Mandela and Rhodes = true?

A few hours ago a colleague in Cape Town and I spoke over the phone. He alerted me to the situation in Cape Town and at the UCT in particular regarding the discussion about whether or not the Rhodes statue should remain at the centre of the UCT. See one of my blog posts about this conflict.

It goes without saying that this is a much bigger issue than just concerning a single statue. Hence students and staff at the Rhodes University have also raised concerns. Protesters at the UKZN have defaced another statue, George V. I have also published a blog post about that.

And now discussions are being held around the Mandela Rhodes Foundation and its colonial legacy.

My colleague in Cape Town made it clear to me that academics question the role of Mandela himself. Was it appropriate of him, to link his name with the name of Rhodes, taking into account the values that Rhodes stood for?

I google Rhodes and Mandela and find two debate articles in Mail and Guardian where  Judy Sikuza, programme director of the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, tries to explain how this dichotomy or juxtaposition can be reconciled. I am not totally convinced.

The other debate article is written by Ntombizikhona Valela, a masters’ student in the history department at Rhodes University’s and also a member of the Black Student Movement. She gives the information that there have been debates around changing Rhodes University’s name since the 1990s - in particular since 1994.

Without really revealing her own standpoint she makes it clear that Rhodes University will face huge problems if they don’t listen to the demands from the students:

But, with the emergence of a new kind of student in a different political moment in which young people nationwide are challenging the notion of the rainbow nation and whether we can truly say we are in a post-apartheid era, it remains to be seen whether Rhodes’s final fortress will stand.

My colleague from Cape Town said earlier this morning, young South African feel that Mandela needs to be de-iconized.

We are in for interesting times in the country.

Must Rhodes fall?

John Cecil Rhodes was born in 1853, became rich from diamonds, British Prime Minister in the Cape and died, before his 50^th birthday, in 1902.

'Spes bona' means 'Good hope'.

After him two countries were named: North and South Rhodesia. Today Zambia and Zimbabwe. In South Africa one of the more prestigious universities is named after him: Rhodes University in Grahamstown. At the University of Cape Town (UCT), a statue of Rhodes I centrally placed.

Especially the statue at UCT is now causing debate and protests. 300 students and staff members have embarked on an overnight sit-in. The protest has also spread to Rhodes University.

Pietermaritzburg is quite far from both Cape Town and Grahamstown but through different internet sources I get some information. First of all it seems to me that the two universities are dealing with the matter in an open and democratic way. On the website of UCT a number of links refer to this conflict. The same at the Rhodes University website.

According to the UCT website, the Vice Rector, Max Price, wants the statue to be moved, not removed. I am not sure if this will be enough for students and staff.

On facebook, there is a community called: Rhodes must fall, with the explanation:

A collective student, staff and worker movement mobilising for direct action against the institutional racism of UCT.

Julius Malema, EFF, is also taking part in the protest and offers the support of the EFF to remove the statue of Rhodes, writes the Mail and Guardian. But he sees it as part of a greater war on Cape Town’s ‘apartheid regime’.

I also read in the Eyewitness News, that the ANC youth league is behind the protest.

It is not easy to know what is going on here. But one thing is for sure: the statue is just the tip of an iceberg.

Anyway, I like the way the academic world seems to deal with in in an open and transparent manner. I hope my analysis is correct. To me it a ‘good hope’.