EDITORIAL | How low can smirking Steenhuisen go?

Civil rights legend Dr Martin Luther King Jr’s words that “the ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people but the silence over that by the good people” is an apt summary of the latest racist and sexist threads stitched into our country’s blanket of shame. 

Are we surprised that “shock jock” Gareth Cliff rudely shut down guest commentator, One South Africa Movement spokesperson Mudzuli Rakhivhane, when he astonishingly told her: “Your personal experiences are completely anecdotal and unimportant to all of us, sorry,” on his show The Burning Platform? 

Infuriated yes, but not shocked given Cliff’s history.

The relevance of the quote, however, is pertinent to fellow guest speaker DA leader John Steenhuisen, whose silence in Cliff’s tirade, amounting to ganging up against Rakhivhane, spoke volumes.

While Steenhuisen could be seen as “good people” given that his party projects itself as an alternative to the corrupt ANC, his actions and words — or lack thereof — countered more than a month’s worth of town hall campaigning. 

He had a smirk pasted on his face and, like a schoolyard spectator relishing a fight on the playground, made no attempt to counter Cliff's behaviour, instead egging on the exchange by shouting: “Service delivery, service delivery.”

In a defensive response to questions about his reaction, Steenhuisen deflected his complicity by saying that when the focus is on “policing people's facial expressions, I really think we are starting to hit a new low in SA”. 

Fresh from the party’s failed race-card poster-war in Phoenix, where it tried to drum up support from the Indian community, Steenhuisen showed his privileged hand and burned his chance when he had a platform to speak out about sexism and racism. 

When pressed about Cliff’s comment Steenhuisen said: “I wasn’t there to talk about what they were talking about, and I was there to talk about service delivery. I think we have reached a new low in SA where we are now blaming another panellist for an interaction that happened between two completely separate individuals.”

No, Mr Steenhuisen, it seems you have a hit a new low.

Fresh from the party’s failed race card poster-war in Phoenix, where it tried to drum up support from the Indian community, Steenhuisen showed his privileged hand and burned his chance when he had a platform to speak out about sexism and racism. 

The problem with the exchange — apart from the fact that Cliff deemed Rakhivhane’s experiences of systemic racism unimportant — is that both white men bearing down on one black women and negating the link between racism and local government elections is patently patriarchal, patronising and sexist.

Her dismissal is exactly what happens to many women in this country, who are forced to shrink themselves in the loudly expressed, misogynistic opinions of the men in power.

And there are many others who keep quiet while this happens. 

There are those who believe it is akin to cancel culture to say that the voices of white men  such as Cliff shouldn’t be heard.

Perhaps. Robust and frank discourse is definitely what is needed in SA, but you can’t be the judge and the jury. 

When you fail to realise that race permeates every pore of our being in contemporary SA, you will not understand why approaches like Cliff’s and especially Steenhuisen’s are almost comically tragic. 

The mayors and councillors we are voting into power on November 1 are responsible for everything from education and sanitation to roads, parks and recreation and community centres, all tools that were weaponised during apartheid’s spatial planning strategy to deliver blows against the disenfranchised.

So while democracy prevails so does the legacy, directly on our local government.

That means when millions go to the polls next week, they should vote for candidates who are empathetic to our lived experiences and call out bullying, sexism and racism not only when the camera is rolling.