White man — you are the reason for Black Consciousness

The 45th anniversary of Steve Biko’s death was marked on 12 September and conversations among black people were covered on at least two television channels, which focused on the meaning of Black Consciousness and Biko’s legacy for black people today. 

The words “black man” — as in, “black man, you are on your own” — were frequently used in these conversations.

But the words “white man” never came up. Strange. Because if it wasn’t for the white man, Black Consciousness would never have come about.

It was the white man who decided to make blackness the criterion by which certain human beings were relegated to second-class status through the Population Registration Act of 1950.

And it was the white man who enforced that law throughout the apartheid era. Biko simply said, “Okay, you have decided that blackness is the departure point for what defines a human being in South Africa… we will now decide on what this actually means for blacks.”

Did they really think that black people would happily embrace the identity given them by the apartheid system and live happily ever after with whites? Or, perhaps, resent it a little bit for a while, until they finally saw the light, and then live happily ever after with whites?

What Biko did was turn blackness — the very thing that was designed to make him a second-class human being — into a philosophy that restored to him the dignity that the whites had trampled on by making it the criterion of his identity in the first place.

And it was, quite honestly, a brilliant move.

Actually, the conversation that took place around the topic in Biko’s day differed quite markedly from those taking place around it today.

First, the white man featured a great deal in Biko’s day. And, second, there was not a single rant in anything that Biko said when he spoke about the white man. Biko was nothing if not cool, calm and collected in his thoughts about the white man.

And courteous — extraordinarily courteous. Courteous to a fault.

And this is what terrified the whites. Police Minister Jimmy Kruger’s infamous “[Biko’s death] leaves me cold” was an expression of terror, not indifference. And that’s why the police killed him. They had seen frustration, resentment and anger, but, through a sheer war of attrition, saw these all fizzle out. But quiet, polite, determined, rational resistance was something new. This was something far more dangerous; far more permanent.

The rationality of Biko’s argument was most striking in the courtroom conversations that took place during Biko’s trial. These make astonishing reading. The measured response of the black man and the utter inability of the white man to understand him.

Here is an exchange that really gets to the heart of the white/black thing:

May 1976 in the SASO/BPC Trial. Defence Counsel Advocate David Soggot leads Biko: 

Soggot: Mr Biko, would you refer to Resolution 42 on page 249? In paragraph (2) there you have referred to the definition of black people which I will not trouble you with, but paragraph (3) I should like you to deal with. ‘SASO believes’ — if you will read (a) please?

Biko: Yes. ‘SASO believes that (a) South Africa is a country in which both black and white live and shall continue to live together.’

Soggot: Now what does that mean?

Biko: Well, this means that we accept the fact that the present South African society is a plural society with contributions having been made to its development by all segments of the community, in other words we speak of the groupings both black and white. We have no intention of… of course, we regard ourselves as people who stay here and shall stay here. And we made the point that we’ve got no intention whatsoever of seeing white people leave this country; when I say leave, I mean leave this country.

Soggot: Leave?

Biko: Yes.

Soggot: L-e-a-v-e?

Biko: That is right. We intend to see them staying here side by side with us, maintaining a society in which everybody shall contribute proportionally.

Soggot: I wonder, in this context, would you please have a look at SASO G. I, Resolution 45? On page 206.

Biko: Right?

Soggot: Would you read from: ‘This country belongs…’

Biko: ‘Therefore we wish explicitly to state that this country belongs to black people and to them alone.’ Whites who live in our — who live in our — who live in this country on terms laid down by blacks and on condition that they respect black people. This should not be construed as anti-whitism. It only means that in as much as black people live in Europe on terms laid down by Europeans, whites shall be subjected to the same conditions. ‘We further wish to state that in our opinion it shall always be...’

Soggot: Can you explain what SASO meant by this resolution?

Biko: Well, I must explain I was not at this particular meeting but from reading this document, what I understand it to mean is that this country is essentially a country in Africa, a continent which is inhabited always naturally by black people, and what whites… it is conceived that whites are here and they may live in the country, depending on their relationship with blacks, and their acceptance of whatever conditions blacks in this country shall lay at a certain time — I don’t know what time the resolution is referring to.

This extract is quoted by Njabulo Ndebele in his foreword to the 2017 edition of I Write What I Like. Ndebele suggests that the “time” referred to by Biko was 1994 — that year when, finally, the tables were turned, once and for all.

So here we have it, my fellow white men. There are the terms, in black and white. We may live in the country depending on our relationship with black people, and our acceptance of the conditions they lay down.

We can rant and rave from the margins or we can, like Biko, sit down and think more rationally about how we got ourselves here in the first place. DM/MC