What Has the World Cup to Do With Civic Action?

Guest contribution by Meghan Cooper

Meghan Cooper, former ISS student and currently employed by UNIFEM in Sydney Australia, has recently finalized a working paper for the Knowledge Programme on citizenship and social movements in South Africa. On 13-16 June Meghan Cooper attended a conference organized by the South African Sociological Association (SASA), where she presented the outcome of her research. While the World Cup is reaching its boiling point, enjoy reading Meghan's critical take on development, sport and social delivery protest.

Report Seminar: “Sport, Leisure and Development in the 21st Century - Opportunities and Challenges” in South Africa - June 13^th – 16^th East London South Africa

With a simultaneous take-off of the 2010 FIFA World Cup, sport mega events and the potential of sport in development goals was a key focus of the annual congress. Opinions as to the economic costs associated with such events were overwhelmingly concerning with the question of: couldn’t there be a better way to use this money?

Recognized as one of the most divisive societies in the world, South Africa hosting the 2010 World Cup has been met with applause for its ability to somehow prove African development and serve as a tool for economic strength. Although the opening panel overwhelmingly sided with the criticism of its enormous costs and economic benefits for a few that only exacerbates the societies divisions. Steven Jacksons from the University of Otago in New Zealand expressed such caution in further dividing societies from his studies of socio-cultural analysis of sport and sport mega events. In his opening session he notices that mega events are at the intersection of cultural, social and national tensions. In this vein, arguably the World Cup has been exacerbating ongoing tensions especially in Johannesburg’s now infamously termed “service delivery protests”.

Marcelle Dawson contributed to the debate in detailing the increasing persecution of social movements involved in what similarly known throughout the conference as “service delivery protests”. Moreover, she details that it is inappropriate to place the argument that service delivery is just about receiving water, electricity or the like. It is just as much about participation. Not just the demand for participation among movements but the governmental spaces and mechanisms that have been created for participation as these are too often assumed to be adequate and properly functioning. She notices that within this problematic there has been an ongoing cycle among service delivery protesters where police repression has only served to create more “system alienation”. Most state responses to protestor clashes with authorities have been that individuals are not utilizing state programs created for their expression, however, as founded in Dawson’s research local government counselors have been a source of frustration for citizens with little being done to address the concerns that are brought forth. One can then ask, if the limitations of economic activity in and around FIFA venues are another source of frustration for communities that cannot afford to pay for electricity to run a television or radio to be a part of the spectacle of “African culture”.

In looking at how movements have been challenging blatant state inaction or discrimination it is important to similarly examine other members of civil society. Most notably for South Africa, trade unions have historically played a vital role in challenging apartheid divisions and more recently vocal towards the ANC government’s policies. This was seemingly the case however, upon a presentation and evaluation by Crispen Chinguno from the University of Witswatersrand, unions seem to have been largely silent especially when it came to the opposition raised to FIFA economic limitations. According to Chinguno in his analysis of trade union activity and themes over recent years, the density of trade unions in South Africa has been on the decrease. With this decrease he notices the necessity for the expertise of trade unions in preparations for the World Cup however, failed to be taken up as an opportunity or focus for revitalization among those remaining movements. Could this be because of increasing repression and an inability to really dialogue with the state as has been argued by many movements? This was hard for him to tell as many unions had not been issuing formal statements or reviews on the matter, however, should remain a question of concern for the future of South African civil society.

The curiosity and perhaps even “mystique” of why such service delivery protests have become increasingly violent remained a prevalent discussion especially within the Working Group for Social Movements throughout the congress. The strategies of the government but also the movements themselves were under scrutiny. The interplay of xenophobia remained a prominent discussion especially when acts of xenophobic violence were noted internationally in creating what many claimed to be “Afrophobia”. Joshua Kirschner of University of Johannesburg sought to understand this dilemma by looking at a township that had not seen such levels of violence when seeking services and political participation. In looking at the community of Khutsong it seemed that local councilor failures to respond to residents were not misdirected against foreigners as has been seen in other townships. Rather, Khutsong residents formed around the Merafong Demarcation Forum, consisting of representatives from various organizations and civic leaders who drew attention to the fact that foreigners were not responsible or causing the lack of response to the communities concerns*. What is different about Khutsong from other movements that are seemingly similar and experiencing many similar struggles? This question remained by the end of the conference, however, an interesting question nevertheless to continue to be examined.

Finally, the violence among movements was acknowledged in the paper presented by Meghan Cooper who suggested that among discussions of social movements in South Africa the option of utilizing rights-based litigation or a legal approach is too often placed in a false binary of opposition. Among social movement scholars and participants utilizing a legal approach is seen more negatively than positively as it is costly, lengthy and arguably results in co-optation by working within the “rules” of the legal agenda. However, Cooper presented the case of the Anti-Privatisation’s water struggles in the Phiri Water Case with Jackie Dugard under the Coalition Against Water Privatisation. In her analysis, she suggests that this case reveals a forward and revolutionary step by a socialist movement that largely remains critical of legal approaches. While critique of legal processes is warranted they can also represent an opportunity should the barriers of cost and representation be overcome. In turn, a legal approach may actually be an inventive and additional maneuver within and among other forms of civic action.

While many topics were presented throughout the conference, this text details the dominant themes that were questioned and discussed surrounding South Africa social movements. The topics presented are overwhelmingly relevant not only for arguments surrounding the World Cup, but for a much larger analysis and call for support to the increasing challenges and ongoing dynamics present among movements in South Africa.

* Kirschner, J. and Phokela, C. (forthcoming 2010) ‘Khutsong and xenophobic violence: Exploring the case of the dog that didn’t bark’. University of Johannesburg, available online

About the author

Meghan Cooper received her Master’s degree from the ISS during the 2008/2009 academic year, specializing in Politics of Alternative Development. Meghan then worked as a researcher at the University of New South Wales in Sydney Australia on the topic of women’s movements in Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo and their engagement with the International Criminal Court. She now works for UNIFEM.