prisoners and make tangible progress towards national reconciliation, leading to genuine democratic transition; It called on the Government of Myanmar to cease military attacks against civilian in ethnic minority regions and in particular to put an end to the associated human rights and humanitarian law violations against persons belonging to ethnic nationalities, including widespread rape and other forms of sexual violence carried out by members of the armed forces.
Why did South Africa do this? Because of some procedural rubbish about which of the damn Useless Natterers committees could “better handle” the matter. Here you go, folks. Here’s how the matter is “better handled”:
Ask this chap, he’ll tell you:
I wonder, sometimes, why on earth South Africans rose up against an oppressive regime. Why they faced ostracism, teargas, bullets or torture in their demand for freedom and democracy. Have we forgotten so soon what it was all about? How can South Africa, of all countries, hide behind procedural technicalities in their craven demurral from even token pressure on the violent oppressors of Burma?
These are stains not on the pavement, but on our national character:
It makes me sick.
(Images courtesy of Ko Htike, a Burmese blogger who deserves a medal.)
Thumbs up.
I am with you on this one.
The South African government’s has not lived up to expectations on this one. But there are more powerful voices, institutions (private forms) that probably have more clout on this.
One of these is Gary Player, builder of golf estates for generals (where tourists — another group with clout, dollars and pounds — from mainly the UK, Australia and China ‘relax’ and play a few rounds).
I hope Mandela distances himself from Player’s tournament.
In general though I am not surprised that there’s a connection between Player, a great golfer (and there’s no debate about his sporting prowess), and the Burmese dictatorship.
This kind of behavior on Player’s part is not new. He has had a habit, despite his current “friendship” with Nelson Mandela and identifying as a South African ‘liberal,’ of siding with repressive regimes.
His relationship to the former apartheid government has been detailed more recently in the country’s mainstream media. This include him famously defending apartheid in 1968, to a New Yorker writer, suggesting: ‘[We are] maligned, misunderstood, pilloried by people who can tell us how to order our affairs from a range of 6 000 miles without ever coming down to South Africa and seeing for themselves and trying to understand.’
Separately Player wrote (in a book about golf): ‘… I must say now, and clearly, that I am of the South Africa of Verwoerd and apartheid.’
Player also actively participated in advertising campaigns for the official tourism bureau, SATOUR. University of Stellenbosch historian Albert Grundlingh has written about SATOUR’s wider political impact: ‘The publicity material of Satour during the 1960s consisted partly of brochures and posters depicting the ubiquitous imagery of sun, sea and wildlife. These portrayals were supplemented by material focusing on sport: brochures depicted the world-renowned golfer, Gary Player, teeing off for an American audience and a scene from a rugby match aimed at an Australasian market. Looking at these brochures from the vantage point of 2006, it is the silences that speak the loudest; black people did not make a guest appearance, nor did they even appear as a kind of animated geographical background. Clearly, to the prospective tourist, South Africa had to appear as an invitingly outdoor, exclusively white country with a consuming interest in sporting matters.’
But perhaps the best example of Player’s dubious politics, is an incident recounted by the poet Jeremy Cronin when after his British Open win, Player suggested to an interviewer that South Africa’s sporting achievements are impressive indeed considering ‘… we have only three million people.’
It wasn’t golf then. And it isn’t now.
That last comment is ludicrous. So Gary Player is more influential than the South African government? I don’t think so. So Gary Player is a builder of golf-courses for generals? I don’t think so. He builds many golf courses all over the world for many different clients. If one of the golf courses that he built 5 years ago is currently being used by bad guys, is that his fault? Remember also that 5 years ago the oppression in Burma wasn’t as apparent. Remember also that even now, South Africa and many other countries have no sanctions against Burma, and even refused to support resolutions in the UN against the junta in Burma.
In addition, it is a bit unfair to assassinate a person’s character based on 3 comments made 40 years ago, none of which are whole-heartedly supportive of apartheid, none of which are presented in their proper context, about none of which Gary Player has been asked to explain his meaning.
Sorry Monbiot and Johnson, your opinions are one-sided and you haven’t made the effort to comment fairly on this issue. One example of this is the quote from Jeremy Cronin, which is firstly hearsay, and secondly may well not mean anything bad.
He might have meant (or indeed actually said) 30 million. He might have meant that only the 3 million white South Africans have the opportunity to play golf, and as such it is amazing that SA golfers had done so well. Which is a statement of fact … why is it suddenly a racist comment? People don’t always manage to explain precisely what they mean, especially in interviews and off the cuff remarks.
Anyway, my 2 cents. Read the “Gary Player in the rough” article for a balanced opinion on the matter!
Just another quick point:
Gary Player is now supposedly an evil racist because he worked for SATOUR. SATOUR was South Africa’s tourism bureau, and as one of the predominant sportsmen in the country, he was used in advertising to promote tourism to South Africa. The fact that SATOUR painted a distorted picture of South Africa has nothing to do with Gary Player. Are you blaming the model because you don’t like the designers clothes?
In the 1960s, John Vorster had him for a golf pal. Around 1970 he publicly condemned white boys going overseas after matric to avoid compulsory military service to support Apartheid. A few years later, his son Mark, was spirited away to the USA when he finished school to avoid this service. He also backed the establishment of the National Party English newspaper, The Citizen, in 1976 three months after the Soweto uprisings. What a hypocrite. He is in the same category as Cliff Saunders. Anyone with his money can be a great philanthropist.
Sorry, Theleoafrica, Gary Player did a lot more than make the odd, inappropiate comment.
As it has been said many times before, it is hard to find any white person who admits to voting for the National Party these days, but at least they keep their dirty secrets to themselves. But Player takes the cake. He has reinvented himself as Nelson Mandela’s big buddy and a fighter for human rights. Am I the only person in South Africa who remembers Player’s support and defence of the apartheid regime? I was only a teenager, but well remember my father’s anger towards Player.
If he was not a card carrying member of the National Party, he sure acted like one. He defended what was called “separate development” to the outside world on numerous occasions. He didn’t keep quiet about the regime’s polices, he actively defended them. (It is fortunate for Player that you would have to search microfilm of the newspapers to find the stories.)
He was a regular golfing partner with Nat leaders, iincluding the Minister of Justice and later Prime Minister BJ Vorster. Vorster, as Justice Minister, was responsible for some of the most draconian detention laws such as the 90 and 180 day detention without trial.
The sad part of this is that if Player had the beliefs then that he now claims to have now, he could have, with his high profile in the world, put the spotlight and real pressure on the apartheid regime.
“A solid record of campaigning for democracy” and “support for human rights”! Give me a break, Player.
It is not that he may have changed his views, I hope he has honestly done that. But he should not try to bury his past under a heap of steaming bulll****.
Has anyone ever heard him saying he was wrong for supporting apartheid? Because after his very public support for many years, he owes the black people of this country an apology before he can get on with his new life as a campaigner for democracy and human rights.
A side note: For many years, there was a regular letter writer to the Sunday Times and other newspapers who made it his mission not to let Player get away with his past. He died many years ago. But I am sure he is dancing tonight as Player gets a little bit of come upperance.
Thanks for the comment Mike. Just one disagreement. I don’t think Player is a hypocrite. In fact, what I tried to point out in my original post (see above and reproduced on my blog http://theleoafricanus.blogspot.com) is that Player is consistent.
Sadly Ivo, unable to counter my arguments and the facts, had to revert to misrepresentation: he attributed to me things I did not even write so as to make me look ridiculous (that I wanted Player banned) and then gave his post a ridiculous title (I suppose he was trying to be ironic) and rubbish me.
As usual it is not rugby.
Thank you all for your comments, and sorry for not responding earlier. I’ve been cloistered in a conference for the past two days, and have had no time and limited access — enough only to approve comments from new posters.
I’d just like to add a brief note for now, since I’m knackered, and the issue demands a more thoughtful, reasoned response.
I didn’t intend to misrepresent your comment, Leo Africanus. I’m sorry if I did. I also don’t see how I “rubbished” you. Your suggestion that Nelson Mandela distance himself from the golf tournament hosted by Gary Player sounded to me like support for the public statement Desmond Tutu made, which was phrased pretty much the same, and was reported as a call to boycott Gary Player. (I never used the word “banned”, as you suggest.) Tutu’s call was in turn based on the George Monbiot piece. As it happened, Mandela apparently responded by declining to invite the would-be host “in any specific capacity”.
I’ll stand by the posts I made to date (here and here), namely that I feel Player is being unfairly treated in this case. It’s important to note that this does not constitute a defence of Player’s alleged support of Apartheid, nor of his current political views and behaviour. I thought I’d made that clear. I’ll respond more fully, and elaborate or clarify where necessary, in a post tomorrow.
Support Bob Glenister (Hugh) now!!! Mr Glenister is serious about his coming court case against government to prevent them from disbanding the scorpions. Please help him to succeed in this process: All you have to do is to sms the words “scorpions yes” to 35052 and for every sms received a donation is made towards his legal costs. You can also mail the words: “Scorpions Yes” to scorpions@savare.co.za or fax the same to 0880218521388. Please take a few minutes of your time and let us all stand together and help this very brave man.
Ondersteun Bob Glenister (Hugh) nou! Mnr Glenister is regtig ernstig om die ontbinding van die skerpioene te stuit. ‘n Donasie word geskenk aan Mnr Glenister vir elke sms wat ontvang word om hom te help met sy regskostes. Al wat julle moet doen is om te sms: “scorpions yes” na 35052 of dieselfde te e-pos na scorpions@savare.co.za of te faks na 0880218521388. Kom ons staan saam en maak regtig ‘n verskil