There are marked similarities and differences in the South African and the American story. Race has been a central factor in the politics of both countries since their inception over three hundred and fifty years ago. Ironically, now that one of the archetypical proponents of a racial superiority, South Africa, has long abandoned its apartheid policy, an American candidate of one of the two major political parties is running on the self same canard that was the basis of apartheid - Keep America White or as he euphemistically refers to it - Make America Great Again.
It was Robert Kennedy, (Senior), in a speech in Cape Town South Africa in 1966 who brought the two countries preoccupation with race into focus.
ROBERT F KENNEDY (THE FATHER THAT IS)
It was Robert F. Kennedy, (the father that is), in his Affirmation Address at the University of Cape Town, June 1966, who highlighted the analogies between his homeland and South Africa. The American icon opined, " I come here because of my deep interest and affection for a land settled by the Dutch in the mid seventeenth century, then taken over by the British and at last independent. A land in which the native inhabitants were first subdued, but relations with whom remain a problem today.....a land which was an importer of slaves and now must struggle to wipe out the last traces of that former bondage. I refer of course to the United States of America......
THE ACCURACY AND INACCURACIES OF RFK'S NARRATIVE
RFK's narrative was not entirely accurate in so far that South Africa was never a significant importer of slaves nor did it wipe out the indigenous populations which action had stained Kennedy's land of birth. The white race in South Africa was very much in a minority as opposed to the USA.
By comparison very little immigration has occurred to the Southern tip of Africa while America is characterized as a melting pot of many nations. These circumstances have played a role in racial politics. The South African White Nationalists rated the threat to survival more highly in the 1960's than did their American brethren.
But both countries enacted policies relating to their pigmented citizenry. Both had had their history dominated by two distinct white groups who wrestled for power and who had differed in their attitudes to their colored brethren.
Notwithstanding the genesis of the racial politics, in 1966 the two nations were on divergent paths as to meeting the challenge created by their diverse populations. South Africa had engaged in apartheid with the trappings of totalitarianism to keep it in place while America had thrown off their historical shackles through the Civil Rights legislation. Martin Luther King had mobilized public opinion while Nelson Mandela was only a few years into his 28 years into his prison sentence.
LEGISLATION OF APARTHEID TO KEEP SOUTH AFRICA WHITE
The Nationalist Party in 1948 with a minority of votes came into power on a platform of naked racist segregationist policies as well as to promote the Afrikaner in every sector of society. While the latter was a valid objective and many may have voted for that aspect of their program, their reign morphed into the second major human rights travesty of the twentieth century. In this inflection point in history South Africa went the wrong way.(See blog, January 22, 2104,"Smuts The Man Who Might Have Prevented Apartheid").
The new Nationalist Government immediately proceeded to remove any vestige of any pigmented citizens' voting rights. Then followed a slew of legislation to segregate. For purposes of this discussion the focus will be on limiting Black Africans presence in so called"White South Africa". First they enacted the Population Registration Act, whereby everyone was classified according to "race". The latter wreeked havoc especially among the "colored" group who were descendants of some indigenous peoples and indentured labor that had been imported from South East Asia. Families were split.
For the Black Africans rigid criteria were laid down as to who was entitled to live in "white areas of South Africa". The legislation became tougher and tougher as the years rolled on. "iIlegals" were rounded up sentenced to jail terms and sent back to rural areas some of which they had never ever seen before. Families were split by the family values regime. The arrests were on an epidemic like scale. In 1971 at the height of this cruel insanity 381,000 Black Africans were arraigned.
The methods used to find those without documents referred to as "passes" were barbaric. Squad cars could career around confronting anyone who was black demanding to see their pathetic "passports". What occurred in the black townships was out of sight but in the "White Group Areas" the fascism was there for all to see. The police would raid domestic workers quarters for example in the middle of the night, bang on the doors and scream, "Maak oop", ("Open up").
THE RATIONALE FOR APARTHEID CHANGED IN 1960
While the day to day impact on the black population didn't change, in 1960 the rationale and the philosophy did. The opprobrium throughout the world was enough alone for the need to put a new face on this racism.
Enter Hendrik Frensch Verwoerd a theocrat autocrat who was elected Prime Minister in 1960 and had all the answers. The latter was a former newspaper editor who had been sued for pro Nazi propaganda during the war and had led a march against the immigration of Jews in the late 1930's. He was not new to the game having been Minister of Native affairs since nearly the beginning of National Party reign. He introduced an absurd solution - the concept of "Bantustans".Prior to that the "illegals" were sent to rural districts run by hereditary chiefs and the like, now they had a "Homeland". Each of these would be the home to persons of a particular tribe whether they liked it or not. Social engineering on the grandest of scales.
The Bantustans were to be run by parliaments that would be constituted by hereditary chiefs and by election. It is fair to say that they by definition they had to be puppet states as they had few sources of revenue. The first experiment in the Transkei area, the "Homeland" of the Xhosa tribe, nearly came adrift as the government's nominee was almost defeated but with much maneuvering and bribery the anointed one was elected as head. There were eventually 7 such dummy states that did nothing to alleviate the situation and inhumanity that apartheid had engendered.
In 1986 as a prelude to the historic ending of apartheid the influx control laws were abolished. Verwoerd was assassinated in 1966 by a schizophrenic who was found guilty but insane in a high profile court case.
REPRESSIVE LEGISLATION TO CARRY THIS OUT.
No comments:
Post a Comment