Loading ...The latest Human Science Research Council survey reveals that
white South Africans are worried about the success of the 2010 World Cup. However, the survey also indicates “this by no means implies that they care less about hosting the mega event”.
Furthermore, “at least 95% of white South Africans have consistently perceived there to be some form of benefit accruing to South Africa from the hosting of the World Cup”.
The survey, which used 3 300 respondents, has rubbished the claim by former Minister in the Presidency Essop Pahad that whites would like to see South Africa’s attempts to host the event fail.
Pahad used his platform at the 2008 Beijing Olympics to single out one particular race group and, once again, the Afro-pessimists had a field day. The Human Rights Commission took the easy way out by saying it didn’t have the right to rule on an incident that had occurred overseas. Nevertheless, Pahad has done us all a favour.
Apart from falling on his sword in the wake of Thabo Mbeki’s axing, he has forced South Africans — black and white — to re-examine their stance towards the 2010 World Cup, which, like it or not, will change the landscape of this nation forever. Opposition political parties, the media and many ordinary South Africans have subsequently proclaimed their patriotism and support for 2010.
Guy Lundy, a futurist and strategy consultant, says the real issue is that the average South African has not yet grasped the enormity of this event. “When we look at other major sporting events, there is always a level of skepticism — all the things we worry about here. It goes with the territory. In the last year, building up to the tournament, the momentum will pick up.”
Let’s not forget the extraordinary images of 2006 when much of Germany was washed in a sea of red, yellow and black. Our time is coming.
That is all very well, but it doesn’t say anything particularly substantial. Okay, so Essop Pahad spoke like an utter cretin, and most people think there is “some form of benefit” to hosting the 2010 World Cup. That’s nice, but it doesn’t add up to much. Most people could simply be wrong, or “some form of benefit” could be a fleeting feeling of vicarious pride.
A more interesting question to answer is this: what material, long-lasting benefits will South Africa’s hosting of the 2010 World Cup bring for ordinary South Africans? Another: will these benefits outweigh the material drawbacks? By material I don’t mean physical and tangible, but benefits/drawbacks that matter.
(Report abuse)