When, four months after their last Test, the Proteas finally took to the field against the West Indies in St Lucia, they joined their opponents moments before the match in making gestures intended to acknowledge the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement.
The two captains had discussed the matter the night before.
The West Indies chose to back the BLM campaign by taking the knee and raising their right fists. The Proteas – after a year of internal discussions on the matter, and much scrutiny of their handling of the campaign – left it to the players to decide for themselves how to respond. Some took the knee, others raised their fists, some did both. But one player did neither.
Quinton de Kock said of his decision: ‘My reason, I will keep it to myself. It’s my own personal opinion. Like Lungi [Ngidi] said, it’s everyone’s decision. No one is forced to do anything. Not in life. That’s the way I see things. That’s just about it.’
When asked about De Kock’s actions, Lungi Ngidi – the young Proteas paceman and the most vocal advocate for South African cricket to take a stance on BLM – said: ‘We come from a diverse country…It’s not fair for me to speak for other people, everyone’s entitled to their own choices in life. I’ve been very clear on my stance. In terms of the team, there is no division at all. You could see today in the way we were playing – everyone’s happy for everyone, we play for South Africa, which is all we are trying to do as players.’
Last year, while recalling his own experience of alleged racism during his career, Makhaya Ntini backed Ngidi’s calls to support BLM. Against this backdrop, Ngidi’s comments on unity and camaraderie in the team should be welcomed wholeheartedly. Right?
Apparently not
Well, apparently not, according to ‘PhD student at the University of Bristol’ Jon Hunter-Parsonage in the Daily Maverick article Standing to account: Why Quinton de Kock shouldn’t be allowed to ‘keep it to himself’.
Hunter-Parsonage argues that, by not showing ‘support of calls for racial and social justice’ or explaining his reasons, De Kock is failing to take responsibility for his actions. Hunter-Parsonage criticises De Kock for not ‘openly engaging on these issues especially when you are a leader and role model for so many others’.
Later, he writes: ‘It is the people who decide to take no action who need to justify their actions. It is people who, when given a choice, choose not to act. It is people like de Kock.’
Off the bat (pun intended), De Kock has every right to act or not, as well as to keep his reasoning to himself. He has freedom of expression and should not be compelled to do something against his will, and the rest of us can only speculate on De Kock’s chosen reaction to gestures that he was given a choice to perform or not. Regardless, the principle of freedom of expression applies to everyone, right?
Well, apparently not, particularly if you’re white, in Hunter-Parsonage’s estimation:
‘There is much to be said for the idea that the players can take the action that they want to. They do, after all, enjoy the constitutional right to freedom of belief and opinion like the rest of us.
‘In one sense, people should not be compelled to do something they are uncomfortable with. In another, perhaps as white people we should feel uncomfortable enough to act in face of the calls for racial justice implicating the patterns of privilege that shape today’s world, that benefit white people and white men in particular. And acknowledging, admitting and addressing this discomfort is important. Ignoring it is arguably part of what produces or allows systems racism to continue.’ (My emphasis)
Trying to bowl too fast
Often in cricket, a fast-pace bowler looking to impress onlookers ends up trying to bowl too fast. Invariably, without the requisite composure and control, the bowler ends up rocketing the ball far down the leg-side for a wide. Hunter-Parsonage’s statement above betrays a similar error of judgement. In his attempts to show solidarity with the woke mob, his self-aggrandisement finds him bowling far down the (left?) leg-side of rationality.
His sentiment comes straight out of post-modern Critical Social Justice Theory, and specifically the branch of Critical Race Theory (CRT). Essentially CRT holds that race is the central aspect of every individual, and that all white people are oppressors and all black people, victims.
The origins of CRT can be traced to academia in the 1960s. It has since oozed across the Anglosphere and invaded many esteemed academic institutions and brought them to the brink of terminal infection. PhD candidate Hunter-Parsonage seems to have imbibed the CRT Kool-aid with zeal at the tea break.
The BLM movement has swept across the sporting world, and gesturing towards it has become a cult-like ritual, as players around the globe acquiesce to the regressive neo-Marxist, illiberal, and anti-humanist ideological front that is BLM, which masquerades as a social and racial justice movement.
I don’t envy players who are in the limelight and must decide, as the world looks on, whether to take the knee or not. Arguably, it is easiest to simply go with the flow and just bend the knee. And that, in fact, is what makes De Kock’s actions so impressive – standing up for whatever it is he believes in, rather than surrendering to fashion.
I have played cricket all my life and have had the pleasure of coaching children from various backgrounds between the ages of six and thirteen. Sport – particularly cricket, a team sport that also calls for great individual responsibility – is immensely valuable in building character in children. It teaches them valuable lessons, and virtues such as hard work, cooperation, patience and responsibility. CRT is antagonistic to these values, and at its core it undermines the very ideas of merit and individual accountability.
Should be lauded
As CRT slides its tentacles into all aspects of society, from universities to schools, supermarkets to stadiums, De Kock, rather than being held accountable, should be lauded for going against the populist tide and having the bravery to stand up for himself and his beliefs. Society is sophisticated enough to hold both Lungi Ngidi and Quinton de Kock as role models for standing up for what they believe in and exercising their freedom to express it.
Given South Africa’s racially oppressive Apartheid history, and its continuing reliance on race-based policy, to have a sports team that truly embodies the ideal of non-racialism should be celebrated.
[Image: By NAPARAZZI, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=38063596]
* To learn more about confronting racialism and CRT, click here, and here.
If you like what you have just read, support the Daily Friend