While it may be true that one of the complex structural causes of historic and current violence is from worsening economic inequality, making this claim divorces politicians, local leaders and vigilante groups from the scapegoat they have created. This scapegoat creates a smokescreen for the state’s own failings both in local and national government. 

 

Xenophobia does not only exhibit itself  in the physical violence and looting of foreign owned properties. It is normalised and augmented in daily slang, anecdotal evidence spued out by politicians, policies which institutionalise the exclusion of specific people on unjust grounds, and vague statements which insinuate prejudice.

 

Earlier this month, in an news interview on ENCA, Motsaledi made reference to an incident from 2013 while visiting a public health facility. He was told that 60% of women in the maternity ward were non-nationals. The precise percentage, with damaging impact, was determined from a casual conversation between nurses at the hospital. This anecdotal conversation is now being treated as factual information and used to argue why the Gauteng Department of Health’s budget is not sufficient, deflecting the focus from long term corruption, mismanagement and maladministration.

The repercussions of these statements and anecdotal evidence are palpable. Last week I met with a women who is legally documented, born to refugee parents in South Africa. She 
will soon be delivering her first child. She was turned away from receiving health services because she is awaiting an extension on her permit from Department of Home Affairs. They have granted blanket extensions to all persons’ whose documents expired during lockdown. The hospital requested R400.00 for her to see the doctor, she did not have the money. She was then threatened by the hospital manager who pronounced that Home Affairs would come at her next appointment to deport her and take her ‘home’. 

The lethal cocktail of this rhetoric from leaders who are losing power is first exhibited in institutional violence, as seen by the examples above. This legitimises the use of the same language and consequential violence by vigilante groups. These are groups with superfluous leaders trying to maintain and sustain power in local communities. 

 

Until we unveil the true convinct for our collective grievances, we must ask ourselves: Who will we burn next?