Jews urged not to meet Tafelberg activists

This article gives plenty of space to detractors of Seeff and Katz, but offers no indication of whether either was approached for comment. As such it suggests a tendentious agenda, less reportage than advocacy. Did the author make any effort to gauge the response of the two men?

Mr Teichner:

The article includes the entire text of the letter by Samuel Seeff and Lance Katz. It constitutes their public stated point of view. Far more space is dedicated in the article to the views of Samuel Seeff and Lance Katz than anyone else. It would be redundant to ask them for further opinion on their already stated opinion. The views of Doron Isaacs and Jared Rossouw were solicited as responses to the extensive space given to Seeff and Katz.

I know, being one of the tribe myself, that many local Jews have a strange belief that a differing opinion is a crime. But really, it happens so damned often that I fear Jews have lost the capacity to think independently and with some originality. I hope that among the Cape Town Jews, few will listen to the Estate Agent and will participate in the discussion and listen to differing views.

Though you are right in that both sides are represented adequately in this article, the presence of the letter does not absolve you from contacting the authors for their comment. You should have at least reached out to them and stated as much in the article. Good reporting otherwise. Thank you for your hard work.

As a member of the Jewish community I received Seeff and Katz’s email. As Isaacs rightly points out in this article, these men have not been elected by the Jewish community and thus do not have the authority to speak on its behalf. Yet, they have the power to email virtually every member of the Jewish community and use this platform to claim that what is in their own (financial) interest somehow reflects the interests of the community a whole. You do not represent me.

Calling for a stay-away from a public meeting is shameful because of the ignorance this action creates. What harm would it do for Jewish people to know about the benefits of social housing? What harm can come from listening to the testimony of poor and working class people about their housing needs – the same people that are working in our homes, looking after our children? When have Jewish people ever believed that learning, questioning, debating, and seeking to understand a situation deeply are activities to shy away from? Do we believe that our community is incapable of listening to another side of this issue and coming to their own, reasoned conclusions?

While I understand that a school on the Tafelberg site would be a boon to the Jewish community it would be irresponsible not to consider “at what cost?” We cannot ignore that the alternative use of the site is for social housing. Social housing would afford poor and working class black and brown people an opportunity to live in a historically white suburb – an opportunity with real, material benefits including access to good schools, transport, employment, healthcare etc. This, in turn, works to lessen race and class segregation and social inequality in our city. Is the Jewish community willing to ignore these pressing social justice issues and deny that our actions have any bearing on them? What happens on the Tafelberg site matters – not because housing on this site will solve all of Cape Town’s problems – but because it represents our collective stance on integration and transformation in our city.

As members of Jewish Voices for a Just Peace (JVJP), who care deeply about the Jewish community, the email you sent to the Cape Town Jewish community last week, concerns us a great deal.

In the email, you urge Jews not to attend the public meeting being held to discuss the future of the Tafelberg site in Cape Town. The email claims this will compromise Jewish community interests and even went as far to tell Jews if they went there, it would be in their personal capacity.

According to Groundup News: Tafelberg is the site of an old school. It is currently owned by the Western Cape government. The Phyllis Jowell Jewish Day School (PJJDS) wishes to build a school on Tafelberg, while activist groups Ndifuna Ukwazi and Reclaim the City want it to be used for affordable housing.”

It was pointed out in a reply to the email that neither of you are elected by the Jewish community and it is therefore strange that you would be issuing any kind of orders as to what Jews should be doing with their time.

It also concerns us that the email identifies a clear enemy and hints that Jews are under siege from activists and Seapoint residents seeking affordable housing.

Public meetings are precisely the arena where different points of view can be heard and engaged on, as well as solutions found.
For many Jews who’ve grown up in Seapoint, Greenside, Sandton, it’s difficult to imagine a life where one has to wake at 5 AM, to take a two-hour bus or taxi journey to one’s place of work.

The complex spatial patterns, due to the history of forced removals in Cape Town and other parts of the country, are well documented. The evictions to the sprawling Cape Flats, placed people far away from economic and education centres.

It’s close to 23 years after democracy and it’s clear that unless ALL sectors in society, think through how we can change this country to ensure, millions of people benefit from it, we will continue to see high levels of crime, unemployment and other social ills.

It’s to our mutual benefit, to engage, interact and listen, share our points of view with people we have not spoken to previously. It’s in this context that your silo mentality in attempting to bar Jews from last Thursday night’s meeting is so concerning. Why not actually encourage members of the Jewish community to attend the meeting, listen and put their own views across?

Kathy Barolsky
Jewish Voices for a Just Peace (JVJP)