Improving debates on inequality in South Africa

The merits of an inclusive, equitable society are broadly in consensus, but the approaches cannot be more widely different between contesting parties. Differing expectations and interpretations of how to address the racial legacy of democratic South Africa often led to bitter debates and flare-ups reminiscent of those seen during the struggle. Arguments about the desirability and effectiveness of one of the most contentious remedial policies, Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE[1]), continue to be shaped by opposing viewpoints.

Hardwired ideological positions in South Africa are typically demarcated by previously disadvantaged (read black) and advantaged groups (read white), leaving a sense of despair at this impasse. The inability to understand and transcend these biases remain obstacles for societies striving to overcome debilitating racism.

Anchor bias approach to eradicate racism

The concept of “anchor bias”, explored in The Conversation by Harvard Professor Robert Livingston, offers insight into how entrenched forms of racism persist. Livingston, who identifies as Black, explains how differing points of reference shape and reinforce these biases.

Writing in the American context, where Black people are a minority, he describes anchor bias in racial terms: “Many whites mentally compare how well they believe Black people are doing now with how badly Black people were doing in the past. The past then becomes an anchor for judging the present, leading to a biased conclusion.” In contrast, Black people may judge the present against a future ideal of full equality, dignity, and inclusion, and therefore without fail conclude that much remains to be done. In other words, their anchor is the future rather than the past.

Livingston explains anchor bias through the analogy of spectators watching a marathon from different points. A friend standing at the start might say that a runner who has completed 10 of the 42km has already covered a significant distance. A friend at the finish line, however, might say the runner still has a long way to go. Both are describing the same progress, but their different reference points lead to contrasting perspectives.

Hence, white people in America having memories of the oppressive past in the Jim Crow era, that of lynchings and civil strife may submit that much progress had been achieved in overcoming racism. The same is not true for Black people though. Studies quoted in “The Conversation” showed that Black people firmly believe that eradication of racism had been slow and that there is still a long way to go. Both groups consumed the same statistics on inequality and inclusiveness, but held different perspectives grounded in past and future anchors. These perspectives subliminally shape the subconscious and influence social responses, empathy, and tolerance.

A similar pattern is evident in South Africa. Thirty years into democracy, white South Africans, in general, would argue that substantial progress has been made in redressing past injustices and that the country should not remain fixated on the past. Black South Africans, by contrast, would contend that much remains to be done. These differing anchor biases continue to shape debates about the value and desirability of restorative policies such as BBBEE.

Inequality remains pervasive 

Recent estimates place South Africa’s income Gini coefficient at 0.63 to 0.67 making this country, according to the World Bank “the most unequal in the world.” More concerning is the fact the inequality is characterized by race. A 2024 study estimated that the median white household wealth was at about R1.36-million versus that of R70 000 for black households.

Research from the World Bank consistently shows that the richest 10% of South Africans own 85% or more of total household wealth with the top 0.01% owning more wealth than the bottom 90% combined. The bottom 50% possess extraordinarily little net wealth, and too many households have more debt than assets or negative net wealth.

Whilst White South Africans constitute 8% of the national population, they dominate in decision-making power and control in the private sector. The most recent Commission for Employment Equity data shows 66% in 2022 private-sector top management positions are occupied by white South Africans. Studies on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange have also shown continued white overrepresentation with around 75% of directorships held by whites. Board chairpersons and executive leadership, in the main, are the preserve of white males.

Intangibles that preclude progress

Executive mobility is undoubtedly facilitated by and premised on access to professional networks, mentorship, corporate relationships, and institutional familiarity.

These influential networks often replicate historical patterns, reinforce groupthink, and remain disconnected from other cultures, making them difficult for previously marginalised individuals to access. Assimilation in schools, clubs and social life is often treated as the ultimate measure of success, while deliberate or unconscious gatekeeping preserves the status quo.

It is posited herein that progressive forces are stifled by the referred to anchor bias. If white decision makers labour under a subconscious perspective that we have advanced sufficiently far from where we started the inclination will be towards a measured trajectory. In fact, white executives often tell black professionals that there should be no rush, and no substitute exist for patient development. This whilst white counterparts race up the corporate ladder.

Obviating the race impasse

What do the incorporation of anchor bias provide to overcome opposing perspectives and pierce perception veils. Prof Livingston found that when counterfactual views are consistently addressed through sustained conversation the anchor bias may be significantly moderated.

With patience he broached mental barriers explaining to cynical white groups the essence of what Martin Luther sought to convey in his “I have a dream” speech. He cautioned that not everybody responded to the same degree, but measurable positive outcomes are attained. Similarly, when black people begin to understand why white people take the racist past as a departure, anchor points shift closer to each other. As Livingston found, those who change their views often become deeply committed to bridging these unnecessary and self-imposed divides.

The proposed rapprochement is neither automatic nor a cure-all, especially in South Africa, where suspicion and structural divides remain deeply embedded. Views such as, “Blacks are not ready – Look at the infrastructure decay” show how entrenched these attitudes are. For progress to occur, we need more honest conversation and a greater willingness to be persuaded.

Given the country’s history of legislated racial discrimination, the continued delineation along racial lines on important policy debates must constitute one of the most vexing challenges of this nation 30 years into democracy – and an ignominy we must all dedicate ourselves to overcome.

[1] The South African Constitution permits and provides the legal basis for affirmative transformation policies such as B-BBE as corrective measures aimed at advancing disadvantaged groups.

• Randall Carolissen (PhD) is an accomplished business leader with years of experience in developing and executing strategy, driving transformation programmes across multiple industries.