One of the recurring themes of politicians in this country is that of ‘Eurocentrism.’ It implies that your argument, whatever it might be, is flawed in an African context because it is subjective and based on a set of principles that were forged from a European perspective. This can be intensely irritating if you are of European origin because it tends to kill most debates before they even begin. But I'm beginning to think they might have a point.
The charge of ‘Eurocentrism’ implies that you have a disproportionate view of the world. Europe at the centre, the USA on the left, Russia and China on the right and Africa….. well, someplace Africa-ish. You assume that anything worth knowing originated in Europe and spread outwards in a broadcast-like concentric circle. As recently as the 1980’s many European-produced maps displayed the continent of Africa as disproportionately small. Similar in shape to the Indian subcontinent, just a bit more developed, like an older teenage sibling.
A more modern Eurocentrist view of Africa implies that, while you may have great sympathy, or even admiration for Africa and its people, you wouldn’t really trust them to organise the proverbial piss-up in a brewery.
So what the hell were FIFA doing giving the World Cup to South Africa to organise ?
Sure, they may have delivered 10 world-class stadiums on time and, sure, they may have organised two flawless draw ceremonies with 50 000 people celebrating peacefully in the street. But, come on, what about the crime, and the transport and, come on, what about Cabinda ?
Cabinda ? It’s a disputed area in northern Angola where, 3 weeks ago, the Togo national football team was attacked by separatist guerrillas and 3 members of the Togolese party were killed. They were on their way to play a match in the African Cup of Nations, being hosted for the first time by Angola, a country in Southern Africa.
Well there you go. If it can happen in Southern Africa it can happen in South Africa, I mean, come on !
Cabinda is roughly 3500 kms away from Johannesburg, a bit further than Istanbul is from London. That’s what 1980’s world maps do to your perception of geography. If a terrorist bomb goes off in Istanbul in February 2012 will that cause Europe's media to question the wisdom of holding the Olympics in London later that year ? Did the murder of 334 hostages at a school in Beslan, Russia in 2004 jeopardise Germany’s hosting of the 2006 World Cup ?
Stupid questions I know, but now you get a sense of the frustration South Africans feel when Europe's media question security around the World Cup because of something that happened 3500 kms away in Cabinda. Around a political issue that has not even the remotest connection to South Africa. I would wager that less than 1% of South Africans had even heard of Cabinda until 3 weeks ago.
I don’t even want to guess at what makes up the mindset of someone who makes the connection between Cabinda and South Africa, but I suspect the phrases ‘black Africans' and ‘what would you expect?’ would feature prominently in their reasoning.
Since democratic elections in 1994 South Africa has hosted a Rugby World Cup, a Cricket World Cup, 2 Lions tours and a host of other sporting events, all attracting thousands of visitors, without a single security scare. The only countries I can think of where terrorist attacks actually disrupted a major tournament are Germany and the USA. But nobody questions their ability to provide security at major events. Now that’s a good example of Eurocentric thinking.
0 comments:
Post a Comment