AGENCY, STRUCTURE AND THE SOUTH AFRICAN DREAM

The thread running through the first three official SAWIP events – dialogue on active citizenship, township visits, and a talk on Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) – is stronger than I initially thought, and this needs to be explored further. Firstly, the dialogue on active citizenship raised a number of issues that demanded in-depth engagement, but we did not have enough time to deal with all of them. More importantly, those issues really made us reflect deeply about our roles in society.

In the dialogue, we asked each other a number of interesting questions: How do we define citizenship or ‘active’ citizenship? How do we fill the intergenerational gap? Should we try to be global citizens or resolve local issues first? But in my view, the main contestation was between two concepts: agency and structure. Several participants argued that active citizenship requires an individual to become inspired, and then use that ‘burning fire’ to put him or herself in the service of others. In other words, citizens should use their agency, and try to resolve their own problems without relying on government unless it's absolutely necessary. The opposite view stressed the importance of structures and institutions, and how they can empower individuals to tackle societal problems. The two following SAWIP events – township visits and a talk on BEE – made me think that perhaps the debate between agency and structure is counterproductive. 

During the township visits, which involved going to impoverished areas in Cape Town such as Khayelitsha, Langa and Gugulethu, we met a number of inspirational individuals. We visited the Iliso Care Society, an organisation that runs a soup kitchen, orphanage and other youth projects in Khayelitsha. What was most inspiring was the story of its founder, Vivian Zilo. Against all odds, she not only completed her university education but also committed herself to help children and young people by setting up Illiso Care Society. She used her agency to the fullest, and today her organisation is growing from strength to strength.       

The talk on BEE by Graeme Dorrington, a BEE consultant, informed us about the government’s policy to increase black (by 'black' I mean South Africans who would not have been classified as ‘white’ under apartheid) participation in white-dominated corporate South Africa. Although the majority of those who suffered under apartheid have not benefitted from BEE, policies of this nature are necessary to deal with historic injustices. In a country where socio-economic inequalities are so widespread, structures or institutions (such as government or big business-backed BEE or broader transformation policies) can play an important role in tackling societal challenges.

That is why, in our context, the debate between agency and structure is not very useful. Rather, we need to find synergies between the two. On one hand, the likes of Vivian Zilo are using their agency to help others, but she needs more support to expand her services/projects to those who desperately need them. On the other hand, despite the empowerment potential of a policy such as BEE, it doesn’t ensure that wealth trickles down to the grassroots level where Vivian Zilo needs resources to help her community.

Agency or structure? I would say it is the combination of the two that will take us a lot closer towards realising the South African Dream articulated by none other than former President Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela:

"We have triumphed in the effort to implant hope in the breasts of the millions of our people. We enter into a covenant that we shall build the society in which all South Africans, both black and white, will be able to walk tall, without any fear in their hearts, assured of their inalienable right to human dignity – a rainbow nation at peace with itself and the world.” (May 10, 1994)