brands and their symbols are powerful things. you have to decide whether the positive brand attributes outweigh the negative ones. internationally the springbok brand is very strong (2 time world champions in recent times) but locally the brand is tainted with the apartheid legacy in some people's minds and this should probably outweigh all other considerations.
most symbols have been changed in SA since 1994 - new flag, new national anthem, new emblems for government departments, new street names, new airport names etc. people got used to all of those. why not change the bok emblem too?
i have heard a lot of (mainly white) people arguing that, 'the country has united behind the boks', asking 'why change what isn't broken?'. this kind of thinking is culturally arrogant and insensitive as it fails to acknowledge the fact that the same powerfully emotive positive values that they attribute to the emblem can be viewed differently by people from a different background (especially a background that is characterised by white supremacist oppression). Just because some patriotic black people support the 'springboks' despite the powerful symbolic a**ociation with apartheid, doesn't necessarily make it cool.
mandela wore the bok jersey at a time when he needed to show white people how moderate and conciliatory the ANC was. that time is over now and it would be nice to move forward. i understand that changing an emblem won't change the endemic problems within SA sport, but symbols are important. change can be painful, but why stay stuck in the past?
