TOM EATON | When the coffers dry up, scapegoats line up

This column went to print a few hours before the dawn of June 30, before we knew if South Africa was going to descend into witch-hunting or whether violence was averted, either because cooler heads prevailed or the powerful people who benefit from civil unrest came to terms.

I do suspect, however, that anger directed towards illegal immigrants in South Africa, and the political mileage to be made from conjuring or fanning that anger, are going to dog us for many years, as the conditions that fuel these flames ― the anger of a citizenry getting relentlessly poorer, farmed by a wretched yet unapologetic political class, along with those Machiavellian spoilers who are expert at pulling our strings ― are not going away any time soon.

Certainly, the rise of nativism in the US and Europe over the last decade has shown us that once a population is gripped by the belief that it is being usurped or “replaced” by foreigners, no amount of evidence will refute that belief.

On the contrary, refuting evidence is increasingly being used, paradoxically, as proof that any claim, no matter how wild or manipulative, is true: one of the most powerful effects of Trumpism and similar right-wing movements actively discrediting expertise and facts is that facts, presented by an expert, are something between a list of insults aimed at you and your identity group, and a new trick being debuted by the devil.

In South Africa, we are seeing our own version of this process, albeit with rebuttals that appeal to slightly more plausible realities.

Journalists are citing the state’s figures, showing a relatively small number of migrants? Those figures are obviously wrong. And why would you listen to the mouthpieces of the owners of the economy as they seek to replace South Africans with cheap, easily exploited foreigners?

[...] I’ve read a lot of people asking the sensible question: why march against immigrants when you should be marching against the state? [...] Perhaps for those who have been convinced that illegal immigration is an existential threat, the answer is simple: why march against something that is so ineffective that it might as well not exist?

Civic organisations are asking for tolerance and peace? Typical suburban liberals, totally oblivious to the lived reality in the “real” South Africa …

Either way, questions or criticism or basic appeals for calm are easily recast as proof that the system, embodied largely by the media and the faux left’s favourite enemy, NGOs, is once again turning against black South Africans.

The main problem, however, is that the only thing that can slow and reverse the spread of these ideas is the state, and there are few signs of life there.

History is full of examples of anti-immigrant sentiment being whipped up by malicious opportunists, but almost without exception it is a shrinking economy that allows that sentiment to take hold and flourish, and even if we got the ANC’s foot off the economy’s throat tomorrow, it would take many years until a majority of South Africans feel they can breathe.

Then there is also the fact that South Africa’s border cannot be policed to a degree that will satisfy citizens who believe that immigration is out of control.

The US has the biggest, richest and most technologically advanced border patrol force in the world ― its budget is just over four times bigger than our entire military budget ― and yet people cross the southern border every day. The interventions against illegal immigration are complex, expensive, difficult, but above all, they will remain deeply unsatisfying to citizens convinced by their own anxiety and a constant diet of emotive online content that borders can and should be endless, impenetrable walls.

Even when it comes to temporary interventions the state seems paralysed, as illustrated on Sunday when the government’s official Twitter account issued a “fake news alert”, asking people to “please ignore” claims online that there was a “R250 reward for capturing illegal foreign nationals”. One might have thought they’d add a mention that kidnapping is illegal, but of course the state dare not threaten the threateners lest it confirm marchers’ belief that they have become second-class citizens.

Over the last few days I’ve read a lot of people asking the sensible question: why march against immigrants when you should be marching against the state?

Perhaps it is that familiar feebleness on the part of the state that answers the question. Perhaps for those who have been convinced that illegal immigration is an existential threat, the answer is simple: why march against something that is so ineffective that it might as well not exist?

The trouble is, the state does exist, badly, recklessly, greedily, and a ruling political cabal can only steal for so long, whether it is stealing billions of rands or uncounted lives and futures, before the bill comes due.

It is just a terrible pity that those with so little are being asked to pay it.