FOR WORLD SOCIALISM |
In terms of wealth distribution, South Africa is the second
most unequal society in the world. The gap between those who have, and those
who don’t is staggering, and it stands in the way of a widespread sense of
unity. The small green identity document that signals South African citizenship
is no guarantor of belonging when one out of four citizens are jobless.
With every outbreak of xenophobic violence in South Africa,
the refrain is the same: ‘The kwerekwere are stealing our jobs’ The xenophobic
populism was reflected in statements by the ruling party, the ANC. Nomvula Mokonyane, the Minister of Water and Sanitation,
commented on Facebook that in Kagiso, Gauteng province “almost every second
outlet (spaza) or even former general dealer shops are run by people of Somali or
Pakistan origin… I am not xenophobic fellow comrades and friends but this is a
recipe for disaster”.
Small Business Development Minister Lindiwe Zulu has also
said that “foreigners need to understand that they are here as a courtesy and
our priority is to the people of this country first and foremost… They cannot
barricade themselves in and not share their practices with local business
owners”.
“The idea that people are here ‘stealing’ jobs and that they
don’t have a right to be here needs to be corrected,” says Dr Zaheera Jinnah,
an anthropologist and researcher at the African Centre for Migration and
Society (ACMS) at Wits University. Jinnah said that there were misconceptions
about the size of the international migrant community in South Africa: “There
is a disconnect between perception and reality largely because there hasn’t been
data available until now. A lot of what has been said and reproduced is based
on hearsay and anecdotal evidence or myths.”
The Migrating for Work Research Consortium (MiWORC), an
organisation that examines migration and its impact on the South African labour
market, released two studies last year. They found that 82% of the working
population aged between 15 and 64 were “non-migrants”, 14% were “domestic migrants”
who had moved between provinces in the past five years and just 4% could be
classed as “international migrants”. With an official working population of
33,017,579 people, this means that around 1.2 million of them were
international migrants. A racial breakdown of the statistics reveals that 79%
of international migrants were African, 17% were white and around three percent
were Indian or Asian.
The research consortium also found that Gauteng province,
which contains Johannesburg, had the highest proportion of foreign-born
workers, with around 8% of the working population having been born in another
country. Limpopo and Mpumalanga had the next highest proportion of international
migrants at 4%, followed by North West (3%), the Western Cape (3%), Free State
(2%), Northern Cape (1%), Eastern Cape (1%) and KwaZulu-Natal (1%).
According to the MiWORC data , international migrants in
South Africa have much lower unemployment rates than others. This is unusual.
In most other countries, international migrants tend to have higher
unemployment rates than locals.
South Africa’s unemployment data shows that 26.16% of
“non-migrants” are unemployed and 32.51% of “domestic migrants” are unemployed.
By comparison, only 14.68% of international migrants are unemployed. But while
international migrants are less likely to be unemployed, most find themselves
in positions of unstable, “precarious employment”, unable to access benefits or
formal work contracts. International migrants in South Africa are more likely
to take jobs that locals are not willing to do, or find work in the informal
sector. According to the MiWORC research, 32.65% of international migrants are
employed in the informal sector in South Africa compared to 16.57% of
“non-migrants” and 17.97% of “domestic migrants”. The studies suggest this is
because the informal sector offers the lowest entry cost into the labour
market. The majority of international migrants also come from African countries
which have large informal sectors. According to the research, international
migrants are far more likely to run their own businesses. Eleven percent are
“employers” and 21% are classed as “self-employed”. By comparison, only 5% of
non-migrants and domestic migrants were employers, and only 9% of non-migrants
and 7% of domestic migrants were self-employed.
Late last year, the Gauteng City-Region Observatory – a
collaborative project between Wits University, the University of Johannesburg and
the provincial government – conducted a limited survey of the informal sector
in Johannesburg. Dr Sally Peberdy, a senior researcher at the Observatory –
says that the belief that international migrants dominate the informal sector
is false. “We found that less than two out of 10 people who owned a business in
the informal sector in Johannesburg were cross-border migrants.” Peberdy argues
that international migrants play a positive role in South Africa. “The evidence
shows that they contribute to South Africa and South Africans by providing
jobs, paying rent, paying VAT and providing affordable and convenient goods.” The
Observatory’s study found that 31% of the 618 international migrant traders
interviewed rented properties from South Africans. Collectively they also
employed 1,223 people, of which 503 were South Africans.
Life in townships like Soweto is blighted by severe
under-development. A World Bank survey last year found that about half of South
Africa’s urban population live in townships and informal settlements,
accounting for 38% of working-age citizens, but nearly 60% of its unemployed. Themba,
a South African, said that people weren’t spending money the way they used to.
“In one day I sell stuff worth 120, 150 rand [roughly 10-12 dollars],” he said,
pointing to a table laden with cheap cosmetics and accessories. “Foreigners
take business away from us,” he said. “I still have to eat from there. My
profit is not big,” he said. “I have to walk to my house every day. I think the
government could help us to make stalls here on the pavement and give us
running water, and toilets.
Africans living in other countries which are not their
countries of origin are grimly accustomed to invectives like "fucking
foreigner"; "parasite"; "alien"; "refugee" making
nonsense of the phrase "Africa for the Africans". In the past when
Africa did not have artificial boundaries such as there are today, wars and
hatred were not as rife. Therefore it appears that dismantling the boundaries,
drawn up by non-Africans, would minimise violence. But will that abolish
xenophobia? No. As it is the problem of "the haves and have-nots"
which is central to war, violence and hatred. Thus the real solution will be to
eliminate the present situation of a minority owning the means of production
and distribution of wealth whilst the majority owning nothing, have to work for
the few.
The reasons for the internecine violence are almost always
the same. "Patriotic" citizens are quick to assert,
nationalistically, that the "aliens" have come to take over their
country, their resources, their jobs, their culture, and what have you. Though
the grievances of the masses may be related to economic factors, it is
unreasonable to blame it on their fellow poor. Xenophobia cannot be divorced
from the economic life of the masses. But how the one influences the other is
what most people fail to understand. This can be explained from a
two-dimensional plane: official policy and mass reaction. A party in power is
in reality the executive committee of the rich people behind it. Such a party
therefore rules in the interests of the owners. All its policies are consequently
aimed at the welfare of the rich. Now, since there will arise a conflict of
interest between the rich owners and their poor followers, the ruling party or
government will have to spend huge chunks of the country's money on arms,
maintenance of the army, the police, prisons, etc to hold down the masses so
that the rich can make their profits without hindrance. In the process basic
necessities such as food, shelter, healthcare, education are underfunded. The
little that is provided can only be afforded by the rich. The result,
undoubtedly, is discontent, alienation and disobedience among the masses. In
order to ward off unrest various tactics are employed by governments. One of
them is creating divisions among the suffering masses by, for instance, blaming
foreigners and whipping up nationalistic feelings. This diverts attention from
misrule and mismanagement. The masses who are hungry, sick and illiterate are
taken in by the government's ploy. Now, since a hungry man is an angry man and
since anger is emotional and overpowers reason, the least provocation can
result in violence-often misdirected.
We are all members of the world working class and have a
common interest in working together to establish a world without frontiers in
which the resources of the globe will have become the common heritage of all
the people of the world and used for the benefit of all. In other words money,
buying and selling, commodities and the like must be done away with. Humanity
must commonly own the means of production and must have free and equal access
to the produce. Under such circumstances there will be no want and consequently
no war and hatred. But this type of system can only be possible when people
make efforts to understand it. When they understand and want it, they can
organise to usher it in.
FOR WORLD SOCIALISM |
No comments:
Post a Comment