Back to the issue…

Not being a UCT graduate, I have tried to understand the “debate” (it’s in inverted commas because I’m not sure it can be called a debate) between Professors Mangcu and Benatar, which is apparently about transformation but seems to be more about themselves and each other.

I have yet to read what the participants believe about the subject of transformation, although I now have an excellent idea of what the participants think the other participant thinks.

I went to a university where the local population, which often consisted of residents of rural areas, would comment, thus, when confronted with some academic luminary: “Are you a real doctor, or one of those things from Rhodes?

One of the benefits of this was that academics at Rhodes, many with vast experience and learning, were kept humble and modest. Not so, it would seem of the participants in the Cape Times on the subject of transformation, which has been ongoing for decades now but seems to be more about ad hominem attacks and showing everyone how clever we all are than reaching a conclusion.

Rhodes may have fallen fairly quickly, at least the bloke on the horse did, the one in Grahamstown appears to have survived, but thanks to academic snobbishness (and if that wasn’t a word, then it is now), the crucial debate about real change appears to have stalled.

So to all you clever doctors (real or otherwise out there) taking part in the debate about transformation at UCT: you are all clever, we think you are ever-so-smart and doubtless you are all experts in your field. Could you now please get over yourselves, climb over each other, and tackle the issue at hand? This is what we do to move our society forward.

And while you’re at it, please don’t write anymore articles until after you have actually tackled the real challenge which, although large, is still smaller than your egos.

B Anderson

Stellenbosch