Who gets to decide when South Africans are racist?

In my Hillbrow days some 10 years ago, I used to walk the streets from Ponte to Constitutional Hill always wondering how safe people felt there. It was only during a local walking tour that I came to learn about the concept of “vimba”.

Turns out, the local community, having given up its faith in the local police, had set up a system of mob justice. Thus, if somebody stole your things, cut and ran, all you’d have to do is point and shout the magic word, signalling all within earshot to attack.

It was not just a signal to the community though. It was a justification. The community, which had been plagued by crime and become so desperate to stop, started believing that to stop crime, a mere accusation was enough to warrant the beating of the suspect. I say “beating” knowing that many have witnessed more horrific conclusions.

What else is the community to do? They surely can’t be expected sit back to allow crime to persist while the state isn’t doing a fantastic job of protecting them. Considering this, one may understand why taking the law into their own hands seemed like the best path to them.

Of course, it’s a dumb idea and one that isn’t sustainable in a civil society. Of course, taking the law into one’s own hands omits important checks and balances. If it did work, that would be great. You know what happens when we disregard our checks and balances? We open our world to abuse.

I have no doubt that vimba has been called on innocent people to settle an unrelated score. I have no doubt that a community would be less inclined to accede the call of vimba if they felt they were better protected by the state. I have no doubt that many who make the call feel completely justified in doing so, just as I have no doubt that some have weaponised the mechanism for their own ends.

The problem is, once the call has been made and the result ensues, there’s little that can be done to fix the broken bones if the call was wrong.

In our society, beleaguered by racism, you can similarly understand why some would feel empowered and even justified to call it out based on suspicion alone. It’s an important action to rid our society of racism. Today’s problem is that we can’t even agree on what racism really is. The old school stuff was easy to call out; don’t have separate doors for different race groups. But today? Is it the intent of the alleged perpetrator? Does the subjective feeling of the perceived victim count? What about power structures, intersections and a whole host of factors that may differ from person to person.

ALSO READ: Cape Town pub apologises after racist incident goes viral

This is what makes it difficult to call out the subtle kinds of racism, but also attractive to try and find it. It’s like we’ve dealt with the obvious stuff but still feel it hovering in the air though we can’t see it as clearly.

As the wind blows, one may be tempted to find things that aren’t there. Sometimes it’s just wind. Other times there may be toxins, dust or disease in the air and, like modern racism, you need to clear it out.

But you can’t just stop breathing.

Now that Hank’s Olde Irish pub on Bree Street in Cape Town has been cleared of the racism accusation against it by the cops, we can ask some questions. Was Christopher Logan’s viral video shouting at the pub owner justified? How can we say Thabiso Danca didn’t feel prejudiced in his own context? Is it the job of the pub owner to be more accommodating than otherwise necessary to deal with subjective feelings of prejudice? Why did the video attract the attention it did and why were so many quick to dismiss it while others were quick to relate to it?

Calling somebody racist in South Africa is an important accusation as racism is a problem in the country. If we call out the real racists, that’s fantastic. If we call out people who are not racists, it’s social vimba to a potential ally and you do the cause no favours.

ALSO READ: EFF closes Hank’s Olde Irish Pub in Cape Town amid racism claims

As more of these cases go to court, we’ll need to pay attention to what a legal racist may be because at some point, we’ll need to acknowledge that we can’t mount a fight against something when we can’t agree what it is.

If only we had some sort of national commission that works on human rights to set it out for us.