Normally I would not bother responding to this kind of self serving intellectual nonsense from a Fascist leader but it has to be challenged given the duplicitious response to racism of our political & judicial system. Here is why this view is nonsensical: https://www.news24.com/news24/southafrica/news/there-is-no-black-person-who-can-be-racist-effs-floyd-shivambu-in-black-lives-matter-debate-20200818

First, to draw inferences about the social attitudes of a whole group of people on the basis of their skin pigmentation is inherently racist. One cannot make easy statements about blacks or whites as if these are homogenous categories of people who think & behave in the same way.

Second, take a look on my twitter account or those of the many critics of the EFF & you will see the most racist, misogynistic vile responses by those who are either activists or supporters of the party. This statement from the party leader has a self serving logic to it.

Ironically, for all their platitudes about racism, if you simply replaced the word ‘black’ with ‘white’, the statements of EFF activists,supporters, & even leaders could comfortably fit in the discourse among members of the Klu Klux Klan, AWB or even Hitler’s inner sanctum.

Third, although this was not mentioned in the parliamentary debate, advocates of this view hold that blacks cannot be racist because they do not have power. Again, this reveals a lack of understanding of power. Note that power prevails in any interaction bet. 2 or more persons.

Why did I bother to respond to this self serving intellectual clap trap? I fear this kind of nonsensical thinking has contaminated the decision-making of pol. & judicial thinking in SA. Note that Penny Sparrow & others were correctly charged for their racist remarks & behaviour.

But how come no such charge & penalties have been imposed on EFF activists & supporters & those of other parties,when they spew similar racist vile?So long as we do not do this,so long are our laws differentially applied.And is this not the very essence of what we fought against?

Are we not overdue for a deliberation on whether we are differentially applying our laws against racism?If we can have such a deliberation,then perhaps for once,our ‘honoured member of parliament’ may have at least prompted a positive political outcome, even if it was unintended.