Navigating the Complexities of Culture, Poverty, and Structural Exclusion
In the rural regions of South Africa, the interplay between culture, poverty, and structural exclusion has created a complex web of challenges that have left many communities struggling to break free from the cycle of unemployment and shared adversity. This article delves into the nuanced realities faced by these communities, drawing insights from ongoing ethnographic research and exploring the cultural narratives that have emerged in response to the persistent lack of economic opportunities.
Revisiting the Debate on Culture and Poverty
The debate surrounding the relationship between culture and poverty has long been a topic of contention in the social sciences. In the 1960s, the American anthropologist Oscar Lewis introduced the concept of the “culture of poverty,” suggesting that certain attitudes and traits developed by impoverished communities could perpetuate their disadvantaged state. This notion was heavily criticized, with others arguing that it was not culture, but rather capitalism and structural inequality, that was the root cause of poverty.
Alongside this debate, the anthropologist George Foster proposed the idea of the “image of limited good,” which suggested that in rural, peasant-proletarian communities, there was a cognitive orientation that perceived all “good” (both material and spiritual) as being in short supply, where one person’s gain was seen as another’s loss. This model was informed by a sense of maintaining social equivalence and avoiding anti-social inequality.
While the use of the “culture of poverty” concept has been problematic in the South African context, due to its historical association with the apartheid state’s racist ideologies, the idea of the “image of limited good” provides a more nuanced framework for understanding the cultural dynamics at play in the rural communities of the country.
The Lingering Legacy of Apartheid
In 20th-century rural South Africa, the apartheid government enforced forms of social equivalence through policies that restricted families in the reserves or homelands from accumulating too many material assets. Communal land tenure systems helped flatten out rural social differentiation and create a state-supported system of shared poverty to support the cheap labor economy. The aim was to ensure that rural households remained too poor to assert their independence or withhold their labor from the market.
After the end of apartheid, when the state no longer controlled the labor market through influx control and the migrant labor system was dismantled, families were more inclined to express social differentiation by improving their rural homes and acquiring material goods. However, the long-standing expectation of social equivalence remained, leading to a persistent and contested issue around access to basic services in rural areas.
The Image of Limited Good and the Politics of Service Delivery
In the post-apartheid era, rural communities have fiercely contested the idea that some areas are receiving services, such as electricity and running water, while others are not. Many communities have even boycotted elections due to the perceived inequity in service delivery. With limited public goods and corruption, the ruling African National Congress (ANC) has struggled to meet the rural population’s demands for basic services, but has nevertheless implemented a standardized system of social security and grants, which allows access irrespective of location.
This context has led to an intensification of intra-community competition and fracture, as residents block citizens from neighboring communities from attending service delivery meetings, or even shut down schools to children from other village sections. The “culture of limited good” is reflected in the belief that what comes into the community belongs to those who live inside, creating a zero-sum mentality that makes it difficult for limited public goods to reach all who need them.
The Curse of Persistent Unemployment
The chronic failure of service delivery, combined with the increasing isolation of rural communities, has unleashed an increasingly vitriolic culture of competition over scarce resources. In this environment of growing suspicion, fear, and competition, rural individuals and households feel that inclusion or exclusion (access to goods of any kind) is a matter of luck or good fortune.
In the rural village of Tsolo, in the former Transkei homeland of the Eastern Cape province, the level of unemployment has reached an existential crisis, with many older men and women speaking of a time when almost every family had someone employed, often in the mines or the cities. The shift from periodic to permanent joblessness has led to the emergence of a narrative that persistent unemployment is a “curse.”
Locals believe that evil witches, driven by envy and a desire to maintain their own advantage, are stealing the luck and employment opportunities of others. They speak of “spiritual warfare,” where Satan is constantly working to take away the jobs that God has provided. This belief in the supernatural theft of luck has led some young people to even avoid discussing their educational achievements, fearing that they may become targets of these malevolent forces.
The Pandemic and the Reinvention of Funeral Practices
The arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent restrictions on customary practices in rural areas further exacerbated the feelings of spiritual vulnerability and the need for social equivalence. In Tsolo and other areas around Mthatha, the night vigil ritual stage, where the coffin was opened and the body washed and dressed in the presence of kin, was widely dispensed with in favor of simply taking the sealed coffin to the grave on the day of the funeral.
Locals offered different explanations for their decisions to break with tradition, with many citing the inability to afford the elaborate funerals of the pre-pandemic era, as well as concerns about spiritual contamination and the threats of rising crime. The decision to stick with some of the COVID-19 restrictions was thus appealing to minimize the threat of spiritual contamination, while at the same time demonstrating a commitment to social equivalence at a time when witches were perceived to be on the loose and highlighting social difference and inequality could be dangerous.
Conclusion: Confronting Structural Exclusion and Reimagining the Future
In this election year, when aspirations and hope are high, the failure of state service delivery to reach the poor has produced a new politics of competition within and between communities and families. Even targeted poverty relief measures and grants are dividing rather than uniting families, genders, and generations. In this context of broken promises and collapsing services, the feelings of rural entrapment and isolation have helped to reinvent the cultural politics of “limited good.”
As the rural communities of South Africa grapple with the complexities of unemployment, spiritual beliefs, and service delivery, the need to confront the underlying structural exclusion becomes increasingly clear. By understanding the nuanced interplay between culture, poverty, and inequality, policymakers and community leaders can work towards more holistic and equitable solutions that address the root causes of these challenges and empower rural populations to break free from the curse of shared adversity.
The Joint Action for Water initiative is committed to supporting communities in navigating these complex issues, offering practical guidance, advocacy strategies, and innovative approaches to water and sanitation services, community engagement, and sustainable development. By bridging the gap between policy and grassroots realities, we strive to create a more inclusive and prosperous future for all.
