The current debate around the location and relevance of apartheid and other oppressive figures from our history, standing proud in places of prominence 21 years later, rages on.
It has ripped open many old wounds and highlighted some of the divides around ideology and history that still exist in our society, but this debate is not a new one.
The ANC was the first to bring this issue to the table as early as 1994. While I was a member of parliament in our fledgling democracy I made my maiden speech to the plenary on this very topic.
The result was the removal of a number of paintings and brass busts of apartheid leaders from the property of parliament.
The speech and the issues contained in it are as relevant today as it was in 1994 and is a conversation that needs to continue beyond the parliamentary precinct.
I repeat in this column what I said that day as I addressed parliament with the late president Nelson Mandela present.
Less than a week ago (this was in 1994), I entered the portals of this grandiose and imposing chamber, the Senate. I entered it with a sense of trepidation, expectation and happiness.
As I entered the imposing and opulent corridors I came across a few gentlemen whom I had read about, but not met. These gentlemen were symbols of oppression and repression and they were cast in stone. So too were their policies.
The gentlemen concerned looked at me very sternly. I smiled, but they refused to respond. They persisted in gazing at me sternly. I felt something stirring within my soul. I wondered whether these relics of apartheid, these symbols of oppression, ought to continue to decorate the corridors in a new society where we should all be free and treated fairly.
I believe that we have reached a stage in our development and evolution in terms of which we should rid this society, this institution and this nation of any symbol which represents oppression, injustice and unfairness to its people.
I looked at the gentleman named Verwoerd and what stirred in my memory was a thought which he had expressed. That thought was implemented in terms of his policy, which was rigid, and, as I said earlier, cast in stone.
The thought he expressed was that the Afrikaner's right to empowerment must be protected from the competition it would face from the non-whites. This was a policy that was initiated by the previous government, and I do believe that many people suffered because of this policy.
Evidence of the implementation of this unfair, unjust and inequitable process is reflected in the economic structure of our society. The black community represents 86% of the population. But only 3% of all executive, managerial or responsible decision-making positions are filled by black people.
For this reason the president of the Republic indicated in his address that we should look at the empowerment of black people.
We should give serious consideration to this empowerment in such a way that we do not experience a sense of tokenism or window-dressing as regards the promotion and the enhancement of this development. Our society should reflect the demographics of this nation, both politically and economically.
The sentiments I shared then in 1994 are relevant now. The ANC dealt with these matters of symbols at that time in a respectful manner, perhaps quietly understanding the emotional attachment by some to these "villains" of our past and what they represent to different people.
It's a tolerant consultative approach that needs to take place, respect for each other as South Africans and determining who we are and how we want to be identified as a nation without fuelling racism and self-imposed segregation.
lSurty is deputy minister of basic education; he is a lawyer by profession and has served in the ANC government in a number of different capacities since 1994
South Africa must get rid of symbols of oppression
The current debate around the location and relevance of apartheid and other oppressive figures from our history, standing proud in places of prominence 21 years later, rages on.
It has ripped open many old wounds and highlighted some of the divides around ideology and history that still exist in our society, but this debate is not a new one.
The ANC was the first to bring this issue to the table as early as 1994. While I was a member of parliament in our fledgling democracy I made my maiden speech to the plenary on this very topic.
The result was the removal of a number of paintings and brass busts of apartheid leaders from the property of parliament.
The speech and the issues contained in it are as relevant today as it was in 1994 and is a conversation that needs to continue beyond the parliamentary precinct.
I repeat in this column what I said that day as I addressed parliament with the late president Nelson Mandela present.
Less than a week ago (this was in 1994), I entered the portals of this grandiose and imposing chamber, the Senate. I entered it with a sense of trepidation, expectation and happiness.
As I entered the imposing and opulent corridors I came across a few gentlemen whom I had read about, but not met. These gentlemen were symbols of oppression and repression and they were cast in stone. So too were their policies.
The gentlemen concerned looked at me very sternly. I smiled, but they refused to respond. They persisted in gazing at me sternly. I felt something stirring within my soul. I wondered whether these relics of apartheid, these symbols of oppression, ought to continue to decorate the corridors in a new society where we should all be free and treated fairly.
I believe that we have reached a stage in our development and evolution in terms of which we should rid this society, this institution and this nation of any symbol which represents oppression, injustice and unfairness to its people.
I looked at the gentleman named Verwoerd and what stirred in my memory was a thought which he had expressed. That thought was implemented in terms of his policy, which was rigid, and, as I said earlier, cast in stone.
The thought he expressed was that the Afrikaner's right to empowerment must be protected from the competition it would face from the non-whites. This was a policy that was initiated by the previous government, and I do believe that many people suffered because of this policy.
Evidence of the implementation of this unfair, unjust and inequitable process is reflected in the economic structure of our society. The black community represents 86% of the population. But only 3% of all executive, managerial or responsible decision-making positions are filled by black people.
For this reason the president of the Republic indicated in his address that we should look at the empowerment of black people.
We should give serious consideration to this empowerment in such a way that we do not experience a sense of tokenism or window-dressing as regards the promotion and the enhancement of this development. Our society should reflect the demographics of this nation, both politically and economically.
The sentiments I shared then in 1994 are relevant now. The ANC dealt with these matters of symbols at that time in a respectful manner, perhaps quietly understanding the emotional attachment by some to these "villains" of our past and what they represent to different people.
It's a tolerant consultative approach that needs to take place, respect for each other as South Africans and determining who we are and how we want to be identified as a nation without fuelling racism and self-imposed segregation.
lSurty is deputy minister of basic education; he is a lawyer by profession and has served in the ANC government in a number of different capacities since 1994
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending
Latest Videos