SA’s moral compass

by Editor · March 3, 2010

President Jacob Zuma�s proposed national dialogue on morality in South Africa is most welcome, even if the announcement�s timing and lack of detail may suggest an element of opportunism by a president whose own views on personal morality seem to differ from that of much of the rest of the population.

The National Church Leaders’ Consultation (NCLC), of which the Catholic Church is part, summed up the challenges South Africa faces most eloquently: �As a nation, we have been reaping the fruits of attitudes�social, economic, moral and political�that have undermined and continue to undermine what common values and principles of behaviour we shared in the recent past to achieve our new South Africa.�

The Christian leaders described the South African nation as �directionless and clueless as to where we are going as a country�. South Africa has indeed lost its moral compass. There is a need for a collective effort to guide the nation in the right direction.

However, the terminology of �morality� is ominously loaded because it is so subjective. What embraced by some religions, cultures or philosophies may be abominable to others. It is therefore fundamental that the terms of the proposed dialogue be predicated on common grounds, with an emphasis on equitable and mutually respectful co-existence.

The NCLC has identified a workable premise: �We propose that the starting point be the foundational principle that the human person, and every human person, has intrinsic and inalienable value. All else in any code of morals must take its lead from that basic principle.�

Some thorny issues will be raised immediately. The dialogue will be tested as the question of when life begins is presented, and further when matters concerning sexuality and gender relations arise. These difficult issues must be discussed openly and respectfully, but they must not derail a collective effort to address areas of common agreement.

At the root of the declining sense of ethics is the erosion of personal responsibility. South Africa has been infected with a culture of impunity.

The problem manifests itself right at the top. The presidency of the nation is occupied by a man who fought long and hard to prevent having his innocence of alleged corruption tested in court, and whose lapses of sexual continence have angered the nation.

The culture of impunity is manifest among those who wield political power. Not a few political leaders have milked their power for personal aggrandisement, benefiting from business interests which don�t always give the appearance of complete probity (and lie about it when presented with their unethical dealings), and then are not adequately investigated.

The culture of impunity is manifest among business concerns that conspire to swindle the consumers of staple foods, exploiting the nation�s poorest for profit. And when found out, these racketeers plead ignorance.

The culture of impunity is manifest among criminals, who fancy the odds of not being caught and are not being turned into social outcasts, and among those South Africans who already threaten xenophobic violence after the World Cup, with no evidence of preventative intervention from public officials.

The culture of impunity is manifest on our roads, where motorists believe traffic laws need to be obeyed only at the threat of these laws being enforced.

The culture of impunity has infected all of us who commit infractions � drink-driving, littering, petty theft, coercive behaviour, adultery � simply because we can.

The erosion of ethics and morality in South Africa is linked to this festering culture of impunity, the lack of personal, social and national responsibility. A national conversation on morality will be of no consequence unless it tackles this corrosive mentality.