Ponderings of the Man from Mpofana...

Before you wonder why an undiverse person like myself is writing on the identity of such a diverse land, ask who would be qualified to write on such a topic? Everyone has their own biases & if anything, I write with some knowledge of history & little knowledge on genetics so who better? If we're going to go by genetics alone - there is no such thing as a South African. With genetics, you're either black (African), white (European), Indian or Asian. No inbetweens. Coloured or mixed-race people are just a mixture of two or more groups & not a distinct heritage on their own. My logic goes, you are your surname & more importantly you are your parents' child. Whatever your parents identify as is what you inherently are & quiet often this identity is unclear in the modern age of globalisation so your surname becomes ever more important.  What of naturalisation? In the past, there were "rights-of-passage" to naturalisation. Mainly you would show that ...

Many mixed-race people who have, at least, one black parent identify as black in the Western world. In Africa, it's not the same... mixed race people in Africa, especially those with white fathers prefer their father's identity & rightfully so, one usually claims the identity linked with their father's surname. What we as black people assume is that mixed-race people who were born under black culture should simply adopt black culture & forsake their other heritage. Virtually leaving little room to express themselves in full so, in time, they grow resentful of the culture they were born under. My theory is if someone is not of full blood, they should not be considered any of the identities they are a mixture of. Then you say "Maybe when an individual has no identity to go home to, he/she goes rogue & becomes a menace to society when lacking something to hold on to." This might be so in unstructured societies with no identity & direction but where ...