Here’s a controversial opinion that’s sure to ruffle some feathers, sent in by an independent writer. Feel free to comment.

The views expressed in this post are those of the authors and are not reflected by 2oceansvibe in any way, shape or form. 

_______________________________

RHODES MUST FALL?

To be a student. To be young again. To be infatuated – with yourself, with others, with an idea. With many ideas. To feel the swollen passion of righteous indignation. Infuriation. To believe you can change the world. To believe that you know better. Ah, yes. It may be growing increasingly distant but this furl of sentiments is familiar to me, as it is I’m sure to many of us, but as appealing, alluring even, as it may be, I’m happy to consign it to my past. Do I sound patronising? I don’t really care. Come argue with me against the merits of maturity and experience. The untempered vigour of youth is hit and miss, and recently, ongoing, we’re all being trapped in the midst of an avalanching, catastrophic miss.

I refer of course to the Rhodes Must Fall campaign. Students at the University of Cape Town (and elsewhere) are agitating for the destruction of the brooding statue of Cecil John Rhodes which resides on the main campus overlooking the rugby fields – a protest that has hobbled the university, and that has inflamed the country. Destroy the statue, leave the stature, remove the statue. Everyone has an opinion. It’s a debate in which subjectivity reigns like an erratic tyrant. Maybe, if I could be so bold, it’s time for another approach. A more balanced, transactional approach. I want to propose that we leave it to the students. Let it be their choice, entirely, 100%, but with a caveat. This choice would need to be framed. In the real world screaming children don’t just get their way unilaterally (imagine a society in which this is permitted?!?). The piper must be paid. Anyhow, before I elaborate, bear with me as I grind out some context.

The issue seems to have drawn itself up on the following lines: The campaigners consider the statue to be a symbol of the colonial past, in which black people were exploited, dispossessed, and marginalised, and that black students are reminded of this injustice every time that they see the statue; and further that’s it’s a symbol of an insufficiently transformed university. On the other side people are claiming that the statue is a symbol of the past, which, whether good or bad, is part of our heritage, and needs to be retained. There is not inconsiderable consensus on each side that the best solution is the middle ground – that the stature be removed and relocated.

Both parties though are missing the real point. The statue, and its placement on this particular campus, is not a symbol of colonialism, imperialism, or of our nation’s past per se, unless you’re determined to make it out to be. Rather, it’s there as a tribute to Rhodes’ bequeathal of the land on which it stands to the university. Can this be doubted? Would it otherwise be there? I don’t think so. Now, pay attention, because this is important. The statue may be more evocative because it is formed in the shape in his features and accompanied by some scripted puffery, but the land (and his other legacies for that matter) represent Rhodes every bit as much as the statue. To suggest that the statue be destroyed but to happily accept the land and the benefits that it brings is hypocritical at best. If the one is tainted, then so is the other, and so is Rhodes’ largesse in general.

Now I’ve heard it said in some quarters – including by a prominent political commentator – that the money that bought the land (and that funds the Rhodes and Mandela Rhodes scholarships) is illegitimate, and that it actually belongs to the people of South Africa. Do the people that spout it actually believe this garbage? It’s incredible to the point of being farcical. If there was ever an argument of convenience then this is it. You find the truth troublesome? No problem – just wish it away or discount it, I guess. We may not like it but Rhodes earned his wealth legally. Our court-of-public-opinion pronouncements certainly don’t change this fact. If we were able to stake a claim on any monies which we felt were ill-gotten, irrespective of the law, then we’d be heading on the fast road to anarchy. There’d be a lot of people in this country getting a little hot under the collar.

So, to my proposal then. Let’s let the students decide – present and future, because they’ll be the ones most affected. If the majority of the student body feels that the statue is undesirable, then it should be covered up – with an appropriate, aesthetically pleasing, meaningful structure of course. As a consequence (such a nagging inconvenience this idea of consequences…) the ownership of the land should then be returned to Rhodes’ trustees, who could, ostensibly, rent it to the university at market related prices. As further consequence, because someone needs to foot the bill, this rent would then be divided up amongst the dissenting students (those who vote against the statue), by way of a premium to their fees. This referendum could then be held on an annual basis, as the student body changes, and the statue can be covered or exposed accordingly. There we have it – a simple, pragmatic, real-world solution. You want something, invariably you have to pay for it.

I’m not a fan of Cecil John Rhodes, although I think I’m objective enough to acknowledge that he did make some material positive contributions to the country. I have no particular agenda. I have not a trace of Anglo-Saxon ancestry – and I mention it only in case you’re one of those who believe this type of thing might play a part in my reasoning. I do know however that nothing in life comes for free. Everything has a cost. This is the type of mature realisation that you soon make as an adult. It is reality. If you want to sit at the table – then have the courtesy, the integrity, the good sense to acknowledge the host, however begrudgingly. Otherwise pay for your own lunch.

– Patrick Leclezio

________________________________________

The views expressed in this post are those of the authors and are not reflected by 2oceansvibe in any way, shape or form. 

We’d love to hear your thoughts. Is Patrick on the money? Or is he misinformed?