South Africa

I know I have been beating the AA drum a bit recently but I have noticed the debate is evolving in interesting ways. The following is an interview the M&G had with the SRC President at Wits over the appointment of a White American male to head the Dept. of Humanities.  

 

Does it matter what the skin colour of the successful candidate is when we are supposed to live in a non-racial society?

Contextually it matters. In an institution that is supposed to undo the apartheid-created racial demographics, there is a need to prefer qualified and appointable candidates from designated groups, and that’s females, blacks and disabled persons. Now the university’s predominantly white selection committee overlooked all equity issues and appointed a white male from America through a racially based vote. That is unacceptable.

 

What proof does the SRC Prez have that the vote was "racially based", or is he just throwing that accusation around to add weight to his argument?

 

Did you familiarise yourself with Professor Timothy Reagan’s CV, and what concerned you about it?

We do not have a problem with his qualifications. What we have a problem with is the appointment process. His CV doesn’t matter within the context in which our concerns are raised. We are saying that it was mandatory for an institution that needs to transform to consider appointable and equally qualified candidates from designated groups vis-à-vis an American white male. I am familiar with his CV and CVs of other applicants and what I saw in his CV was lots of American education.

We do not have a problem with his qualifications. What we have a problem with is the appointment process. His CV doesn’t matter within the context in which our concerns are raised. We are saying that it was mandatory for an institution that needs to transform to consider appointable and equally qualified candidates from designated groups vis-à-vis an American white male. I am familiar with his CV and CVs of other applicants and what I saw in his CV was lots of American education.

 

What is the problem with having a lot of "American" education - are we so close minded that only South African education fits the bill? So much for tertiary education being all about opening your mind to different opinions and approaches.

 

Would you rather students do not get the best education just for the sake of transformation?

First, deans of faculties are not academics; they are senior administrators … who take very important decisions in regard to academia. And who said American education is the best education? We are emphatic in calling for appointable black candidates, particularly with South African experience since academic institutions of higher learning in the country ought to respond to South African and African needs before anything else.

 

Well I dunno, when I was at university ALL the deans in my faculties continued lecturing and publishing...? I don't recall any mention in the question of American education being the "best" - rather it focused on quality. So the Prez is dodging the question on that one. 

 

You’ve said that equity legislation forces the university to appoint a black person should there be a black and a white candidate. Do you still believe this to be true?

What we said was that the university ought to prefer candidates from designated groups when there is a situation of appointable black and white candidates. And certainly the equity legislation provides for that. Now Wits University failed to exercise leadership and chose to appoint a white person. This trend has been recurrent in the past three appointments, where blacks were overlooked for white candidates. This must come to an end.

 

Evidence of that final statement?

 

Do you not think that you are merely reversing racism?

I think the view of reversing racism is a right-wing view and totally misplaced. South African demographics in regard to race are created by a racist apartheid system. It is therefore the responsibility of everyone, including Wits University, to redress such an odious phenomenon. There is no way that we can leave the current racial demographics at the university intact. Wits University must be adherent to the South African transformation trajectory and discourse.

 

What still blows my mind is that it is still about quantity and not quality - throughout this interview the SRC Prez basically just used race and citizenship as the only two qualifying factors for the job (he did pay lip service to "appointable black candidates"). Is this the South Africa we want where these two factors suprercede all other considerations? Furthermore the use of "appointable" has been used very liberally by the SRC Prez., I'd be curious about what he actually means by "appointable" - a) a candidate who meets the minimum requirements or b) is average compared to the other candidates or c) is the most qualified candidate? Which one best fits "appointable"? I would say in a University where excellence is prized an "appointable" candidate should only be in the final category.

 

Thats my 2 cents!