Alumnus pleased to see uni debate “still as divisive, toxic as ever”

“Some things never change,” says 25-year-old with a smile as she scans the university’s Facebook page

Rhodes University alumni are pleased today, after a brief perusal of the university’s Facebook page confirmed it still contained all the vitriol, ad hominem comments and logical fallacies that hundreds of ex-Rhodents grew so accustomed to in their time at Rhodes.

According to 25-year-old Financial Analyst Jeanine Dee – just one of hundreds of students who attended Rhodes University and is glad to see the continuation of such a beloved ritual – it’s like she never left.

“I’m glad that not much has changed,” she said. “I mean, when you look at the majority of the posts, there are still a lot of people and many students who use weasel wording, among many other rhetorical fallacies.”

“And it’s not just that: I see spelling mistakes, ALL-CAPS arguments, a lack of critical thinking that fails to take into account the nuances of these complex debates, and even people just outright saying ‘oh, you’re clearly irrational and stupid, there’s no point in arguing with you’,” she said. “I’m just glad to see that a university education is still producing such excellent and thought-provoking discourse.”

And it doesn’t end there.

“There’s also that lack of a sense of humour that was so frequent in our flame-wars,” she said. “I remember when I was second year and I said ‘guys, just chill’ and then posted a meme making fun of the whole silly furore. Now, just like back then, I see people still tell these calm heads to ‘GTFO’ and explain in great detail why their attitude and comment is ‘so problematic’. I’m just glad that there’s still that good old vituperative mud-slinging that made me unsubscribe from the page all those years ago.”

However, some alumni say that it’s “so much more than it was in our time” and that this new wave of debate has “taken things to a new level”.

“Back in my day, I was never told by someone making a controversial assertion that ‘it’s not their job to educate you’, or even that I ‘should go do my bloody reading’ without providing a link or idea what these readings may be,” said 27-year-old MSocSci graduate Erin Jackson. “I don’t know why we didn’t see it before; it makes total sense. After all, they’re the ones making the argument. Why should the burden of proof be on them?”

Despite this heaped praise, the current student body has discounted the alumni’s response, saying that it’s “invalid”.

“We’re not saying that current membership to an in-group is an obligatory prerequisite to taking part in such controversial topics that affect not just our university or even our whole nation, but many many, many universities and nations across the globe...” said SRC Social Media Councillor Ray Sandgenda.

“... but seriously, do you even go here?”

Facebook to distribute likes to cancer victims

Social media giant and philanthropic website Facebook have announced that, starting today, they will now be distributing the accumulated likes, shares, and statuses aimed at ending cancer.

According to Head of Facebook's Charity wing, Sharon Lyks, the decision has been a long time coming.

"Ever since that first photo of a small girl smiling sadly at the camera, her bald head shining tragically in the little-girl-hating, cancer-giving sun, we knew we had to do something to stop this awful illness," she said in an interview with Muse and Abuse this morning. "Of course, we all know that the best way to end the combined pain and suffering of the victims of disease is to like and share photos of the internet."

The response, said Lyks, has been amazing.

"Since sharing that photo and putting it on everyone's wall, the picture has garnered over 4 billions likes and 18 billion comments," she said. "We're not sure, but we're pretty sure that's gotta be worth a lot of Internet Money."

Lyks and the Facebook team intend on taking these likes and comments to the Internet Monetary Exchange Bank later today.

The secret to its success, she said, was in Facebook users' tendency to repost the picture again and again, even if they know other people had seen it before.

"That's how much they cared about this campaign," said Lyks with a big smile. "They'll share it on all their friends' walls, even if that friend is a cancer-loving douche who replies 'oh, it's a hoax' and 'you should check these things to see if they're real, or just donate to a recognised charity', the cancer-apologist arsehole."

Facebook first shared that seminal photo in early 2003, but have now extended their charitable goodness to other worthy causes.

"World hunger, poverty, water shortages, homelessness... These are just a few of the things on the list of tragedies we are eliminating, one mouse click at a time."

Facebook's early estimates now state that homelessness and poverty are a mere 43 243 likes away from not existing.

"When it comes to creating a perfect utopian world of wonder, we believe that Facebook is right up there with those other bastions of social change: you know, email chain letters and online petitions on Change.org.

Man definitely not racist

pic: wikimedia commons

A man who posted a racist rant to facebook yesterday attracting the ire of hundreds of online comments and posts has been found to be "definitely not racist" by the Institute for the Study of Racist Behaviour.

According to officials from the SRB, the post by 46-year-old Sandton businessman Johan van der Westhuyzen may have at first seemed racist, as it contained several harsh slurs, including the words nigger and k****r and phrases like "these bloody blacks", but a second revision of both the content, the poster, and the circumstances under which the post was made shows that the status was actually benign in its nature.

"If we take a second look at what he said, we can see that he started off with some very insightful preceding statements," said Dr Ray Cist of the SRB. "If you look at his status, he started off by convincingly telling us that 'I'm not racist, but...'. Statements like these are societal agreements that whatever we say after that will be totally devoid of hate speech."

Cist went on to point out that Van Der Westhuyzen also went on to point out that "some of my best friends are black", saying that this is also the mark of a forward-thinking, unprejudiced individual.

"It's well known that if you talk to black people every once in a while, you can't physically be racist. Fact," he said. "He also said that he hates Darren Scott and thinks places like Orania are backwards. I mean, you can't argue with logic like that."

Cist said that the Racism Research Team they put to task also found that the offended facebook users who were up in arms over the innocent post totally ignored the context in which the post was published.

"Again, there are times and places where shouting racist or hateful slurs is socially okay," said Cist. "Just look at Shoot the Boer. Johan had a really bad day, and that car guard did get a scratch in his expensive Merc."

Johan has since retracted his apology on facebook, saying that it was "just typical" how "those people" react to "innocent freedom of speech".

Van der Westhuyzen has, however, promised that in future, he would be more equality-minded and politically correct.

"I know that this country is filled with different races and cultures, all of which play a vital role in our society," he said. "Next time, I'll try to slander as many different races as possible."

SRC prepares real-life facebook replacement

 

Following the horrifying news that Facebook will be temporarily down for upgrades to its  major servers, forcing you to talk to real people, the Student Representative Council of Rhodes University has swung into swift action with a huge contingency plan aimed at helping students deal with the upcoming trauma.

"We know that you can't go a single day without liking or commenting on stuff, and so we have stepped in to make this terrible day all the more bearable," said SRC President Betha Thaan-Nhobadhi. "As such, we will have contingencies deployed all around campus."

Plans to ease the students' fragile frames of mind are extensive, ranging from impromptu walls to makeshift Instagram services.

"We will be handing out packs of 'LIKE' cards with the normal thumbs-up sign, and blank comment box stickers for students to pin up on whatever they want," said SRC Facebook Contingency Councillor Lyka Khomment. "This way, students will be able to leave their mark on the things that don't matter in their lives,"  

He went on to add that the university staff had approved a request to turn every wall on campus into a 'wall'. "Now there will be ample space to tell people about stuff that no one wants to hear."

The SRC has also secured plans to have a guy with a megaphone at the major locations around campus, so as to announce your presence every time you 'check in' to a different location.

"We want to keep your 754 friends, acquaintances, old highschool friends that you never even talk to, and that guy who always creeps your profile and invites you to events all the time constantly updated with your changing social life," Khomment said. According to the SRC, this megaphone wielder will also act as an impromptu newsfeed, informing you of the most pertinent events in the Rhodes social sphere, for example  'zOMG Lara was tagged in 212 photos: thirty people like this'.

"We know that your life cannot be lived to its fullest without being notified every time one of Lara's friends post about how 'zOMG babez u so gorjus luv u xxxxox'," he said.

However, a real-life facebook would be nothing without crappy artistic photos - but the SRC has students covered.

Thanks to the SRC, the world will still be able to know about it every time you eat or drink something.

"A team of highly-trained instagram reproducers will walk around with polaroid cameras, taking pictures of your breakfast and of you pouting and pretending that the photograph wasn't totally preplanned and carefully posed," said fourth-year photography student Haza Ritchdhad.

"These professionals will try as best they can to give you, our Rhodes Students, the best real-life instagram experience possible," she said. She also added that these photographers will even soak the polaroid in tea to make it all blurry and sepia-toned. 

Students have reacted to the news with fervent excitement, including first-year journalism student Stacey Blake.

"I can barely wait, smiley face, smiley face, thumbs-up, winking smiley, party hat emoticon!" she said.

Readers looking to get their Muse and Abuse fix will sadly have to go cold turkey. I don't get paid for this, and I am not running for an SRC Portfolio do not have unlimited printing credit for a print edition.

Thanks to the SRC, the world will still be able to know about it every time you eat or drink something.

At what price our humanity?

Logging onto Facebook this morning, I was greeted with a post on my newsfeed which filled me with disgust. 

The post, reported by SOUTH AFRICA TODAY, is accompanied by the text:

"HAWKS SHOOT KRUGER RHINO POACHERSJohannesburg - The Hawks on Sunday shot dead an alleged rhino poacher and injured another during a shootout in the Kruger National Park. Captain Paul Ramoloka said the Hawks, in partnership with the special anti-poaching task force, received information about the alleged poachers who were spotted near the Sabi Sands private game reserve in Skukuza at around 14:00. "When our team confronted the four men, they opened fire on the police who returned fire. One of the poachers was killed, another is in hospital while the other two were arrested," he said. Police confiscated a hunting rifle, axe, saw and sedan used by the alleged poachers. Ramoloka said the three men would be charged with attempted murder and being in possession of dangerous weapons. "We are still trying to link the suspects with some of the rhino poaching which have taken place in the KNP over the past week." According to SA National Parks (SANParks) the country had lost 528 rhinos since the beginning of 2012 and 320 of them were killed in the KNP.- SAPA"

I was disgusted not by the arrest of poachers, or the death of one, but instead disgusted by the massive swathe of reactions posted. 

Now, yes, rhino poaching is a serious issue in South Africa and across the world. As of 16 October 2012, 455 rhinos have been illegally killed for their horns, a figure which has reportedly (as seen in the above) risen to 528, with some reports putting the figure at 776. According to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) approximately 75% of the world's rhinos live in South Africa, and here, the practice of rhino poaching has risen 3000% since 2011.

And for good reason, too.

According to South Africa’s National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), the rhino horn is valued at approximately ZAR 12, 000/kg, with Asian market prices going up with regards to how rare each rhino is. This is not a valid measure of black market prices.

But that - the moral indignation that these poachers are killing defenceless, docile beasts - is not what got me.
What was more horrifying, were the comments on the post.

At the time of viewing the post, there were 2325 likes, 1771 shares,  and 649 comments and quickly climbing with each second (not counting, of course, the myriad comments on each of the near 1700 shares). 

I decided to pick out the ones that hit me hardest. Remember that this is but a small, small sample. The full awful picture can be seen here.

Some of the worst examples

• "Kill them all"
• "Take no prisoners kill them all"
• "Chop off there [sic] arms"
• "kill them don't give them a second chance to do it again"
• "Cut their noses off and leave them in a veld
• "Death sentence for murderers - lets string them up in the village square and hang them"
• "one down" 
• "Kill the bastards!!!"
• "Shoot the bastards the poachers must be killed !!!" 
• "Don't spare the lead!" 
• "Good I hope they hang the bastard!" 
• "wonderful shoot to kill poachers every time"
• "Saw their balls off plus a leg or two and leave them to die or be eaten by any animal roaming the Kruger National Park"
• "One HUGE mistake..... one should have not been taken to hospital and the other two arrested!!!!!! All should have been killed and all 4 taken to the morgue!!!!!!!"
• "burn them alive"
• "don't waste time with arrests"
• "kill the whole fucking lot of them"
• "Next time kill all of them [sic] assasination style, nobody will question it, just say they died in the gunfight."
• "What happens in the bush, stays in the bush. Cut their throats and leave them to gargle in a pool of blood. The vultures and jackals will do the cleaning up."
• "They should shoot them all on site !! Or at least capture them, torture the information out of them and then shoot them"

Most, if not all, the comments suggest 'bush law' as a viable option to deal with these "scum of the earth": no witness, no court, no judge.

And worst of all, there are those who are pleased  by this hatred: "Fantastic, amazing how much hate there is for these guys, they should be tortured".

Word count

Doing a little investigative work, I came by the following stats concerning the number of instances of a word appearing in this comment board. Remember that this doesn't include the reactions in the 1700-odd shares.

The fact that "justice", "court and "jail" rank much, much lower than "kill", "shoot" or "cut" (as in "their horns/noses/penises - yes, you read correctly - off") speaks volumes - very concerning volumes, at that.

A worrying trend

Hard numbers:

"well done": 84

"kill": 64

"shoot": 58

"cut": 43

"bastard": 35

"die": 31

"good work" 18

"dead": 18

"hang": 15

"death": 13

"justice": 13

"deserve": 10

"fantastic": 10

"brilliant": 10

"jail": 6

"court": 5

On closer inspection...

Now, one thing that should be addressed is the idea that race is somehow intertwined (there was a lot of anger on my wall when I shared the post, with some pulling the race card). In the comments board (not counting profile pictures of animals/flowers/bikes/things that aren't people) there were 7 people who weren't white or Afrikaans, but even these two were equally pleased at the reported death: "LOL" and "burn them alive" were two responses.

Now, I'm not saying that there's a racial link between white people caring too much about rhinos or black people not caring enough about rhinos - that's a pretty popular card to play in South Africa, we can all admit. We can also admit that we're pretty fucking sick of it by now.

However, we have to look at the facts. 

With everything in life - crime included - there is a story behind the story. Given this country's shocking statistics that cover health, HIV infection rates, education, poverty, and the Living Standards Measure (SA has reportedly the widest gap between rich and poor in the world, with a GINI index score beating even that of Brazil, the previous heavyweight champion of 

inequality), it's shameful that we can be so brazenly outspoken against these issues when there are far, far more serious issues right in our back yard. Why is there not similar outcry at the terrible levels of service delivered in schools across the country? Where was the vehemence when news was released that a local orphanage here in Grahamstown was going to be closed?

Statistically speaking, white people are better off. And the luxury that comes with not having to worry about so-called 'third-world problems' like water, food, and so on, is that we can start worrying about more 'first-world problems'. It's not rocket science - it's Maslow. 

Now the people that don't fit this group - those who are in the bottom of the GINI index - where are they? Well, statistically, they're black, poverty-stricken, and coping with the daily human rights abuses perpetuated at the uncaring hands of government (note, I categorically state statistics, and in no way imply any connection between colour and crime).

We have to come to terms with the idea that, if someone struggles with daily basics, and is offered or told about the chance to get some horn by just killing an animal (R12 000/kg), then we have to accept that the thought that, as unsettling as you may think it:

It's just an animal

Even if they only get a percentage of the cut for doing the dirty work while their bosses sit back in Jo'burg/wherever, that's still more money than they could dream of getting. How can someone value so arbitrary and vague a concept as 'animal rights' or 'conservation' when he or she cannot even met their daily needs?

More worrying of all was clicking on several of the profile pictures. Many that I did further investigation on (who had public profile information) unashamedly boasted "Christian" in their 'religious view' field. Jesus was pretty clear on the whole "love they neighbour" stuff. Maybe God forgot the 1st amendment to the Ten: "... unless they poach rhinos"?
Christians: killing is wrong. Hell, I know that, and it's not because an old book told me so. Don't post "kill all of them, send a message" and then go to church and ask for forgiveness. That's not how it works.

South Africa (Dark red) sticks out like a sore, unequal thumb.

A misplaced hatred

The saddest thing of all is that this outburst of hatred, this welling of fury at these "bastards" and "c*#ts", is that it's a wasted fury. The bosses behind these atrocities, and the demand for rhino horn, are not affected by the death of this poor man, who will probably die without anyone ever knowing his name or why he did what he did. In fact, with security measures now gaining widespread popularity as rhino become more and more threatened, the demand for rhino horn should only increase  as supply dwindles and dries up. Killing the soldier does nothing: it's the head of the snake that should be cut off, and this is down to what our government does on an international trade level, as well as with wider intelligence operations and stings (times like this I wish the Scorpions were still around). 

Out of the huge array of comments, very few touched on this idea - 7 of them. That's less than one percent of the total posted.

• "We need to shoot the people who are hiring them to kill the rhino. That's not going to happen though as they are in their mansions in Sandton sipping on whiskey and smoking cigars."
• "Unfortunately the poachers are just the workers who are paid very little to do this. It's the big boys at the top that should be found and arrested.
• "They should get the Kingpins as well!!!"
• "...it is the big guys that need to be caught."
• "Get after the king-pins behind this despicable trade."
• "Yes, lots of poachers, would like to see some stronger government intervention at international level to sort out the syndicates driving this!!!"
• "They get paid nothing to do the dirty work and the ringleaders get all the money without getting caught"

Of the 700-or-so comments, only a mere three emulated my reaction:

• "I cannot be glad that someone's life ended. The killing needs to stop. Like others have already stated, killing the poachers is a temporary solution. Need to find who has employed them.
• "... Its completely wrong and disgusting what they do to those poor innocent rhinos, but I think its also morally wrong that everyone is so supportive of them being killed."
• "no one, despite their wrong doings DESERVES to be killed."

This country has fought hard for a justice system that treats us all fairly, and gives us the right to a fair trial. How can we even talk, even in anger, about sacrificing all that work, all that sacrifice? By denying a part of the Constitution, you deny all of the Constitution. And yes, I can hear your retort that the justice system does not deal these crimes effectively, but to you I reply: so we should just mete out justice on the spot? Line up every criminal and shoot them in the back of the head? (haaha, we'd barely have a government left ;) )

Only one comment questioned this: 

"Can't see the killing of poachers very constitutional?"

Killing in the name of...?

I will admit that I believe that (if the reports are correct) the shooting of the poacher in the article is justified. Simply put, it's self-defence. No race tangents, no politics.  

However, this is just a fact: a cold, legal point that says its okay to defend your life if it is in danger. It does not extend to gloating, or feeling a sick sense of pride that a human being has taken another human being's life. I think back to the news blown all across the world that Osama bin Laden had been killed, and I remember the roaring crowds that gathered in America to celebrate the fact - a sight that I understood, but could not help but feel sickened by. Yes, I lost my farm and much more in the crippling land reform program in Zim (many more lost even more than that), but if Mugabe were to push up daisies today, I don't think i'd flock to Facebook and cry "THANK GOD UR DEAD U PRIK BASTARD U DESERV IT".

I have to reiterate that the law should never extend to calls to kill poachers on sight, or indeed to bring back the death penalty. Think of Bheki Cele, and the damage he did with his desire to turn the police force into a 'shoot to kill' organisation (probably from watching too much Die Hard 2 on SABC3)?

In Section 11 of Chapter 2 of the South African Bill of Rights, it makes the following statement:

"The right to life, which has been held to prohibit capital punishment"

No amendments. No little clauses. No grey area.

But what can be done?

A brilliant article here points out the weaknesses, strengths and costs of each strategy. I won't go into specifics here - that isn't the point of this article.

What we can do is keep worrying: rhinos need their saviour, and ignoring one cause at the peril of another is no way to go about it. We shouldn't have to choose between the lesser of two evils. 

However, what I think we can do is be more considerate of the politics behind such a story. By calling for blood and a vague, immeasurable sense of justice meted out on the spot, we lose our humanity. These are people too. Yes, they're criminals and poachers, but what if it were your brother there, or your father, or your cousin? Would you still call for summary execution?

We cannot - I repeat, cannot - demean the value of even a single human life, whether we are Christian, Atheist, black or white. By doing that, we're no more than murderers ourselves.

Instead of just lashing out, baying for blood and hollering for heads, we should consider why it is that someone would want to kill an animal to harvest a medically-useless horn in the first place. 

And then direct all our fucking fury there.