Reviewed by Amanda Xulu
In ‘Foreign Natives’ to ‘Native Foreigners’
Michael Neocosmos brilliantly uncovers the perplexing xenophobic attitudes that
seem to characterise South African society. Xenophobia in South Africa is a
problematic occurrence as one can see it overtly through institutionalised
xenophobia practiced by the state and through covert xenophobia that can be
seen in regular people’s interactions with people that are not South African.
This book was a very interesting (and exciting) read for me because of
Neocosmos’ brilliant way of unpacking the myths that some people use as
justifications for the xenophobic attitudes and actions. Neocosmos ultimately
proves that xenophobia in South Africa is not only on the ground, but is
continuously institutionalised by the current post-apartheid government, which
inherited its attitudes from the previous apartheid regime.
Neocosmos argues that South African xenophobia
is “an absence of theory and absence of politics (Neocosmos, 2010: 15) while
also being an absence of humanity because it is largely ruled by an irrational
hatred of people that do not fall under a subjectively particular understanding
of what it means to be a South African citizen. This is reminiscent of the
arguments put forth by Jean-Paul Sartre in Anti-Semite
and the Jew, and in Frantz Fanon’s Black Skin, White Masks, where the
concepts of anti-Semitism and racism are discussed as being irrational thought
(or rather a lack of thought) processes which are influenced by overtly biased
concepts of race. In my reading of From
‘Foreign Natives’ to ‘Native Foreigners’, I was struck by a deep sense of
shame that South Africans are remorselessly subjecting people from other
African countries to such cruel and senseless behaviour, which manifested
itself most pertinently in the 2008 Xenophobic attacks around the country. This
behaviour is perhaps more embarrassing when one thinks of the role that many
African states played in aiding the fight for liberation from the apartheid
regime. Countries like, Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe served as
guerrilla training bases for many UmKhonto we Sizwe and Poqo cadres who were
either exiled from South Africa by the apartheid state or were sent abroad to
train militarily in order to prepare for violent struggle. Many of these
African countries played an extremely vocal role in leading international
pressure against the apartheid government. Having said this, it is extremely
disheartening to know that many South Africans have all but forgotten this role
but have instead chosen to emulate many attitudes that resonate with some of
the apartheid government’s beliefs.
Neocosmos states that xenophobia in South
African manifests itself in three ways: the xenophobic, hegemonic rhetoric that
is employed by the states; the laughable idea of South African exceptionalism
and the idea of South African citizenship being dependent on ‘indigeneity’
(Neocosmos, 2010).
The state’s role in institutionalising the
idea of a particular ‘South African citizen’ has contributed significantly to
xenophobia in this country. Neocosmos argues that this is because the state has
adopted the hostile nature of the apartheid state to anyone/thing that is
considered to be ‘different’, despite the claims of possessing the most
‘progressive’ constitution in the world. The government and politicians often
employ a paranoid and hysterical rhetoric that often casts those who fall
‘outside’ the state’s understanding of what a ‘South African’ citizen is
(Neocosmos, 2010: 6). The South African state has constructed an idea of the
‘South African citizen’ which is largely individualistic and does not take
calls for the recognition of difference well. Those who strive for rights
outside of the understood idea of the ‘South African’ are immediately accused
of attempting to undermine the unity of the country. I would argue that this is
in line with a more cynical understanding of the nation-building exercise that
was “Rainbow Nation”, where people are told to acknowledge their unique
cultures and differences as being special, but to also hold these second to the
idea of being a South African citizen. Anyone who does not comply with the
hegemonic idea of what it means to be a South African is seemingly thought of
as not South African ‘enough’. I recall this to a conversation I had with a
friend on Heritage Day, when he remarked to me that anyone who does not braai
is ‘not South African enough’. Foolish, I know. Neocosmos states this superbly when he says: “Clearly
the process of nation building (whether implicit or explicit) is not simply
about the creation of national unity around a common political project; it is
also about demarcating that unity from others – from foreigners (Neocosmos,
2010: 77).
One of
Neocosmos’ most important points to note is that xenophobia is not only limited
to it being institutionalised by the state; the media plays a large role in
perpetuating stereotypes that might inflate xenophobic sentiments that some
South Africans might hold. This is particularly dangerous because of the
media’s omnipresence, as one cannot escape a day without being exposed to the
news, movies, radio etc. From this, one can obviously make the conclusion that
the media wields a considerate amount of power and has the ability to broadcast
what it sees as fit. In cases like Orientalism, which is another form of racism
and xenophobia, people that are from the “East” (sic) are portrayed in a number of derogatory stereotypes that at
most times do not correlate to how people actually are. This is similar in
South African media, where sensationalised stereotypes are used for whole
population groups. One still sees this in films where all Nigerians are depicted as drug war-lords, where all Somalis are pirates and how South
Africans often play a heroic role in conflicts in “Africa” (Blood Diamond is a horrible example of
this). This unsubstantiated propaganda can be used for nefarious means as was
seen in the 2008 xenophobic attacks, where publications like the
(not-very-credible) Daily Sun were
guilty of perpetuating the violence and xenophobic sentiment with articles that
talked of “immigrants stealing jobs” and “using muti against South African
people”.
I have
dealt very little with the text, but it cannot be doubted that Neocosmos’ text
plays a crucial role towards establishing an intellectual discussion about the
deeply problematic presence of xenophobia in South Africa.
Bibliography:
Neocosmos, M., 2011. From
‘Foreign Natives’ to ‘Native Foreigners’: Explaining Xenophobia in
Post-apartheid South Africa. CODESRIA: Dakar.
