Can the online debate on Zwarte Piet support the decolonization of the tradition and of the Dutch society?
Considering the few trends we identified and explored in our blog posts, we believe that the Zwarte Piet debate on Twitter can have a positive impact and contribute to the decolonization of this primarily Dutch tradition. Indeed, the specificities of the online debate (its dynamics, its restricted format, its possible use of visuals and its potential to share information) enable to keep the discussion going and to offer people with essential knowledge to make up an informed opinion on the topic.
Even though Twitter offers a debate that, at first glance, appears to be mainly relying on a low level of argumentation or a lack of such, the platform also proposes new rules for a debate that becomes almost entertaining. Users may enjoy the discussion process, thanks to its inherent disorganization and to the variety of content materials that can be used.
In line with it, it must be noted that Twitter, which is essentially a micro-blogging service, allows people to share their personal experiences. It offers a space for these personal accounts to exist and be shared. We highlight this point as we strongly believe that decolonization requires to “humanize” people, Africans and black people in the case of Zwarte Piet, who are the victims of the enduring colonization of the minds.
Furthermore, Twitter enables more people to be included in the debate and enables each contributor to potentially reach a wide audience. This characteristic is especially interesting for authors of what we call “educational posts”. These authors take fully advantage of the format the platform has to offer and, thus, actively contribute to decolonization discussions by bringing something that is highly valuable to the debate on Zwarte Piet online: sourced or otherwise verified information.
However, we must highlight that making the Twitter debate valuable is a matter of individual choice as well as institutional support. We all choose the ways we consume and contribute to social media. We can choose to passively consume content or to actively take part to the content creation process and the discussion, and critically analyze the offered information.
On top of the personal responsibility, it is the role of education institutions to provide new generations with the tools and an objective teaching of history, for them to be able to critically think by themselves.
Changing the Tradition of Zwarte Piet
One major advantage of the online debate is the extensive discussion on the reasons why Zwarte Piet is a racist tradition that shows that decolonization is still persistent. However, there is not much discussion on how the tradition should change and the practicalities of such a transformation.
But, what could be implemented in practice? Should the figure of Zwarte Piet be cancelled altogether? Should the figure of Chimney Pete be used instead?
Across the Netherlands, there is evidence of a move towards the adoption of Chimney Pete as Sinterklaas’ partner. For instance, Rotterdam has banned all blackface in the city for the festivities. However, it is not a widespread adoption[1]. Indeed, the national government leaves the responsibility to municipalities to have a discussion and to choose their stance.
Yet, the discussion is not happening in most cities and towns[2]. And, on Twitter, such a middle ground is weakly defended. Only a few rare tweets concern this figure. Then, what would it take for the government to officialize a Zwarte Piet ban in the Netherlands?
[1]https://www.ad.nl/rotterdam/regio-ziet-niets-in-roetveegpiet-bij-ons-blijft-zwarte-piet-zo-zwart-als-de-kachel~ae0e8d6a/?referrer=https://www.google.nl/&referrer=https://t.co/yMjKWyzixf?amp=1