How does a post-colonial state embrace diversity without risking perpetuating the racial categories of Apartheid South Africa? How does a post-colonial state undermine oppressive racial categories without unintentionally replacing diversity with homogeneity? Neville Alexander argues that it is not necessary to create racial categories, for ‘sub-national’ identities can be based on many different factors such as religion and linguistics.

Pambazuka News: In an essay you presented at the Human Science Research Council earlier this year, you postulate that language could be used to promote social justice. What do you mean?

Neville Alexander: What I mean is that rather than using race as a means of determining affirmative action, which translates to the danger of perpetuating racial identities, it is better to find other ways of using redress in an organic way. One of these is language.

In the South African context, language communities tend to coincide with those previously classified in certain racial categories. Most African language speaking communities have been disadvantage in one form or the other. And that means if one were to use language to promote social justice, one would give preference to those who can use an African language. That would be an organic way of promoting redress. It would also give market value to African languages and generally raise the status of these languages. In this way people would be rewarded for their linguistic skills.

Pambazuka News: In a country like South Africa, where English is practically the official language, do you think that’s a realistic view?

Neville Alexander: The point is that the political and cultural leadership must have the vision and the political will to make sure that English does not continue to operate as the de facto only official language. We have to begin to use other African languages in powerful ways. The reason for this is not just for some nationalistic nonsense, rather, the reason is that this is the only way we can guarantee and entrench a democratic dispensation. The masses of the people in South Africa are not English speaking, they are not comfortable speaking English.

Further, to promote African languages is not going to be costly at all. We have done research and costing on this, and our research shows that to promote African languages will not be costly at all, but, on the contrary, it would be better in terms of preventing waste through the use of English only or mainly.

Pambazuka News: Is it for this reason that you argue that Affirmative Action unintentionally perpetuates the racial categories of apartheid South Africa?

Neville Alexander: This is a very fundamental issue and it needs to be discussed very carefully so that people do not get the wrong impression. I am not opposed to affirmative action. My view is that affirmative action is essential in the absence of the social revolution.

If we had a social revolution we would not need affirmative action, we would simply expropriate the wealth and resources of the oppressors. However, in the absence of such a revolution affirmative action is essential.

The crucial question, however, is, does one implement affirmative action in a country like South Africa where the majority of the people are black, in the same way that affirmative action is implemented in the United States of America (USA)? To implement affirmative action on the basis of a minority paradigm is not necessary in South Africa. To implement affirmative action in such a way is negative, and it actually perpetuates the racial categories that one wants to undermine and weaken. The point is not to address race but to address social disadvantage, irrespective of colour. Given that the majority of disadvantaged people in this country are black people, we do not have to approach it the way the affirmative action is implemented in the USA, for that model is very negative, even for the USA it is a negative approach.

Further, affirmative action in this country applies only to a very few people. To be eligible for affirmative action one needs to have necessary qualifications and experiences. And so, because of apartheid and colonialism, very few black people have the necessary qualifications to benefit from affirmative action in this country.

Pambazuka News: By wanting to downplay racial and cultural difference are you not necessarily against diversity? There is a difference between cultural/racial differences and cultural/racial oppression. And the fact that there are cultural/racial differences does not necessarily mean that there is oppression going on. Don’t you think the ‘task is to remove oppression, not to obliterate difference’.

Neville Alexander : Firstly, you need to understand that racial identities are the reason we are where we are in this country. Secondly, in the very short term you can’t obliterate “racial” differences. Further, it is not necessary to create racial categories, nor does one have to perpetuate racial categories. Sub-national identities can be based on many different factors such as religion and linguistics.

Pambazuka News: What is the difference between racial and linguistic categories?

Neville Alexander : The difference is that in South African history, languages have not yet been abused in the same manner as “race” for purposes of oppression and social conflict, if one excepts the two critical historical events around the Milnerist suppression and the Verwoerdian imposition of Afrikaans. Secondly, linguistic categories are not permanent. One can get in and out of linguistic categories whereas one can’t do the same with racial categories.

Pambazuka News: One can argue that there is no reason that a society will not find it easy to linguistically oppress those who don’t sound like us, just like it was easy to oppress those who do not look like us.

Neville Alexander: That is why I do not insist on a standard isiXhosa or a standard English. If one is able to decipher a particular text at a certain level, then one should have the same opportunity just like everyone else. To use racial categories, one risks perpetuating the kind of oppression one witnessed in the past.

Pambazuka News: Don’t you think that given the South African social context, racial categories such as ‘Indian’, ‘White’, ‘Coloured’ and ‘Black’ are useful if we do not want to obscure the racial hierarchies and racial privileges that still exist in this country?

Neville Alexander: We can never obscure them for they are terribly obvious. However, what needs to be done is to address them openly, not by perpetuating these racial categories but by questioning racial categories.

Pambazuka News: What is the difference between ‘non-racialism’ and ‘anti-racism’?

Neville Alexander: In my view, ‘non-racialism’ means the non-existence of race as a biological entity to begin with, and the constructedness of race as a social category and therefore the potential to deconstruct race as a social category. Anti-racism is the struggle against racial hierarchies and against the use of racial ideology to exploit people’s labour power. I do not see the concepts as mutually exclusive in any way, but rather as concepts that complement each other.

• Interview conducted by Mandisi Majavu.
* Neville Alexander is the Director of the Project for The Study of Alternative Education in South Africa (PRAESA). He has done much pioneering work in the field of language policy and planning in South Africa since the early 1980s via organisations such as the National Language Project, PRAESA, as well as the LANGTAG process. He has been influential in respect of language policy development with various government departments, including Education. His most recent work has focused on the tension between multilingualism and the hegemony of English in the public sphere.

• Please send comments to or comment online at www.pambazuka.org