White folk are hypersensitive to any kind of racist allegations directed at them.

Most white people suffer, unconsciously, from paranoid personalities. A classic race paranoia that affects interpersonal relations, causing imperious gestures and strong aversion towards other races which impacts the personality and central unit of thoughts in the cerebrum.

In a fair and equal society, they feel nervous and insecure with the appearance of their superiority complex. The fact of the matter is, as a result of racism, whiteness displays an act of pure malevolence towards blackness.

The structural foundation of racism is the white privilege. This safeguards the existence of the superiority and inferiority complex. The former impairs the consciousness of the superego, though one knew at some deep level of the psyche that the superiority complex is unethical and is immoral behavior that deserves unequivocal rejection.

On the other hand, the inferiority complex is the unendurable pain of inequality. It imposes serious constraint on the psychology, which denies the individual a sense of humanity.

In many white households, there is a youthful enthusiasm for racism which appeals to white privilege. As a form of superiority complex, it’s molded into cultural thinking that deeply implants in the minds of these young people. A mentality of superiority assurance towards other races with a condescending attitude. This, however, continues as a psychological racist-household-education that cripples the humane innocence by inciting racial hatred.

As keenly observed by Frantz Fanon: “Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance.”

To a very high degree, this shows the frailties of the white race. All these symptomatic elements are different patterns of the superiority complex that stains the psychology with hatred. There is no rational explanation for these actions. Rather than the dangerous notion of white supremacy that lacks genuine acts of humility, white folk urgently need to de-educate their mentality of all such barbaric customs.

There is a need for our society, as an organic whole, to continuously emphasize the boundary between acceptable and unacceptable behavior, based on the measures of morality.

Building a culturally diverse society that holds the belief that everyone is equal and should have the same rights and opportunities, starts by defeating animalistic moralities. That fuels personal animosities between members of different races.

In guiding our society to retrace its rightful path, we need speedy departure from awful norms. We must take steps to rectify fallacious interpretations.

The key fragmentation of apartheid still hangs loosely on the weak plot of glorifying de Klerk’s deeds. It comes as a prettified insult, disguised in a lifetime reward. For a former racialist, who has worked hand in hand with principal architects of apartheid, who handed over the baton to him as a successor? Willingly, he continued the race of apartheid, at the expense of the black people.

Now, in return, de Klerk is rewarded with the Nobel Peace Prize* as a negotiator, ignoring the fact that conditions forced him to sit for peaceful negotiations. It was the collapse of the USSR, and of course the Cold War, that led to the collapse of apartheid in South Africa.

After the USSR had supported many anti-colonial and anti-apartheid movements in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, the west intervened by supporting a number of anti-communist governments and regimes. In the 1980s the west supported the apartheid government in order to secure its investments and South African mineral resources. As a result, the west rejected calls of imposing sanctions on apartheid South Africa.

When the USSR and communism were collapsing, there was no reason for the west to continue supporting the apartheid government. South Africa was forced to renounce apartheid and there was an internal and external outbreak of pressure. The ‘Release Mandela’ campaign caught international attention which channeled direct criticisms towards the apartheid government.

Therefore, de Klerk knew very well that the plan to renew the apartheid policy would backfire. His political move clearly showed his awareness for the hazards ahead, and he changed lanes.

Without derogating his excellent participation during negotiations which caused him to be recognized as a noble leader, what impression does the action of glorifying him give about his guilt? Rewarding de Klerk with the Nobel Peace Prize was an unnecessarily premature move.

John Boyle O’Reilly warned that: “Social equity is based on justice; politics change with the opinion of the time.”

The people longed for lasting peace that would not redeem sinners into angels in the overnight scene of the peace process.

History and truth is always disdainful of such false credits. I use two factious verbs, ‘know’ and ‘realize’ in order to discredit two deceiving contra-factious verbs ‘pretend’ and ‘wish’ that are permanently implanted in the minds of the people, timeously.

Such distortions instill permanent mental disfigurement which influences behavior and we must make it our duty to squeeze the truth out of lies.

As a collective society that is devoted to moral principles, we must practice strict discipline, and have zero tolerance for unjust actions of desensitization.

***

Bukelani is an Essayist, Pan-Africanist writer, Social commentator and a freelance writer.