–– Paul Schlehlein
Audio version of this article is available here: YouTube, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.
Dis-Chem, the second-largest retail pharmacy chain in South Africa, has faced significant criticism over the past two years over a leaked memo that prohibited any further hiring and promotion of white people. Is this an example of racism or systemic racism and what’s the difference?
Systemic racism refers to laws and policies in a society that discriminate against people based on their race. The Cambridge Dictionary defines systemic racism as “policies and practices that exist throughout a whole society…that result in and support a continued unfair advantage to some people and unfair or harmful treatment of others based on race.”
Therefore, systemic racism isn’t just racial bigotry. It’s ‘bias on the books’. It’s discrimination encoded in law.
When John invites the neighbourhood to his Block Party except for one family simply because they’re black, this is racism but not systemic racism. If a group of black boys refuse to play soccer with another boy simply because he’s white, this too is racism but not systemic racism. It’s a sin, but not a crime. There are no laws forcing the group of black boys to play pick-up ball with the white boy.
An Example
But are there examples in Africa of encoded laws that discriminate based on one’s skin colour? Yes. Systematic racism exists in any nation that promotes affirmative action, which are codified policies favouring certain ethnic groups that have been discriminated against in the past. Affirmative action happens worldwide today, like males losing out to women in Zimbabwe’s workforce or one race misplaced by another in New York City.
One glaring example of this in Africa is South Africa’s BEE, sometimes called BBEEE (Broad-Based Economic Empowerment). Since South Africa’s Constitution specifically states that it is founded upon values of “human dignity” and “non-racialism”, one would expect colour-blindness from this post-apartheid government, refusing to benefit others based merely on racial classification.
Yet, racialism stands at the heart of BEE. Act 46 of 2013 states that BEE’s purpose is to “establish a national policy on broad-based black economic empowerment”. In other words, black skin is a requirement for business contracts and hiring. The BEE scorecard is based almost entirely on racial categories. The more blacks and the more women a business hires, the better the score. The nation’s Employment Equity laws demand that an institution’s employee racial ratio reflect the racial ratio of the nation. Since South Africa is about 9:1, that’s what the business should reflect as well.
BEE has failed badly since its inception in 2003. Why? For one, it is hypocritical. It’s no surprise the biggest government promoters of affirmative action send their kids to private schools where affirmative action isn’t followed. Second, it is corrupt, as BEE benefits only a small elite, not the poor it was designed to help. Third, it hurts economic growth by frightening away foreign investors and keeping local businesses small by applying BEE rules only for companies with 50 employees or more. Finally, race is notoriously difficult to define, especially as racial intermixture increases. The government broadly defines blacks as “Africans, Coloureds, and Indians” but they do not define what this means. How black must one be? Most Africans are not black but brown, another indication that few have unmixed African ancestry. Who makes the cut becomes arbitrary.
Answering a Common Objection
Though BEE and other affirmative action policies clearly entail systemic racism, their proponents are prepared with arguments. They say it merely levels the playing field and redresses prior wrongs. Since colonialism and apartheid damaged black Africa, black Africans warrant preferential treatment over white Africans.
Notice this argument does not deny systemic racism. It acknowledges that some racial groups are favoured over others based on their skin colour but this racism is OK because it’s for justifiable reasons. The answer to this argument is that the solution to racism is not more racism. One cannot undo past wrongs by continuing those wrongs.
Solutions
If systemic racism in the form of affirmative action isn’t the answer, what is? Consider the following three solutions.
First, exclusively promote meritocracy in society. The central standard for companies, schools and institutions should be competence. The free market (which is the best economic system for any society) has as its slogan, “May the best man win” not “May the correctly-shaded man win.”
Scripture always presents character as the standard for success, not race. As Thomas Sowell said, “People inherit cultures as well as genes.” All cultures and families are weak in certain areas, so the solution for poverty and poor education is infusing integrity in deficient areas. Proverbs 22:29 says, “Do you see a man skilful in his work? He will stand before kings; he will not stand before obscure men.”
Second, stop using victimisation as an excuse for failure. The vast majority of Sub-Saharan Africa’s population is black. All 46 heads of state are black. Yet government still convinces their citizens that they are victims and that they need subsidies for their businesses to succeed. Though African societies have certainly suffered their share of difficulties, we must remember that history is filled with examples of ethnic groups that have succeeded under much tougher odds. The Jews, for example, have often lived as a minority group in their society but have managed to flourish.
Third, exalt the gospel of Christ. He who hates his black or brown or white or yellow brother walks in darkness (1Jn. 2:11), a darkness which no government policy can remove from our hearts. Jesus is the only One that can break down the sinful barriers between races, for in Christ, “there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28).