EDITORIAL | Anti-Muslim abuse aimed at Yusuf Cassim should concern every South African

Yusuf Cassim’s appointment as deputy minister of higher education and training should have sparked a debate about student funding, the future of NSFAS and the quality of higher education.

Instead, sections of social media chose a darker path. Within hours of his appointment, Cassim became the target of anti-Muslim abuse, conspiracy theories and xenophobic rhetoric that questioned his place in government because of his faith.

That should concern every South African, regardless of political affiliation.

South Africa has never been immune to prejudice. We have battled racism, xenophobia, tribalism and intolerance in many forms. But overt Islamophobia has never occupied a meaningful place in our political discourse.

Muslims have, for generations, been woven into the country’s social, political and economic fabric. They have fought against apartheid, served in democratic governments, built businesses, led universities and enriched South African society without their religious identity becoming a point of national political contestation.

That is precisely why the attacks on Cassim matter.

They are not simply insults directed at one politician. They represent an attempt to import the toxic culture wars that have consumed parts of Europe and North America, where religious identity has increasingly become a political weapon. South Africa would be making a grave mistake by allowing those divisions to take hold here.

Once prejudice is legitimised against one religious community, it rarely stops there. History offers countless examples of societies where seemingly fringe bigotry eventually entered mainstream politics with devastating consequences.

Cassim’s first weeks in office have offered little reason for ideological outrage. His focus has been decidedly practical. He visited Unisa, listened to hundreds of students, confronted NSFAS over delayed allowances and unresolved appeals, and committed himself to making government more responsive.

Whether he succeeds is another matter entirely, and he should ultimately be judged by results rather than promises. But criticism of his performance should be rooted in policy, competence and delivery — not in his religion.

Democracy demands scrutiny of public officials. Ministers and deputy ministers are not beyond criticism. In fact, they should expect it. Yet there is a profound difference between holding a public servant accountable for their work and questioning whether they belong in public office because they are Muslim.

The danger is that social media normalises this behaviour. What begins as anonymous trolling quickly morphs into accepted political language.

Once prejudice is legitimised against one religious community, it rarely stops there. History offers countless examples of societies where seemingly fringe bigotry eventually entered mainstream politics with devastating consequences.

South Africa’s constitutional project has always rested on something more ambitious than mere tolerance. It is built on equal citizenship.

Public office is not reserved for people of a particular race, language or religion. It belongs to every South African who earns the confidence of voters or is appointed through constitutional processes.

That principle cannot become negotiable because outrage trends online.

Political leaders across the spectrum also have a responsibility. Silence in the face of religious hatred is not neutrality; it is acquiescence.

The same voices that rightly condemn racism, antisemitism and xenophobia should be equally unequivocal when anti-Muslim hatred surfaces. Human dignity cannot be defended selectively.

Cassim will have ample opportunity to prove whether he deserves the confidence placed in him.

Students will judge him by whether NSFAS becomes more efficient, whether allowances are paid on time, whether appeals are resolved and whether the government becomes more responsive. Those are the standards that matter.

South Africans should insist on robust debate about public policy. But they should reject, without hesitation, attempts to divide the country along religious lines.

Our democracy is strongest when ideas compete. It is weakened when identities become targets.