On The Quinton de Kock Episode
The genius of the Black Lives Matter protest is that it forces everyone to pick a side. Either one acknowledges the essential point of the anti-racist protest - that prejudice exists in the world, and that in practice, not all lives matter equally, but that they should and that institutions, individuals and society at large needs to change to ensure that they do - or one doesn’t. There isn’t a third alternative.
This is why it is such a brilliantly successful protest movement. It’s message begins and ends with the heart of the matter. It is devoid of high minded jargon or deep political theory. It offers its opponents few targets.
Those who yearn for the prejudices of the 19th century hate this. But the far more numerous fence sitters hate this just as much.
Quinton de Kock sat out (see Firdose Moonda’s excellent reporting for ESPNCricinfo on this subject) South Africa’s T20 World Cup match against West Indies after refusing to follow a new Cricket South Africa (CSA) directive that the South African team should take a knee at the start of the match. de Kock has not spoken publicly since his decision to withdraw. But he has spoken about the matter earlier.
"My reason? I'll keep it to myself. It's my own, personal opinion. It's everyone's decision; no-one's forced to do anything, not in life."
Fence sitters may not immediately notice the irony in de Kock’s point. The entire point of highlighting the existence of racism or prejudice is that this capacity to make one’s own decisions and live by them is not equally available to everybody. For all lives to matter equally, all lives must have the capacity to make their own decisions (this means they must have comparable options available to them to decide from) to an equal extent.
It follows that if de Kock were to follow his own “personal opinion”, he should show solidarity with his teammates. The ongoing SJN hearings provide additional relevant context for South Africa. de Kock’s position is the classic position of the fence sitter.
So how does the fence sitter avoid taking a stand? The classic method is to say something to the effect that “I support the sentiment, but not this particular action”. Readers will perhaps notice the mathematical elegance of this singular formulation - it is a point which works for all proposed actions, one at a time. The fence sitter never has to say “I will never support any action, but be assured that I support the sentiment”. This deviously straight bat offers them an out.
There are other things fence sitters do to take a stand. You’ve all probably heard them - many are mutually contradictory.
CSA have not previously instructed the South African cricket team to unite in a gesture. Boards, which are private entities, it should be remembered, do this routinely. de Kock is essentially in a dispute with his employer. He remains a centrally contracted player for 2021-22, and the terms of the contract will probably determine how the dispute is resolved.
CSA’s decision to require the South African cricket team to make a united gesture has, however, not only forced Quinton de Kock off the fence, but if the reaction to this episode is any guide, has forced thousands of others off this fence too.
Fence sitters need not despair however. New disputes will arises in the future, and there will be new, well-populated fences in the future for sure. In time, there may be cause to evict those as well, and still newer fences will arise. That is how social change seems to occur.
But for now, one is either anti-racist or one isn’t. If one is, then one recognizes that being anti-racist is not about oneself, but about us.