an advanced state of human society, in which a high level of culture, science, industry, and government has been reached.
Another thing it could mean is:
any type of culture, society, etc., of a specific place, time, or group:
Greek civilization.
I pondered these two meanings after reading of ANC supporters disturbing the peace at a memorial on Human Rights Day commemorating the Langa Massacre. Mayor Athol Trollip, of the DA party, appears to have merely stood by weakly, and done nothing to restore order at his event. I say his event, because as mayor he is responsible for events such as these. In a 4th Generation Warfare world, he lost this battle decisively.
In what ways did he lose? As a representative of the state, he failed to maintain order, which is the state's raison d'être. As a leader, he failed to project strength and instead appeared weak and cowardly. As an opposition to the majority party, his side was shouted down and drowned out.
How could he have done better? Now we come to the interesting part. First, we look at some important facts about the event as it happened, based on the Herald Live article and the embedded video:
- The ANC used posters with ANC logos to get a lot of supporters to attend.
- The ANC used government, not party, money to pay for the posters.
- There was little, or even no, sign of security and police presence.
- All attendees, ANC and DA, appear to have been poor, non-white township dwellers, presumably from Langa itself.
- Trollip is an old white guy, who wore a button-down shirt and a suit jacket.
Trollip could have done something beforehand to prevent the chaos. He could have done something at the time to end the chaos. He can do something after the fact to turn defeat into victory.
Before the event, Trollip could have charged an entrance fee for the event. Sure, everyone in the area is impoverished. But a nominal fee tends to keep out the worst of the riff-raff, and donating the funds to a worthy cause eliminates the "greedy white guy" narrative. And if the ANC used municipal funds to pay for posters, the DA could have at least sponsored DA attendees with DA party funds to cover their entrance fee.
Trollip could also have played the same game as the ANC, putting up posters with DA logos for the event, but kept the moral high ground by using party funds instead of municipal funds to pay for them. It is counter-productive to stick to rules of decency and fair play when your opponent fights dirty. Especially when your opponent is also the referee, as is the ANC who control the national and provincial governments. When they go low, don't stand up straight and take the punch to the groin. Fight fire with fire, and pack the audience with your own people.
During the event, Trollip could have embraced the Hama model: Swift and overwhelming force to remove the threat and restore order before anyone has time to complain about the vigour of your response. Once he knew there would be a lot of opposition attendees, he should have made sure he had enough security or police to maintain order. And when the disturbance started, said men should have swiftly removed the troublemakers, preferably to be charged with whatever the South African government calls disturbing the peace. The earlier and faster this is done, the more effective it is. Removing the instigators immediately, and in handcuffs, sends a signal to the followers of the consequences. A somewhat more civilised (first definition above) version of the Israeli method of kneecapping riot leaders with a suppressed .22.
If Trollip didn't want to maintain order, but instead win the battle of recreational rioters, then he needed to embrace a different civilisation (second definition above). Ditch the upper class Western clothing and dress like your audience. Appearances count, and he definitely didn't fit in - his DA supporters looked like the ANC supporters, except in different colours, while Trollip looked like a friendless nerd. Get down in the trenches and fight: Instead of calling for order and being polite with "comrades", match their style. Tell them to "voetsek". Call them names. Speak as though he was one of the people, not the outsider he obviously is. Or at least have a deputy who can do so convincingly, since by his physiognomy I doubt Trollip is capable. This would have been more feasible if the DA had packed the audience with their own supporters beforehand.
Appearing weak as he did has a downside. Most people respect strength more than weakness, especially in non-white nations. But most people also feel sympathy for someone being bullied by overwhelming force. If the crowd feels you have a fair chance, then you must appear strong and win the physical conflict. But if they feel you are faced by insurmountable odds, then losing physically makes the opposition seem immoral. If Trollip wanted to not win the physical conflict and yet win the moral conflict, he needed to not stand on the stage watching the chaos, and instead put some skin in the game. Wade into the crowd and engage with the recreational rioters. It doesn't matter what he said, because the goal is not to calm them down. While calming them down would have won the moral and physical conflict, it's a practically impossible goal. His goal is to appear to be a brave man standing alone against an angry and violent crowd. If he comes out of it bleeding and bruised, so much the better. The optics of him standing up to bullies garners sympathy, and the moral high ground. But he has to be willing to take the punishment and pain. Again, his physiognomy makes that unlikely.
After the event, Trollip could have used the event for publicity in his favour. There is a narrative waiting there for him to seize it: ANC chair throwers disrupt peaceful DA memorial; ANC violence mars DA's respectful commemoration. Now is the time for him to go on the offensive in the media, instead of saying he won't respond to "nonsense". His non-engagement with the media leaves the narrative in the hands of the ANC, as seen by the plethora of ANC quotes in the Herald Live article, and makes him look like a snooty little wussy. Or something that rhymes with that. It's weak, and it lowers respect for him and his party. YouTube should be filled with videos of the chaos, and audio of the DA's narrative.
He could also play up the corruption and political interference aspects. If the ANC used municipal funds inappropriately, charge them criminally and sue them personally. If the police weren't there because of instructions from above, cause a ruckus about politically motivated chaos and anarcho-tyranny. Sue the ANC as a party for their disruption and any injuries. Capitalise on the existing preconceptions of the ANC as corrupt and the police as both incompetent and corrupt.
But perhaps the DA's biggest problem throughout all of this is their confusion over their own identity. Are they a party who wants to control the entire country, or are they a party who wants to espouse Western values of democracy and liberty and order and civilisation (first definition above). Because the two are mutually exclusive. With an 80% Bantu population, you can't win the country without embracing large aspects of Bantu civilisation(s). And that civilisation is African, not Western, as Huntington observed.
As I've previously said, the various nations of South Africa need to separate. They are not compatible. This does not mean that one is better than the other, for their civilisations evolved along with their people to be appropriate to their conditions. Let the Bantu have the land they won from the Khoisan by conquest, only leave the rest of it to those who want a Western civilisation.
No comments:
Post a Comment