Victories and veneers: When Springbok glory masks a nation’s pain

THERE’S no accounting for taste, and when it comes to taste, I believe there is no absolute right or wrong.

For example, I was once invited to try some “delicious” duck prepared by someone trained by a proper chef. To be honest, the duck was perfectly cooked – crispy skin, juicy tender meat, expertly seasoned. One could tell that time, effort and heart went into the preparation.

But I hated it. One small bite was all it took to realise that I absolutely detest duck meat.

Now, I know that some people with more refined palates may raise their flaming torches, gather pitchforks, and tie a triple knot in the noose they plan to use for the blasphemy I’ve just uttered. They’ll insist there’s nothing better than a well-prepared duck.

And though they may be 100% correct in their view, it doesn’t change mine: duck is a foul fowl. And believe it or not, I’m probably not alone in thinking that.

All of this to say: tastes differ. Preferences vary. And so it should come as no surprise that even though the world champion, all-conquering Springboks have just wrapped up a dominant Incoming Series against Italy and Georgia, not everyone is celebrating. There are South Africans who are unimpressed with the national green-and-gold fever.

Of course, the patriotic, die-hard Bok fan might raise an eyebrow – or a fist – and say, “If you don’t support your country’s team, what are you still doing here?”

But maybe, before deporting someone with an opposing view, it’s worth hearing them out – understanding why they might feel so … let’s say “wrong”.

The open letter

Someone recently shared an open letter with me. It was from a man named Grant Trewern and addressed to Springbok head coach Rassie Erasmus and captain Siya Kolisi.

Before you fire off angry replies, consider his opening: Trewern makes it clear that his letter is not against the Springboks, but rather a protest against how their success is being misused – to mask failure elsewhere, to create a dangerous illusion of national unity.

He acknowledges that the Boks have historically given South Africans moments of pride, especially in hard times.

But now, he warns, that symbolism has become a smokescreen. Politicians are using Springbok victories to distract from a collapsing state. The media contributes, he argues, by romanticising sporting success while ignoring the country’s deeper problems.

And Trewern isn’t the only one sounding this alarm.

A second warning

I recently received another paper from a different source – a powerful, more academic piece by Mark Fredericks. In it, he quotes Jared Diamond and Marshall McLuhan to explain how even ancient civilisations used spectacle to distract the masses.

“The Roman Empire unravelled in part, due to the disruption of their communication routes – the roads and their supply of papyrus – resulting in a communication vacuum which the invading Barbarian hordes took full advantage of.

“While the empire was collapsing, the ruling classes in Rome gave the starving masses games and spectacle – gladiators were the celebrities of the age, inasmuch as the Springboks are the celebrities of the current age.”

Trewern offers a similarly sobering observation: “South Africa is not united. And no number of trophies, jerseys, or national anthem renditions can fix what our leaders have broken and destroyed,” he writes. “While you lift trophies, our children lift empty plates. While you hold medals, our hospitals collapse and schools decay. While you are cheered, millions are left unheard.

“And while you are embraced as gods, our leaders continue to betray, steal and mislead our nation.”

It struck me that two different people, from two unrelated sources, are raising almost identical concerns – and doing so with urgency.

Fredericks continues: “The euphoria that follows the Springboks is understandable, and the wholesome joy expressed by the excluded could be viewed as a masterstroke by the ANC, because their failings as a government would be magnified had the Springboks not been successful.

“Everything the ANC has touched has turned into excrement, and many sewage treatment systems in the country no longer function.”

Neither contributor blames the Springboks for the situation. But both argue that silence — and the symbolic use of their success – contributes to the broader problem. They caution against letting sport become a sedative while governance crumbles.

Trewern puts it plainly: “We are not healed by national jerseys and World Cup trophies. We are healed by justice, by food on our tables, by honest leadership, by working hospitals, by education, by jobs — by hope that is real, not rehearsed and masquerading on Saturdays when the Springboks play.”

Fredericks echoes that message: “Everybody knows that this country is in terminal decline. Everybody can see it, it’s just that people prefer to watch the Springboks and ignore the stench of a rotten South African national corpse. The distraction of the sporting spectacle has, as George Orwell wrote, managed to ‘encourage people to disbelieve the evidence of their eyes’.”

What now?

Are these dissenters just doom-mongers? Or are they holding up a mirror that the rest of us would rather avoid?

Trewern suggests action: “Stop letting politicians use your victories as cover stories for their ineptitude and failures. Stop letting the message of unity in our country be weaponised as propaganda and PR stunts by politicians.

“We thank you for the pride and glory that you have brought us. But pride without justice is just performance. And South Africa has performed long enough.”

Fredericks, meanwhile, urges us to take off the green-and-gold blinkers: “The erasure of township truths, histories, and cultures is aided and abetted by a fetid press and media class, who, due to the royal treatment they receive from the elite sporting structures, refrain from exploring historical questions.

“The result on the scoreboard is all that matters, just as victory at the polls is all that matters.

“Something needs to be done to elevate the memories of township sporting cultures into the mainstream.”

And in a powerful closing line, he writes: “The nauseating flood of visuals from the elite sporting structures encourages social blindness, because elite sport, just like elite politics, does nothing and presents nothing of value to society.”

Is it just noise?

At the end of the day, the dedicated, patriotic Bok fan may dismiss these arguments as white noise – irrelevant distractions from the joy of victory. They may say sport is sport and politics is politics, and ne’er the twain shall meet.

But perhaps, before we switch the channel to highlights and try rewatching the winning try, we could at least consider this: Even the most perfectly prepared duck can leave a bad taste in the mouth – especially when some of us were never at the table to begin with.