Archive for the ‘Apartheid’ Category

Segregation | Apartheid Museum

Segregation

In 1910 South Africa was united for the first time into a single nation known as the union of South Africa. The majority of blacks, along with white women, were denied the vote. Racial segregation became the official policy throughout the Union and laid the foundation for apartheid. The two dominant politicians at the time, Jan Smuts and J B M Hertzog, were the architects of segregation. The new state was immediately confronted by opposition from several quarters such as the South African Native National Congress (later known as the ANC), the white miner strikes (from 1913 to 1922) and the first Trade Union (the ICU). Much of this opposition was suppressed by force.

Read the original post:

Segregation | Apartheid Museum

Fair Usage Law

June 28, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Impact of Economic and Political Sanctions on Apartheid …

SEE: Follow Up Article -The Interconnected Factors on Apartheid in South Africa

SEE: Sports Diplomacy and Apartheid South Africa

Author: Alexander Laverty

Final Paper: MMW 6 Spring 2007

7 June 2007

Impact of Economic and Political Sanctions on Apartheid

When the Afrikaner-backed National Party Came to power in South Africa in 1948, it implemented its campaign promises in the form of high apartheid. This contrasted with the segregationist policies of the pre-war government. While much of that legislation was designed to restructure the organization of economic opportunity in South Africa, apartheid legislation lacked the trademark of systematic exploitation of native Africans (Butler 19). The English speaking whites who had held power before the war were sidelined as the white constituency was consolidated under the National Party, a Afrikaner dominated political group. This allowed the National Party to enact such legislation as the Population Registration Act, which enforced classification into four racial categories: white, Coloured, Asiatic, or native. The next high apartheid landmark was the Group Areas Act of 1950. This act enforced the separate areas of residence by race across the country. It would be this act that eventually led to Promotion of Bantu Self-Government Act of 1959 that transferred Africans political rights to these quasi-states, which allowed the South African government to treat natives as foreigners and allow them no political representation in the South African government (Butler 19-23).

Apartheid, the Afrikaans word for segregation, brought white supremacy to a whole new level as the rest of the continent was decolonizing following World War II. The National Party government treated non-whites as second class citizens and in the case of Africans, non-citizens. By confining Africans to the homelands of Bantustans, the National Party was able to justify stripping away any basic rights Africans had in the country of South Africa. The international community refused to recognize these homelands, and pressure eventually began to build from all sides to allow equal rights for all residents of South Africa. Pressure came in the form of economic sanctions, expulsions from international organizations, and the divestment of foreign companies (Craig et al 1002 & Vandenbosch 1-11).

In response to this oppression by the white minority government, the anti-apartheid struggle by South Africans began soon after the implementation of apartheid in 1948. The movement went global and was heavily influenced by the organizations and networks of South Africans that operated inside and outside the nation (Thorn 50). Did the international anti-apartheid movement against South Africa during the apartheid era play a significant role in causing the National Party government to end apartheid? In attempting to discern the actual effects of the pressure put on South Africa by the international community, two different schools of thought will be addressed in relation to the actual effectiveness of international sanctions placed on South Africa. Nelson Mandela, the first president in post-apartheid South Africa, believes the results from the anti-apartheid movement, sanctions, were effective. On the side that believes the anti-apartheid movement had no discernable impact on the dismantling of apartheid is the former South African President, F.W. de Klerk. When announcing the end of apartheid in his 1990 address to Parliament, de Klerk mentions the conflict and violence that had pervaded South Africa as his considerations for the ending of apartheid. With the end of Communism in Europe, de Klerk felt that that the removal of the African National Congress from the banned organization list was now reasonable, as they would no longer have any financial support from Moscow to continue their fight against the apartheid government. Eventually a negotiated peace was agreed upon and the first elections for all South Africans took place in 1994, resulting an electoral victory for the ANC. De Klerk continued to deny the importance of sanctions in his acceptance of the Nobel Prize for Peace in 1993 in Oslo (de Villiers 197).

The term sanctions in contemporary international law is viewed as a punitive action by one state against another, designed to force a change of policy without resorting to overt aggression (Brewer 36). Thus sanctions require actors, a target group, punitive instruments of a non-military fashion, and political objectives that determine the range and limitations of sanctions. In the case of South Africa, the actors are church groups and public opinion, not the traditional actors: national governments and international bodies. Typically the target group of sanctions are other governments and their constituency. In South Africa however, while the Afrikaner backed National Party is the target of the sanctions, the possible greater affects on the black majority rather than the white minority had to be taken into account. Thus while the intentions were to force the National Party to change its attitudes and behavior, the side effects of the sanctions had to be considered before choosing the best course of action (Brewer 36-37).

The punitive instruments of sanctions range from prohibitive to revocative means. The economic means of sanctions are usually deemed the most effective, short of violence. Economic sanctions can come in two different forms: trade and financial restrictions. Trade sanctions are aimed at the restriction or cessation of imports and exports between state actors and the target nation. Financial sanctions seek to control or manipulate the flow of private foreign capital into the country targeted by sanctions. Financial sanctions appear in South Africa as disinvestment and divestment. Disinvestment is the reduction or withdrawal of all forms of foreign capital that is invested in the country, as well as banks not making any new investments. Divestment is the breaking of financial and economic relations with companies that profit from business done with South Africa (Brewer 37).

Apart from the economic side of sanctions, political and diplomatic sanctions in the form of breaking off or reducing diplomatic ties or refusal of entry can be used against the target nation. Military and scientific sanctions can prohibit the exchange of technology and know-how between nations, which can be in the form of an arms embargo (Brewer 38).

Talk in the 1960s of the use of sanctions to force a policy change were looked at with skepticism based on their predicted effectiveness. In fact one writer believed that only a world wide sanctions movement, coupled with a naval blockade would have the intended effect. For this to happen the UN would have to be willing to send in an invasion force to reinstall stability in the country after it had fallen into disarray following a world-wide boycott. The belief was that if South Africa was able to promote an appearance of stability then the Western powers would not have the resolve or justification for economic sanctions. Proponents of the sanctions movement in the 1960s believed that white South Africans would abandon the National Party in great numbers because many South Africans only supported white supremacy because of the high standard of living that the National Party gave them. This does not recognize that many whites were in fact Nationalists and would prove inflexible to outside pressure (Spence 63-65).

With the passing of Resolution 418 by the UN Security Council in 1977, international efforts to hurt the apartheid government turned to the form of an arms embargo (Klotz 50). This resolution stemmed from the international attention created by the 1976 Soweto movement. This was revolt in a Johannesburg suburb that erupted against the apartheid government over a plan to hold instruction of maths and sciences in public schools in Afrikaans (Levy 416). The South African government in turn began to develop and produce more of their arms in country, but sophisticated systems such as high-performance aircraft, helicopters, and naval vessels were not so easily produced at home. However, self-sufficiency did come in the production of ammunition, military vehicles and communications equipment. The cost of Research and Development accompanied with the smaller production runs did equate to higher prices for even home-made arms. The arms embargo can claim success in at least South Africas outward policy. The inability to replace the loss of ageing fighter-bombers in the conflict with Angola (and their better equipped Cuban allies) began to toll and brought the South African government to the peace table for a negotiated settlement. The greater expense came in regard to South African society and economy. South Africas resources were diverted from other pressing policy matters towards keeping a well-equipped and prepared military. Funds that could have been spent on public utilities, education, or health care, were instead put towards military readiness. Dissatisfaction with the continued deprivation inside the country began to grow. At the same time, the limited amount of educated manpower in the country was required to serve in the armed forces. Additionally, due to the isolation from the rest of the world more money, citizens, and time were forced to be spent on research new military technologies because of the inability to purchase Western weapons systems. Finally, the profound effect of the arms embargo was on South Africas relationship with the international community. If an arms embargo had not been put in place, the West would not have been able to directly challenge the regime in power. Thus the embargo as a whole not only served to raise awareness and politicize the struggle against the apartheid movement in the West, it boosted the opposition against the South African state (Grundy 109-111).

In the early 1980s the furthering unrest in the country began to worry many of the foreign investors in South Africa. While many of these private business were feeling the pressure in their home country to disinvest, the political instability of the country was the primary concern for many of the foreign companies. It was only after this withdrawal of funds and business from the country in the mid-1980s did South Africa begin to feel the squeeze put on by their foreign debts. In 1985, the European Community put a limited scope of trade sanctions on South Africa, yet still the most expansive to date. This was followed by more significant sanctions in 1986 from the EC, coupled with the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act passed by the US Congress over a presidential veto in the same year. While South Africa did its best to circumvent governmental sanctions, the loss of private capital was inescapable (Levy 417).

As the end of the 1980s approached, proponents of the sanctions movement claimed success as they interpreted the fall of the apartheid state as justification of a strong sanctions movement. If nothing more, the economic sanctions were certainly the final straw in the campaign against the apartheid government. While a handful of South Africans began to draw links between the economic climate and political change, many dismissed the effectiveness of sanctions. In retrospect however, many see these comments as simply propaganda to dissuade more sanctions against their country(Levy 418-419).

When measuring the success of sanctions, comparison with past experiences are invariably drawn. For obvious reasons, sanctions have a higher chance of success when placed against smaller and less developed target states. The more specific objectives the sending state sets the more easier it will be to assess the consequences on the target state and will make sanctions more efficient in the long run. Once these objectives have been set a combination of good timing with rapid and merciless implementation must be enforced. If the screw is tightened slowly, this gives the target state to develop countermeasures to the sanctions while at the same time giving the sender state time to develop second thoughts about their sanctions (Brewer 39).

On the other side of sanctions lie the causes of their downfall. First, the expression of not using a sledgehammer to crack a nut is very appropriate here. Cultural and military add-on measures can make the sending states lose sight of the initial objectives. Secondly, the search for comprehensive boycotts and sanctions does not necessarily produce a more effective sanctions campaign. In many cases the search for general consensus among sender states can be self-defeating in the end, causing there to be more leaks in the campaign, rather than less.

While the exact effectiveness of the international sanctions that arose from the anti-apartheid movement against the National Party in South Africa on an economic scale can be debated, the praise from black South African leaders for the anti-apartheid movement must be taken into account as well. Both Bishop Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandela made statements to this extent. On his release from prison in 1990 Mandela stressed that to end sanctions at that moment would risk allowing the National Party to abort the process towards ending apartheid. Thus the psychological impact of international isolation could be viewed as just as important as the economic impact. (Levy 418).

While some form of sanctions had been in place for many decades, efforts intensified in the 1980s, notably from prominent South African allies in the form of the United States and Europe. This change could be attributed to causing the eventual political change of the 1990s, meaning that those that point to the considerable time lag between the implementation of sanctions and the fall of the National Party as evidence of the ineffectiveness of sanctions, do not account for the time that it takes for sanctions to effect the country as a whole. Instant change was an unrealistic goal (Levy 418).

Empirical data has been collected during the time of enforced sanctions that back up Mandelas claim of effectives. An IMF report put together by Tamim Bayoumi in 1990 concludes that the impact economic sanctions had on the country is unmistakable. He concludes that sanctions are leading to a large upturn in white unemployment and that the nonwhite employment growth will rise while resulting in a decline in whites wages. His report would support previous statements that suggested that the removal of private capital from the country, rather than governmental sanctions against the National Party, achieved the greatest success. His report finds that nonwhite employment had increased in the intermediary while coinciding with the fall of real white wages. This analysis would seem to conclude that economic sanctions are having the exact opposite affect on the South African economy that apartheid was meant to provide, which was the economic exploitation of blacks by the whites (Bayoumi 1, 21).

The anti-apartheid movement from an outside perspective obviously had an effect on South Africa. However, reports from inside the country differ somewhat with the Wests assessment of the effectiveness of sanctions. F.W. de Klerk, writing in his autobiography, states Obviously, sanctions also did serious damage to the country. (de Klerk 70). He goes on to corroborate the findings made by the IMF, that South Africas growth rate suffered approximately 1.5 percent during the 1980s and early 1990s. However, he states that the white minority was ready and willing to bear this cost because they feared the alternative was a Soviet-backed African National Congress regime ruling the country. This is more typical rhetoric from the South African government about fighting Soviet expansion in Africa. South Africa attempted to justify their foreign and domestic polices throughout the 1960s and 1970s as combating communism. While in truth the ANC was heavily funded by the Kremlin, Moscow certainly did not stir up the initial causes for the ANC to come into being. Moreover, De Klerk goes on to write that sanctions delayed change, rather than promoted it in the government. Importantly, he believes that the isolation South Africans felt by the West essentially nipped change in the bud as it was beginning to rise in the countrys universities as well as the intellectual and scientific elite. He believes that as a truism, isolation, sanctions, and rampant criticism of a society rarely encourage changes in the society. He is very reluctant to draw a link between governmental policies and the sanctions movement that was put forth by the worldwide anti-apartheid campaign (de Klerk 70-71).

On the political side, de Klerk believes that the National Party owed some of its electoral success to the sanctions. He implies that had no sanctions been in place, the National Party would not have been able to appeal to the resentment and siege mentality that many white South Africans felt when confronted with the Wests sanctions. Concluding, de Klerk feels that the real factor in change was the economic growth of the country. Thus from his perspective, had South Africa been allowed to grow unimpeded economically, change would have come sooner than it actually did (de Klerk 71).

Alternate views of the fall of the National Partys apartheid stem from outside forces that did not include sanctions. Most often cited is the rise to power of Mikhail Gorbachev and the fall of the Iron Curtain in Europe. Gorbachev realized that the Soviet Union could no longer afford to fund proxy wars across the world and abruptly ended all funding to socialist movements, thus depriving the ANC of most of its resources. While the Afrikaners once saw the ANC as godless communists, once the Soviet bloc fell, political dealings with the ANC became publicly acceptable (Evans 3 May 2007 & Levy 418).

While the timing of the Soviet collapse certainly played a role in the changes in South Africa, for de Klerk to say that sanctions had no impact in policy making would be dismissing the effectiveness of the anti-apartheid movement as a whole. Governments did not enact most of these sanctions and embargoes because they felt South Africa was a threat like present day Iran or North Korea. Much of the support for forcing change in South Africa began with grassroots movements across the United States and Europe.

De Klerk, in his own book, gives credence to the overall international movement. He notes that never before in history had a country had to deal with the comprehensive international campaign against the country (de Klerk 114). Not only were the economic stresses demanding, the restrictions on travel, notably on fly-over and landing rights for South African airlines, and the cold-shoulder many white South Africans received while traveling abroad in the 1980s all contributed to the isolation. He then describes how the sanctions net began to tighten in on the country. Later, he stressed the impact that the loss of financial support was taking on the country as a whole and that it became a source of social unrest (de Klerk 183). De Klerk then describes the need for financial stability in order to keep everyone, including the ANC, satisfied with the progress of the negotiations to end apartheid. Perhaps de Klerk cannot see the lines between the causes and effects, but it is most obvious that the reason South Africa is in financial doldrums is because of the anti-apartheid movement coupled with economic sanctions. Thus by his own reasoning, it would be safe to assume that the world-wide movement against the National Party had an undeniable and to some extent a very palpable link between the actual removal of the National Party from power and sanctions that were employed.

The view championed by Nelson Mandela has a significant amount of empirical and scholarly evidence that would support his view that the international anti-apartheid movement against the National Party-led South African government was successful. Despite the campaign against apartheid not always meeting the requirements discussed earlier for successful sanctions, the political and overall isolation felt by South Africans, which was manufactured by the global anti-apartheid campaign, made up for the lapses in economic sanctions. Eventually the total onslaught that the government and white society felt they were under, beginning in the 1960s, encompassed the riots caused by students within the country and the ANCs fight from exile. The international sanction movement against the South African government was the final push that brought the National Party to near bankruptcy and brought them to the negotiating table with the ANC. While each factor of total onslaught played a role, the global anti-apartheid movement was a significant dynamic in causing the turning the tide against the white-minority government and eventually bringing to power a true democracy on the southern tip of the African continent.

SEE: Follow Up Article -The Interconnected Factors on Apartheid in South Africa

Works Cited

Bayoumi, Tamim, Output, Employment and Financial Sanctions in South Africa (December 1990). IMF Working Paper No. 90/113

Order it at:http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.cfm?sk=3077.0

Brewer, John D., ed. Can South Africa Survive? London; Macmillan Pres, 1989.

Butler, Anthony. Democracy and Apartheid. Great Britain; Macmillan Press, Ltd., 1998.

Craig, Albert M., et al. The Heritage of World Civilizations. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2003.

De Klerk, F.W. The Last Trek-A New Beginning. New York; St. Martins Press, 1999. [primary]

De Villiers, Les. In Sight of Surrender. London; Praeger, 1995.

Edgar, Robert E., ed. Sanctioning Apartheid. Trenton; Africa World Press, 1990.

Evans, Ivan. Lecture. University of California San Diego. 3 May 2007.

Grundy, Kenneth W. South Africa: Domestic Crisis and Global Challenge. San Francisco; Westview Press, 1991.

Klotz, Audie. Norms in International Relations: The Struggle Against Apartheid. London; Cornell University Press, 1995.

Levy, Philip I. Sanctions on South Africa: What Did They Do? The American Economic Review May 1999: 415-420. JSTOR. UC San Diego Lib. 10 may 2007 .

Lowenberg, Anton D., and William H. Kaempfer. The Origins and Demise of South African Apartheid. Ann Arbor; The University of Michigan Press, 1998.

Spence, J.E. Republic Under Pressure. London; Oxford University Press, 1965.

Thorn, Hakan. Anti-Apartheid and the Emergence of a Global Civil Society. New York; Palgrave Macmillen, 2006

Vandenbosch, Amry. South Africa and the World. Lexington; The University Press of Kentucky, 1970.

Like Loading…

Follow this link:

Impact of Economic and Political Sanctions on Apartheid …

Fair Usage Law

June 10, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Apartheid – definition of apartheid by The Free Dictionary

Nations Divided: American Jews and the Struggle Over Apartheid.Since the end of apartheid in 1994, approximately five million immigrants have settled in South Africa; most are Africans from further north pursuing economic opportunity or refugees seeking the political stability of the continent’s most highly developed nation.After years of struggle led by Nelson Mandela, South Africa succeeded in ending the apartheid regime and started to become an effective power in the region and one of the most stable and developed African countries which qualified it to become a member state of the BRICS and of the G-20.The shameful system of apartheid deprives its victims of all human rights, flaunts its atrocities for the world to see, supported by vested interests in–illegal territorial expansion, cheap or slave labor, profit, dehumanizing racial views of its victims, and good press by the corporate media.Apartheid Week (IAW) is an annual international series of events (includingThe action is timed to coincide with Israeli Apartheid Week, an annual event held in cities and universities around the world during the months of February and March that aims ‘to educate people about the nature of Israel as an apartheid system’ and to build support for the ‘Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign as part of a growing global BDS movement’.Feld’s new book, Nations Divided: American Jews and the Struggle Over Apartheid, details American Jewish involvement in the battle against racial injustice in South Africa, placing it in within the context of the long historical encounter between American Jews and apartheid.The “One Word” campaign was launched on June 8 by Ads Against Apartheid (A), which is a local Boston-based non-profit group, and is scheduled to run throughout June.He said that without the two-state solution, “a unitary [Israeli] state winds up either being an apartheid state with second-class [Palestinian] citizens – or it ends up being a state that destroys the capacity of Israel to be a Jewish state.He stressed that he does not believe that Israel is an apartheid state.Having suffered a form of apartheid themselves in the USA and known how dehumanising it was, you would think that all African-Americans would hate the apartheid regime in South Africa.Addressing the congregation, the Most Rev Tutu, the former Archbishop of Cape Town, thanked “splendid” and “amazing” campaigners for their efforts in changing the “moral climate” over apartheid.

Read more:

Apartheid – definition of apartheid by The Free Dictionary

Fair Usage Law

April 24, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Apartheid – Facts & Summary – HISTORY.com

In 1976, when thousands of black children in Soweto, a black township outside Johannesburg, demonstrated against the Afrikaans language requirement for black African students, the police opened fire with tear gas and bullets. The protests and government crackdowns that followed, combined with a national economic recession, drew more international attention to South Africa and shattered all illusions that apartheid had brought peace or prosperity to the nation. The United Nations General Assembly had denounced apartheid in 1973, and in 1976 the UN Security Council voted to impose a mandatory embargo on the sale of arms to South Africa. In 1985, the United Kingdom and United States imposed economic sanctions on the country.

Under pressure from the international community, the National Party government of Pieter Botha sought to institute some reforms, including abolition of the pass laws and the ban on interracial sex and marriage. The reforms fell short of any substantive change, however, and by 1989 Botha was pressured to step aside in favor of F.W. de Klerk. De Klerks government subsequently repealed the Population Registration Act, as well as most of the other legislation that formed the legal basis for apartheid. A new constitution, which enfranchised blacks and other racial groups, took effect in 1994, and elections that year led to a coalition government with a nonwhite majority, marking the official end of the apartheid system.

Read more:

Apartheid – Facts & Summary – HISTORY.com

Fair Usage Law

April 16, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Apartheid dictionary definition | apartheid defined

MLA Style

“apartheid.” YourDictionary, n.d. Web. ‘ + dateFormat(“d mmmm yyyy”) + ‘. .

APA Style

apartheid. (n.d.). Retrieved ‘ + dateFormat(“mmmm dS, yyyy”) + ‘, from http://www.yourdictionary.com/apartheid

See the rest here:

Apartheid dictionary definition | apartheid defined

Fair Usage Law

March 9, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Non-Stop Against Apartheid | Spaces of Transnational …

Sunday 12 November 2017 marks the twentieth anniversary of the death of Steven Kitson. Steve was born in 1957 as the eldest child of the South African communists and anti-apartheid activists David and Norma Kitson. In the 1980s, he became a leading member of the City of London Anti-Apartheid Group (after it grew out of the Free Steve Kitson Campaign which had been formed to protest his own brief detention by the apartheid regime in January 1982).

We told much of Steves biography in a blog post written on the 15th anniversary of his death from cancer in 1997:

Steve was born in London; but, as an infant, returned to South Africa with his parents in 1959, when they decided to deepen their involvement in the anti-apartheid struggle. His father,a member of the second High Command of Umkhontowe Siswe(the armed wing of the ANC),was arrested in 1963 and sentencedto twenty years in gaol the following year. Along with his mother and sister, Amandla, Steve endured two years of constant police harassment in South Africa following his fathers imprisonment before Norma moved her young family to London. Each December, from the age of sixteen, he used the holiday period to return to South Africa to visit David.

On 6 January 1982, while visiting his father in gaol in Pretoria, Steve was detained by the South African authorities, accused of being an ANC courier and breaching prison security by sketching the institution. Steve was violently interrogated tortured during his detention. Norma and her colleague at Red Lion Setters, Carol Brickley (a member of the Revolutionary Communist Group), quickly mobilised everyone they could think of to demand Steves freedom. The Free Steven Kitson Campaign was a success and he was released after six days. Within hours of phoning London with news of his release, Steves aunt, Joan Weinberg (Normas older sister), was murdered in her flat in Johannesburg. With Norma and the children in London, Joan had been Davids most frequent visitor throughout his imprisonment. Her killers were never found; indeed, they were never sought.

During its brief existence, the Free Steven Kitson Campaign drew scores of new people into anti-apartheid campaigning for the first time. In order not to lose this momentum, it was decided to transform the campaign into the City Of London Anti-Apartheid Group. Steve played an active role in City Group over the years. On both the86-day picketof the South African Embassy in 1982 andthe Non-Stop Picket four years later, as well as many protests in between, Steve taught picketers South African liberation songs. He frequently performed with City Group Singers. For many years he was a member of City Groups committee, often working tirelessly in the office on the groups financial and membership records, as well as contributing to its political leadership. He used his software skills to develop a membership database for the group at a time when few comparable organisations could invest in such technology.

In our research, several people remembered the time and patience that Steve would invest during his picket shifts, explaining the history of South Africa, apartheid, and resistance to it. He was central to the political education of many picketers. Like other members of the Kitson family, Steve was sometimes targeted by the police, but was also prepared to risk arrest to defend the right to protest against apartheid. In that context, one of the other voices that attested to Steves caring personality came from a (now retired) police officer. She told the following story:

Weirdly one of my most abiding memories was of being on the picket one evening and a call for assistance from a colleague coming over the radio. There was a fight happening around the corner in the Strand. I remember leaving my post and running round to help out, having a bit of a roll around on the floor helping to arrest a drunken yob and then having to trot back to the picket as by right I shouldnt have left it in the first place but some things would always take precedence. I was obviously out of breath, a bit pale and the after effects of the adrenaline had kicked in and my hands were shaking. Steven Kitson was on the picket that evening and after looking at me in a concerned fashion for a minute or two he came over and asked me if I was alright. I was really rather touched. You have to appreciate there was very little contact with the pickets, they didnt talk to us and we didnt to them unless it was to raise an issue. It was a very nice gesture.

To mark this anniversary, I wanted to post something new, that might help enrich this picture of Steve. So, I dipped once again into the two crates of his papers that still sit in my office. Two items from the files for 1984 intrigued me. They both serve as a reminder that, prior to his parents suspension from membership of the ANC and SACP, and City Groups disaffiliation from the national Anti-Apartheid Movement, there were high profile members of the ANC and SACP in London who were prepared to work closely with them.

The first item is a facsimile of a Passbook that was produced for an exhibition about apartheid,The Signs of Apartheid, that was organised by the Greater London Councils London Against Racism campaign in 1984.

What is perhaps most significant about this small brown booklet, that mimicked the internal passports used to control black workers (but, instead, contained information about apartheid), is the annotation inside it in Steves handwriting.

In Steves small, precise, script it states given to me by Adelaide Tambo. I take this both as a personalaide memoire of a small gift from a leading anti-apartheid campaigner who remained close to the Kitson family throughout; but also as political act archiving evidence of Adelaide Tambos friendship against accusations that the Kitson family were ill-disciplined and outside the ANC fold.

The second item from Steves papers speaks to the centrality of music to his life and his political work. It is a photocopy of an image of Steve, the City Group Choir, and the South African cultural activist James Madhlope-Phillips. Having arrived in London from South Africa in the 1960s, Madhlope-Phillips home was be a key site of comfort and welcome for new exiles as they arrived in England; it was also a crucial early meeting place for ANC members in London before a formal office was established there. In the 1970s, he was central to the formation of the ANCs cultural armMayibuye. Out of that contribution, he dedicated himself to teaching the freedom songs of Southern African liberation movements to progressive choirs around the world.

James Madhlope-Phillips (centre) with City Group Choir. Steve Kitson is third from left. (Source: Steve Kitson papers)

The card thanks Madhlope-Phillips for his guidance and for leading the choir in song at a conference (as part of City Groups contribution to month of action against apartheid in March of that year). Once again, Steves decision to keep a photocopy of the thank you card they sent to Madhlope-Phillips suggests a double motivation. It is, of course, a memento of a fun and energizing day of singing. But, it was also an insurance policy, recording a day of cooperation with a leading member of the ANCs cultural wing, at a time when the relationship between City Group and the AAM (as well as between Norma Kitson and the ANC) was heavily under strain. Even so, that a high profile member of the ANC/SACP did cooperate with City Group at this time suggests that the strain on those relationships was not shared universally.

Many of the songs that were central to Madhlope-Phillips repertoire became favourites for City Group members frequently led by Steve Kitson, both as part of the choir, but also more spontaneously on shifts on the Non-Stop Picket. So here, then is a wonderful recording of James Madhlope-Phillips leadingShosholoza.Sing along and remember Steve Kitson.

Originally posted here:

Non-Stop Against Apartheid | Spaces of Transnational …

Fair Usage Law

February 28, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Photos in Black and White: Margaret Bourke-White and the …

MARGARET BOURKE-WHITE AND THE DAWN OF APARTHEID

In 1949, Margaret Bourke-White, one of the most famous photojournalists in America, travelled to South Africa on assignment for Life magazine.

She had begun her career two decades before as an industrial photographer documenting turbines, dams, mines, bridges, steel mills, and other wonders of the mechanical age, in the U.S., in Germany, and in the Soviet Union. Hired by Henry Luce as the first photographer for Fortune magazine in 1929, by the mid-1930s she became one of four staff photographers at Luces renowned illustrated news magazine, Life.

As the shuttered factories and bread lines of the Great Depression undermined the nations faith in industry, Bourke-White turned her lens to more social subjects. During the 1930s, many of her contemporariesDorothea Lange, Arthur Rothstein, Walker Evanstook photographs for the governments Farm Security Administration, creating a visual record of the impact of the economic collapse on American life. Although she remained a successful commercial photographer, like the FSA photographersBourke-White documented the crushing poverty of the era. She showed Life readers the ravages of the drought and storms in the Dust Bowl; the desperation of victims displaced when rivers overflowed their banks; and the plight of poor blacks and poor whites in the rural South. Her trip South, resulting in the photo essay, You Have Seen Their Faces (1937), confirmed Bourke-Whites determination to turn her camera in the direction of something that might have some social significance.

Her South African travels came at the end of a series of foreign adventures as Lifes star photographer. She travelled to Czechoslovakia after Hitlers annexation of 1938; to Moscow in 1941; to defeated Germany in 1945; and to India during independence and Partition.

Bourke-Whites experience as a combat photographer profoundly shaped her vision of the postwar world. She witnessed the horrors of World War II in its most brutal theaters: the Eastern Front in 1941-42; the stalled Allied invasion of Italy in the winter of 1943; and of course, the final assault on Nazi Germany and the liberation of the concentration camps. What is the use of all this bloodshed unless we insure the future for civilization and for peace, she concluded. The hardening of white supremacy in South Africa after 1948came as a rebuke to this hope.

These experiences, driven by what she called her insatiable desire to be on the scene while history is being made, made Bourke-White an expert witness to the unfolding story of South Africa. Elected to power by whites in 1948, the Afrikaner nationalist government embarked on an ambitious program of total segregation known as Apartheid. In a country of 10 million Blacks and only 2.5 million whites, the latter retained all political power, controlled all the fertile land, and attempted to reduce Blacks to the status of an impoverished servile class. As Bourke-White wrote a friend at the end of her four month stay, South Africa left me very angry, the complete assumption of white superiority and the total focusing of the whole country around the schemes of keeping black labor cheap, and segregated, and uneducated, and without freedom of movement.

Bourke-Whites intentions after this assignment were clear: As she told her editors at Life, Its the most unbelievable system. Its vicious, and its got to be exposed.

Go here to read the rest:

Photos in Black and White: Margaret Bourke-White and the …

Fair Usage Law

February 28, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

What are ten facts about apartheid? | Reference.com

Under the apartheid system, nonwhite South Africans, who comprised the majority of the nations population, were forced to live in separate areas from whites in both rural and urban areas. The districts set aside for nonwhites were generally much poorer agriculturally and located farther from transportation hubs and offices, which put their inhabitants at a disadvantage when getting to and from work and even completing basic tasks like shopping for groceries.

Nonwhites had no say in the politics of South Africa, and were required to have documents or passes in order to move from one area to another, which escalated the levels of hardship experienced by the people.

At first, apartheid was a social movement, but it was signed into law under the National Party with the adoption and passage of the Population Registration Act of 1950. This legislation created framework for apartheid by classifying South Africans according to their biological races. Then, the National Party enacted a series of land acts, which collectively set aside over eighty percent of the nations lands for whites. In an egregious display of authority, the government evicted thousands of nonwhite South Africans from their rural homes, driving them into cities and selling their land to whites for farming and ranching.

Original post:

What are ten facts about apartheid? | Reference.com

Fair Usage Law

February 2, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Apartheid Legislation 1850s-1970s | South African History …

Apartheid Legislation 1850s-1970s

1856-1910

Masters and Servants Acts of1856

These Acts, which had been passed between 1856 and 1904 in the four territories, remained in force after Union. They made it a criminal offence to breach the contract of employment. Desertion, insolence, drunkenness, negligence and strikes were also criminal offences. Theoretically these laws applied to all races, but the courts held that the laws were applicable only to unskilled work, which was performed mostly by Black people (Dugard 1978: 85; Horrell 1978: 6). Repealed by section 51 of the Second General Law Amendment Act No 94 of 1974.

Mines and Works Act No 12 of1911

Permitted the granting of certificates of competency for a number of skilled mining occupations to Whites and Coloureds only.

Repealed by section 20 of the Mines and Works Amendment Act No 27 of 1956

Black Land Act No 27 of19 June 1913

Prohibited Blacks from owning or renting land outside designated reserves (approximately 7 per cent of land in the country). Commenced: 19 June 1913. Repealed by section 1 of the Abolition of Racially Based Land Measures Act No 108 of 1991.

1920s

The Native Affairs Act of 1920

The Native Affairs Act was yet another spin-off of the South African Native Affairs Commission report of 1905. It paved the way for the creation of a countrywide system of tribally based, but government appointed, district councils modelled on the lines of the Glen Grey Act of 1894. The principal of separate, communally-based political representation for Africans was extended by the 1936 Representation of Natives Act.

The Durban Land Alienation Ordinance, No 14 of 1922

Timeline: Anti-Indian Legislation.

This ordinance enables the Durban City Council to exclude Indians from ownership or occupation of property in White areas.

The Natal Provincial Council passes three ordinances of 1922:

The Class Areas Bill of 1923

Minister of Interior, Sir Patrick Duncan, introduces Class Areas Bill, which proposes compulsory residential and trading segregation for Indians throughout South Africa.

The Natives (Urban Areas) Act No 21 of 1923

The Natives (Urban Areas) Act legislated on a broad front to regulate the presence of Africans in the urban areas. It gave local authorities the power to demarcate and establish African locations on the outskirts of White urban and industrial areas, and to determine access to, and the funding of, these areas. Local authorities were expected to provide housing for Africans, or to require employers to provide housing for those of their workers who did not live in the locations. Africans living in White areas could be forced to move to the locations. Local authorities were empowered to administer the registration of African service contracts, and to determine the extent of African beer brewing or trading in the locations.

Municipalities were also instructed to establish separate African revenue accounts based on the income from fines, fees and rents exacted from ‘natives’ in the locations; this money was to be used for the upkeep and improvement of the locations. The critical function entrusted to the local authorities was, however, the administration of tougher Pass laws: Africans deemed surplus to the labour needs of White households, commerce and industry, or those leading an ‘idle, dissolute or disorderly life’, could be deported to the Reserves. In implementing the Act, local authorities were careful to consider the needs of industry. In Johannesburg, for instance, where industrialists made no bones about wanting a large pool of permanent standby labour, it was only intermittently applied until the end of the 1940s. The Act was amended in later years.

Boroughs Ordinance No 189 of 1924

This Bill effectively disenfranchises Indians in Natal. They lose vote in boroughs.

The Industrial Conciliation Act No 11 of 1924

This act provides for job reservation. Excluded Blacks from membership of registered trade unions and prohibited registration of Black trade unions. Commenced: 8 April 1924. Repealed by section 86 of the Industrial Conciliation Act No 36 of 1937.

The Township Franchise Ordinance of 1924

The Township Franchise Ordinance is approved by the Provincial Council of Natal to deprive Indians of municipal franchise rights, vetoed by the Union Government.

The Rural Dealers Ordinance of 1924

This Ordinance attempts to cripple Indian trade. This Ordinance prevented Indian ownership of land in White areas.

The Transvaal Dealers (Control) Ordinance No 11 of 1925

This ordinance puts obstacles in the way of obtaining licences. Aim to restrict Indian trade.

The Minimum Wages Act of 1925

This Act leads to a form of job reservation and promotes White employment. Certain trades are earmarked for Whites.

The Class Areas Bill of 1925

This Bill is designed for mere segregation.

The Areas Reservation and Immigration and Registration (Further Provision) Bill 1925

Dr. D. F. Malan, Minister of the Interior, introduces Areas Reservation and Immigration and Registration (Further Provision) Bill in Parliament. It defines Indians as aliens and recommends limitation of population through repatriation.

The Mines and Works Act (Colour Bar Act) No 25 of 1926.

Working Life Factories, Township and Popular Culture 1886 – 1940 by Luli Callinicos

Property Rights and Rent Seeking in South Africa by John M. Mbaku

The 1926 Mines and Works Act must be seen against the background of the wage and job colour bars in South Africa. The 1911 Act, mentioned earlier, reserved skilled work for Whites only. But in spite of this law, mine owners continued to desk ill jobs and give more and more work to Black miners to save labour costs. (The wages of Black mine workers remained the same no matter what work they were doing they earned about a tenth of the wages of a skilled White worker.) The 1922 strike was caused by the mine owners attempt to replace a number of White workers with lower-paid Black workers. This Act provides certificates of competency for skilled work, Indian workers are excluded. The legislation was a reflection of the belief of most Whites, especially in the labour market, that the welfare of Whites would suffer significantly if Blacks were not legislated out of the market.

The Liquor Bill of 1926

Indians and Africans could not be employed by licence holders and were not allowed on licensed premises and liquor supply vehicles. 3000 Indians employed in the brewery trade are affected.

The Local Government (Provincial Powers)Act of 1926

This Act denies citizenship rights to Indians.

The Immigration and Indian Relief (Further Provision) Bill of 1927

Minister of Interior, Dr Malan, introduces Immigration and Indian Relief Further Provision) Bill, which follows closely on Round Table Conference between India and South Africa. It requires children of South African Indian parents, born outside the Union to enter the country within three months of birth. In addition South Africans who absent themselves for three continuous years from the country forfeit domicile rights, and Indians who have entered the country illegally (mostly at the time of the Anglo-Boer War) condoned and issued with condonation certificates. Families of condonees are not allowed to join them. The Act also establishes a scheme of voluntary repatriation of South African Indians to India. The Indian government complies. Repatriates are to receive bonuses of 20 per adult and 10 per child, plus free passages. The bonus doubled in 1931, and finally abolished in 1955 when it becomes apparent that only the old, intending to retire in India, take advantage of it.

The Asiatics in the Northern Districts of Natal Act of 1927

Transvaal laws are to be applied to Indians in Utrecht, Vryheid, and Paulpietersburg. Restrictions placed on land purchase, trade and residence rights.

The Liquor Act of 1927

Africans and Indians are denied employment by license holders and are not allowed to serve liquor and drive liquor vans. They are also denied access to licensed premises.

The Womens Franchise Bill of 1927

No Indian women are allowed to vote.

The Riotous Assembly Act of 1927

Any Indians are considered dangerous agitators subject to deportation.

The Immigration and Indian Relief (Further) Provision: Act no 37 of 1927

This Bill becomes law and the scheme of assisted emigration comes into operation. (Repatriation: 1927 1655 Indians repatriated; 1928 3477 repatriated; 1929 1314 repatriated).

The Nationality and Flag Act of 1927

Segregation and Apartheid Laws as Applied to Indians (1859-1994)

Nationality and Flag Act denies Indians right to become citizens by naturalization. Indians not recognised as South African Nationals.

The Old Age Pension Act of 1927

No pension provisions made for Indians.

The Liquor Act of 1927

Prohibition (Statutory) of Natives and Indians to be employed in the Liquor Trade.

The Black Administration Act No 38 of 1927

The Act stated that all moveable property belonging to a Black and allotted by him or accruing under Black law or custom to any woman with whom he lived in a customary union, or to any house, shall upon his death devolve and be administered under Black law and custom.

The Liquor Bill Section 104 of the Liquor Bill of 1928

Prohibiting Indians from entering licensed premises is withdrawn.

1930s

The Transvaal Asiatic Land Tenure of 1930

The (Amendment) Bill is introduced by Minister of Interior as a result of recommendations of Select Committee. Proposes segregation: relocation of Indians to designated areas exempted from Gold Law within five years. No protection for those who had acquired interests on proclaimed (mining) land.

Timeline: Anti-Indian Legislation.

The Industrial Conciliation Act of 1930

Provided for the registration and regulation of trade unions and employers’ organisations, the settlement of disputes between employers and employees, and the regulation of conditions of employment. Repealed by s 56 of the Industrial Conciliation Act No 28 of 1956

The Wage Amendment Act of 1930

This is the continuation of 1925 Act.This Act provides a single national board (the Wage Board) to recommend minimum wages and conditions of unorganised or unregistered groups of workers in all industries. The Act aimed to raise the wages of semi-skilled workers to a civilised level. Ironically, the government recognised that there was a need to fix a minimum for Black workers in order to protect the White workers wages against undercutting.

The Women’s Enfranchisement Act of 1930

The Act gave only European women the right to elect and to be elected to the Houses of Parliament.

The Riotous Assemblies (Amendment) Act No 19 of 1930

This Act authorised the Governor-General to prohibit the publication or other dissemination of any documentary information calculated to engender feelings of hostility between the European inhabitants of the Union on the one hand and any other section of the inhabitants of the Union on the other hand (Dugard 1978: 177). Commenced: 21 May 1930. Repealed by section 20 of the Riotous Assemblies Act No 17 of 1956.

TheAsiatic Immigration Amendment Act of 1931

Indians have to prove the legitimacy of their domicile in the country.

The Native Service Contracts Act of 1932

The Act drew all Africans outside of the reserves into the agricultural economy, while extending existing controls over labour tenancy. This meant that a farmer could expel the entire tenant family if any one member defaulted on his or her labour obligation. The Act had additional elements allowing for farmers to whip tenants, as well as compel farm tenants to carry passes.

The Transvaal Asiatic Land Tenure (Amendment) Act No 35 of 1932

The Transvaal Asiatic Land Tenure Act and its subsequent amendments in 1934, 1935 and 1937 establish statutory segregation of Indians in the Transvaal end the state of uncertainty about their status in the Province that has obtained since the passing of Law 3, 1885. It is passed in 1935.

The Slums Act: Demolition of Slums of 1934

This Act is aimed at improving conditions in locations, but actually expropriates Indian property.Under the pretext of Sanitation, the Act is enforced to demolish and expropriate with the ultimate aim of segregation.

Segregation and Apartheid Laws as Applied to Indians (1859-1994)

TheRural Dealers Licensing Ordinance Natal of 1935

This Ordinance causes the refusal of licenses to people whose properties have depreciated in value or whose licenses endangers the comfort and health of neighbours.

Representation of Blacks Act No 12 of 1936

Removed Black voters in the Cape from the common roll and placed them on a separate roll (Dugard 1978: 90). Blacks throughout the Union were then represented by four White senators. Commenced: 10 July 1936. Repealed by section 15 of the Representation between the Republic of South Africa and self-governing Territories Act No 46 of 1959.

The Representation of Natives Act No 16 of 1936

The Bills proposed by General Barry Hertzog in the 1920s finally got the two-thirds majority required to be passed into law 1936, when the Development Trust and Land Act (also referred to as the Native Trust and Land Act and Bantu Trust and Land Act) and the Representation of Natives Act were enacted. The Representation of Natives Act essentially stripped African people in the Cape of their voting rights and offered instead a limited form of parliamentary representation, through special White representatives. Under this Act, a Natives Representative Council (NRC), which was a purely advisory body, was also created. The NRC could make recommendations to Parliament or the Provincial Councils on any legislation regarded as being in the interest of natives.

The Development Trust and Land Act No 18 1936

Expanded the reserves to a total of 13, six per cent of the land in South Africa and authorised the Department of Bantu Administration and Development to eliminate Black spots (Black-owned land surrounded by White-owned land) (Horrell 1978: 203). The South African Development Trust (SADT) was established and could, in terms of the Act, acquire land in each of the provinces for Black settlement (RRS 1991/92: 381). Commenced: 31 August 1936. Repealed by Proc R 28 of 1992, 31 March 1992 (phasing out and abolishing the SADT in terms of the Abolition of Racially Based Land Measures Act No 108 of 1991)

The Aliens Registration Act No 26 of 1936

Read the original here:

Apartheid Legislation 1850s-1970s | South African History …

Fair Usage Law

December 19, 2017   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Segregation | Apartheid Museum

Segregation In 1910 South Africa was united for the first time into a single nation known as the union of South Africa. The majority of blacks, along with white women, were denied the vote. Racial segregation became the official policy throughout the Union and laid the foundation for apartheid. The two dominant politicians at the time, Jan Smuts and J B M Hertzog, were the architects of segregation. The new state was immediately confronted by opposition from several quarters such as the South African Native National Congress (later known as the ANC), the white miner strikes (from 1913 to 1922) and the first Trade Union (the ICU). Much of this opposition was suppressed by force.

Fair Usage Law

June 28, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Impact of Economic and Political Sanctions on Apartheid …

SEE: Follow Up Article -The Interconnected Factors on Apartheid in South Africa SEE: Sports Diplomacy and Apartheid South Africa Author: Alexander Laverty Final Paper: MMW 6 Spring 2007 7 June 2007 Impact of Economic and Political Sanctions on Apartheid When the Afrikaner-backed National Party Came to power in South Africa in 1948, it implemented its campaign promises in the form of high apartheid. This contrasted with the segregationist policies of the pre-war government. While much of that legislation was designed to restructure the organization of economic opportunity in South Africa, apartheid legislation lacked the trademark of systematic exploitation of native Africans (Butler 19). The English speaking whites who had held power before the war were sidelined as the white constituency was consolidated under the National Party, a Afrikaner dominated political group. This allowed the National Party to enact such legislation as the Population Registration Act, which enforced classification into four racial categories: white, Coloured, Asiatic, or native. The next high apartheid landmark was the Group Areas Act of 1950. This act enforced the separate areas of residence by race across the country. It would be this act that eventually led to Promotion of Bantu Self-Government Act of 1959 that transferred Africans political rights to these quasi-states, which allowed the South African government to treat natives as foreigners and allow them no political representation in the South African government (Butler 19-23). Apartheid, the Afrikaans word for segregation, brought white supremacy to a whole new level as the rest of the continent was decolonizing following World War II. The National Party government treated non-whites as second class citizens and in the case of Africans, non-citizens. By confining Africans to the homelands of Bantustans, the National Party was able to justify stripping away any basic rights Africans had in the country of South Africa. The international community refused to recognize these homelands, and pressure eventually began to build from all sides to allow equal rights for all residents of South Africa. Pressure came in the form of economic sanctions, expulsions from international organizations, and the divestment of foreign companies (Craig et al 1002 & Vandenbosch 1-11). In response to this oppression by the white minority government, the anti-apartheid struggle by South Africans began soon after the implementation of apartheid in 1948. The movement went global and was heavily influenced by the organizations and networks of South Africans that operated inside and outside the nation (Thorn 50). Did the international anti-apartheid movement against South Africa during the apartheid era play a significant role in causing the National Party government to end apartheid? In attempting to discern the actual effects of the pressure put on South Africa by the international community, two different schools of thought will be addressed in relation to the actual effectiveness of international sanctions placed on South Africa. Nelson Mandela, the first president in post-apartheid South Africa, believes the results from the anti-apartheid movement, sanctions, were effective. On the side that believes the anti-apartheid movement had no discernable impact on the dismantling of apartheid is the former South African President, F.W. de Klerk. When announcing the end of apartheid in his 1990 address to Parliament, de Klerk mentions the conflict and violence that had pervaded South Africa as his considerations for the ending of apartheid. With the end of Communism in Europe, de Klerk felt that that the removal of the African National Congress from the banned organization list was now reasonable, as they would no longer have any financial support from Moscow to continue their fight against the apartheid government. Eventually a negotiated peace was agreed upon and the first elections for all South Africans took place in 1994, resulting an electoral victory for the ANC. De Klerk continued to deny the importance of sanctions in his acceptance of the Nobel Prize for Peace in 1993 in Oslo (de Villiers 197). The term sanctions in contemporary international law is viewed as a punitive action by one state against another, designed to force a change of policy without resorting to overt aggression (Brewer 36). Thus sanctions require actors, a target group, punitive instruments of a non-military fashion, and political objectives that determine the range and limitations of sanctions. In the case of South Africa, the actors are church groups and public opinion, not the traditional actors: national governments and international bodies. Typically the target group of sanctions are other governments and their constituency. In South Africa however, while the Afrikaner backed National Party is the target of the sanctions, the possible greater affects on the black majority rather than the white minority had to be taken into account. Thus while the intentions were to force the National Party to change its attitudes and behavior, the side effects of the sanctions had to be considered before choosing the best course of action (Brewer 36-37). The punitive instruments of sanctions range from prohibitive to revocative means. The economic means of sanctions are usually deemed the most effective, short of violence. Economic sanctions can come in two different forms: trade and financial restrictions. Trade sanctions are aimed at the restriction or cessation of imports and exports between state actors and the target nation. Financial sanctions seek to control or manipulate the flow of private foreign capital into the country targeted by sanctions. Financial sanctions appear in South Africa as disinvestment and divestment. Disinvestment is the reduction or withdrawal of all forms of foreign capital that is invested in the country, as well as banks not making any new investments. Divestment is the breaking of financial and economic relations with companies that profit from business done with South Africa (Brewer 37). Apart from the economic side of sanctions, political and diplomatic sanctions in the form of breaking off or reducing diplomatic ties or refusal of entry can be used against the target nation. Military and scientific sanctions can prohibit the exchange of technology and know-how between nations, which can be in the form of an arms embargo (Brewer 38). Talk in the 1960s of the use of sanctions to force a policy change were looked at with skepticism based on their predicted effectiveness. In fact one writer believed that only a world wide sanctions movement, coupled with a naval blockade would have the intended effect. For this to happen the UN would have to be willing to send in an invasion force to reinstall stability in the country after it had fallen into disarray following a world-wide boycott. The belief was that if South Africa was able to promote an appearance of stability then the Western powers would not have the resolve or justification for economic sanctions. Proponents of the sanctions movement in the 1960s believed that white South Africans would abandon the National Party in great numbers because many South Africans only supported white supremacy because of the high standard of living that the National Party gave them. This does not recognize that many whites were in fact Nationalists and would prove inflexible to outside pressure (Spence 63-65). With the passing of Resolution 418 by the UN Security Council in 1977, international efforts to hurt the apartheid government turned to the form of an arms embargo (Klotz 50). This resolution stemmed from the international attention created by the 1976 Soweto movement. This was revolt in a Johannesburg suburb that erupted against the apartheid government over a plan to hold instruction of maths and sciences in public schools in Afrikaans (Levy 416). The South African government in turn began to develop and produce more of their arms in country, but sophisticated systems such as high-performance aircraft, helicopters, and naval vessels were not so easily produced at home. However, self-sufficiency did come in the production of ammunition, military vehicles and communications equipment. The cost of Research and Development accompanied with the smaller production runs did equate to higher prices for even home-made arms. The arms embargo can claim success in at least South Africas outward policy. The inability to replace the loss of ageing fighter-bombers in the conflict with Angola (and their better equipped Cuban allies) began to toll and brought the South African government to the peace table for a negotiated settlement. The greater expense came in regard to South African society and economy. South Africas resources were diverted from other pressing policy matters towards keeping a well-equipped and prepared military. Funds that could have been spent on public utilities, education, or health care, were instead put towards military readiness. Dissatisfaction with the continued deprivation inside the country began to grow. At the same time, the limited amount of educated manpower in the country was required to serve in the armed forces. Additionally, due to the isolation from the rest of the world more money, citizens, and time were forced to be spent on research new military technologies because of the inability to purchase Western weapons systems. Finally, the profound effect of the arms embargo was on South Africas relationship with the international community. If an arms embargo had not been put in place, the West would not have been able to directly challenge the regime in power. Thus the embargo as a whole not only served to raise awareness and politicize the struggle against the apartheid movement in the West, it boosted the opposition against the South African state (Grundy 109-111). In the early 1980s the furthering unrest in the country began to worry many of the foreign investors in South Africa. While many of these private business were feeling the pressure in their home country to disinvest, the political instability of the country was the primary concern for many of the foreign companies. It was only after this withdrawal of funds and business from the country in the mid-1980s did South Africa begin to feel the squeeze put on by their foreign debts. In 1985, the European Community put a limited scope of trade sanctions on South Africa, yet still the most expansive to date. This was followed by more significant sanctions in 1986 from the EC, coupled with the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act passed by the US Congress over a presidential veto in the same year. While South Africa did its best to circumvent governmental sanctions, the loss of private capital was inescapable (Levy 417). As the end of the 1980s approached, proponents of the sanctions movement claimed success as they interpreted the fall of the apartheid state as justification of a strong sanctions movement. If nothing more, the economic sanctions were certainly the final straw in the campaign against the apartheid government. While a handful of South Africans began to draw links between the economic climate and political change, many dismissed the effectiveness of sanctions. In retrospect however, many see these comments as simply propaganda to dissuade more sanctions against their country(Levy 418-419). When measuring the success of sanctions, comparison with past experiences are invariably drawn. For obvious reasons, sanctions have a higher chance of success when placed against smaller and less developed target states. The more specific objectives the sending state sets the more easier it will be to assess the consequences on the target state and will make sanctions more efficient in the long run. Once these objectives have been set a combination of good timing with rapid and merciless implementation must be enforced. If the screw is tightened slowly, this gives the target state to develop countermeasures to the sanctions while at the same time giving the sender state time to develop second thoughts about their sanctions (Brewer 39). On the other side of sanctions lie the causes of their downfall. First, the expression of not using a sledgehammer to crack a nut is very appropriate here. Cultural and military add-on measures can make the sending states lose sight of the initial objectives. Secondly, the search for comprehensive boycotts and sanctions does not necessarily produce a more effective sanctions campaign. In many cases the search for general consensus among sender states can be self-defeating in the end, causing there to be more leaks in the campaign, rather than less. While the exact effectiveness of the international sanctions that arose from the anti-apartheid movement against the National Party in South Africa on an economic scale can be debated, the praise from black South African leaders for the anti-apartheid movement must be taken into account as well. Both Bishop Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandela made statements to this extent. On his release from prison in 1990 Mandela stressed that to end sanctions at that moment would risk allowing the National Party to abort the process towards ending apartheid. Thus the psychological impact of international isolation could be viewed as just as important as the economic impact. (Levy 418). While some form of sanctions had been in place for many decades, efforts intensified in the 1980s, notably from prominent South African allies in the form of the United States and Europe. This change could be attributed to causing the eventual political change of the 1990s, meaning that those that point to the considerable time lag between the implementation of sanctions and the fall of the National Party as evidence of the ineffectiveness of sanctions, do not account for the time that it takes for sanctions to effect the country as a whole. Instant change was an unrealistic goal (Levy 418). Empirical data has been collected during the time of enforced sanctions that back up Mandelas claim of effectives. An IMF report put together by Tamim Bayoumi in 1990 concludes that the impact economic sanctions had on the country is unmistakable. He concludes that sanctions are leading to a large upturn in white unemployment and that the nonwhite employment growth will rise while resulting in a decline in whites wages. His report would support previous statements that suggested that the removal of private capital from the country, rather than governmental sanctions against the National Party, achieved the greatest success. His report finds that nonwhite employment had increased in the intermediary while coinciding with the fall of real white wages. This analysis would seem to conclude that economic sanctions are having the exact opposite affect on the South African economy that apartheid was meant to provide, which was the economic exploitation of blacks by the whites (Bayoumi 1, 21). The anti-apartheid movement from an outside perspective obviously had an effect on South Africa. However, reports from inside the country differ somewhat with the Wests assessment of the effectiveness of sanctions. F.W. de Klerk, writing in his autobiography, states Obviously, sanctions also did serious damage to the country. (de Klerk 70). He goes on to corroborate the findings made by the IMF, that South Africas growth rate suffered approximately 1.5 percent during the 1980s and early 1990s. However, he states that the white minority was ready and willing to bear this cost because they feared the alternative was a Soviet-backed African National Congress regime ruling the country. This is more typical rhetoric from the South African government about fighting Soviet expansion in Africa. South Africa attempted to justify their foreign and domestic polices throughout the 1960s and 1970s as combating communism. While in truth the ANC was heavily funded by the Kremlin, Moscow certainly did not stir up the initial causes for the ANC to come into being. Moreover, De Klerk goes on to write that sanctions delayed change, rather than promoted it in the government. Importantly, he believes that the isolation South Africans felt by the West essentially nipped change in the bud as it was beginning to rise in the countrys universities as well as the intellectual and scientific elite. He believes that as a truism, isolation, sanctions, and rampant criticism of a society rarely encourage changes in the society. He is very reluctant to draw a link between governmental policies and the sanctions movement that was put forth by the worldwide anti-apartheid campaign (de Klerk 70-71). On the political side, de Klerk believes that the National Party owed some of its electoral success to the sanctions. He implies that had no sanctions been in place, the National Party would not have been able to appeal to the resentment and siege mentality that many white South Africans felt when confronted with the Wests sanctions. Concluding, de Klerk feels that the real factor in change was the economic growth of the country. Thus from his perspective, had South Africa been allowed to grow unimpeded economically, change would have come sooner than it actually did (de Klerk 71). Alternate views of the fall of the National Partys apartheid stem from outside forces that did not include sanctions. Most often cited is the rise to power of Mikhail Gorbachev and the fall of the Iron Curtain in Europe. Gorbachev realized that the Soviet Union could no longer afford to fund proxy wars across the world and abruptly ended all funding to socialist movements, thus depriving the ANC of most of its resources. While the Afrikaners once saw the ANC as godless communists, once the Soviet bloc fell, political dealings with the ANC became publicly acceptable (Evans 3 May 2007 & Levy 418). While the timing of the Soviet collapse certainly played a role in the changes in South Africa, for de Klerk to say that sanctions had no impact in policy making would be dismissing the effectiveness of the anti-apartheid movement as a whole. Governments did not enact most of these sanctions and embargoes because they felt South Africa was a threat like present day Iran or North Korea. Much of the support for forcing change in South Africa began with grassroots movements across the United States and Europe. De Klerk, in his own book, gives credence to the overall international movement. He notes that never before in history had a country had to deal with the comprehensive international campaign against the country (de Klerk 114). Not only were the economic stresses demanding, the restrictions on travel, notably on fly-over and landing rights for South African airlines, and the cold-shoulder many white South Africans received while traveling abroad in the 1980s all contributed to the isolation. He then describes how the sanctions net began to tighten in on the country. Later, he stressed the impact that the loss of financial support was taking on the country as a whole and that it became a source of social unrest (de Klerk 183). De Klerk then describes the need for financial stability in order to keep everyone, including the ANC, satisfied with the progress of the negotiations to end apartheid. Perhaps de Klerk cannot see the lines between the causes and effects, but it is most obvious that the reason South Africa is in financial doldrums is because of the anti-apartheid movement coupled with economic sanctions. Thus by his own reasoning, it would be safe to assume that the world-wide movement against the National Party had an undeniable and to some extent a very palpable link between the actual removal of the National Party from power and sanctions that were employed. The view championed by Nelson Mandela has a significant amount of empirical and scholarly evidence that would support his view that the international anti-apartheid movement against the National Party-led South African government was successful. Despite the campaign against apartheid not always meeting the requirements discussed earlier for successful sanctions, the political and overall isolation felt by South Africans, which was manufactured by the global anti-apartheid campaign, made up for the lapses in economic sanctions. Eventually the total onslaught that the government and white society felt they were under, beginning in the 1960s, encompassed the riots caused by students within the country and the ANCs fight from exile. The international sanction movement against the South African government was the final push that brought the National Party to near bankruptcy and brought them to the negotiating table with the ANC. While each factor of total onslaught played a role, the global anti-apartheid movement was a significant dynamic in causing the turning the tide against the white-minority government and eventually bringing to power a true democracy on the southern tip of the African continent. SEE: Follow Up Article -The Interconnected Factors on Apartheid in South Africa Works Cited Bayoumi, Tamim, Output, Employment and Financial Sanctions in South Africa (December 1990). IMF Working Paper No. 90/113 Order it at:http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/cat/longres.cfm?sk=3077.0 Brewer, John D., ed. Can South Africa Survive? London; Macmillan Pres, 1989. Butler, Anthony. Democracy and Apartheid. Great Britain; Macmillan Press, Ltd., 1998. Craig, Albert M., et al. The Heritage of World Civilizations. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2003. De Klerk, F.W. The Last Trek-A New Beginning. New York; St. Martins Press, 1999. [primary] De Villiers, Les. In Sight of Surrender. London; Praeger, 1995. Edgar, Robert E., ed. Sanctioning Apartheid. Trenton; Africa World Press, 1990. Evans, Ivan. Lecture. University of California San Diego. 3 May 2007. Grundy, Kenneth W. South Africa: Domestic Crisis and Global Challenge. San Francisco; Westview Press, 1991. Klotz, Audie. Norms in International Relations: The Struggle Against Apartheid. London; Cornell University Press, 1995. Levy, Philip I. Sanctions on South Africa: What Did They Do? The American Economic Review May 1999: 415-420. JSTOR. UC San Diego Lib. 10 may 2007 . Lowenberg, Anton D., and William H. Kaempfer. The Origins and Demise of South African Apartheid. Ann Arbor; The University of Michigan Press, 1998. Spence, J.E. Republic Under Pressure. London; Oxford University Press, 1965. Thorn, Hakan. Anti-Apartheid and the Emergence of a Global Civil Society. New York; Palgrave Macmillen, 2006 Vandenbosch, Amry. South Africa and the World. Lexington; The University Press of Kentucky, 1970. Like Loading…

Fair Usage Law

June 10, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Apartheid – definition of apartheid by The Free Dictionary

Nations Divided: American Jews and the Struggle Over Apartheid.Since the end of apartheid in 1994, approximately five million immigrants have settled in South Africa; most are Africans from further north pursuing economic opportunity or refugees seeking the political stability of the continent’s most highly developed nation.After years of struggle led by Nelson Mandela, South Africa succeeded in ending the apartheid regime and started to become an effective power in the region and one of the most stable and developed African countries which qualified it to become a member state of the BRICS and of the G-20.The shameful system of apartheid deprives its victims of all human rights, flaunts its atrocities for the world to see, supported by vested interests in–illegal territorial expansion, cheap or slave labor, profit, dehumanizing racial views of its victims, and good press by the corporate media.Apartheid Week (IAW) is an annual international series of events (includingThe action is timed to coincide with Israeli Apartheid Week, an annual event held in cities and universities around the world during the months of February and March that aims ‘to educate people about the nature of Israel as an apartheid system’ and to build support for the ‘Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign as part of a growing global BDS movement’.Feld’s new book, Nations Divided: American Jews and the Struggle Over Apartheid, details American Jewish involvement in the battle against racial injustice in South Africa, placing it in within the context of the long historical encounter between American Jews and apartheid.The “One Word” campaign was launched on June 8 by Ads Against Apartheid (A), which is a local Boston-based non-profit group, and is scheduled to run throughout June.He said that without the two-state solution, “a unitary [Israeli] state winds up either being an apartheid state with second-class [Palestinian] citizens – or it ends up being a state that destroys the capacity of Israel to be a Jewish state.He stressed that he does not believe that Israel is an apartheid state.Having suffered a form of apartheid themselves in the USA and known how dehumanising it was, you would think that all African-Americans would hate the apartheid regime in South Africa.Addressing the congregation, the Most Rev Tutu, the former Archbishop of Cape Town, thanked “splendid” and “amazing” campaigners for their efforts in changing the “moral climate” over apartheid.

Fair Usage Law

April 24, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Apartheid – Facts & Summary – HISTORY.com

In 1976, when thousands of black children in Soweto, a black township outside Johannesburg, demonstrated against the Afrikaans language requirement for black African students, the police opened fire with tear gas and bullets. The protests and government crackdowns that followed, combined with a national economic recession, drew more international attention to South Africa and shattered all illusions that apartheid had brought peace or prosperity to the nation. The United Nations General Assembly had denounced apartheid in 1973, and in 1976 the UN Security Council voted to impose a mandatory embargo on the sale of arms to South Africa. In 1985, the United Kingdom and United States imposed economic sanctions on the country. Under pressure from the international community, the National Party government of Pieter Botha sought to institute some reforms, including abolition of the pass laws and the ban on interracial sex and marriage. The reforms fell short of any substantive change, however, and by 1989 Botha was pressured to step aside in favor of F.W. de Klerk. De Klerks government subsequently repealed the Population Registration Act, as well as most of the other legislation that formed the legal basis for apartheid. A new constitution, which enfranchised blacks and other racial groups, took effect in 1994, and elections that year led to a coalition government with a nonwhite majority, marking the official end of the apartheid system.

Fair Usage Law

April 16, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Apartheid dictionary definition | apartheid defined

MLA Style “apartheid.” YourDictionary, n.d. Web. ‘ + dateFormat(“d mmmm yyyy”) + ‘. . APA Style apartheid. (n.d.). Retrieved ‘ + dateFormat(“mmmm dS, yyyy”) + ‘, from http://www.yourdictionary.com/apartheid

Fair Usage Law

March 9, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Non-Stop Against Apartheid | Spaces of Transnational …

Sunday 12 November 2017 marks the twentieth anniversary of the death of Steven Kitson. Steve was born in 1957 as the eldest child of the South African communists and anti-apartheid activists David and Norma Kitson. In the 1980s, he became a leading member of the City of London Anti-Apartheid Group (after it grew out of the Free Steve Kitson Campaign which had been formed to protest his own brief detention by the apartheid regime in January 1982). We told much of Steves biography in a blog post written on the 15th anniversary of his death from cancer in 1997: Steve was born in London; but, as an infant, returned to South Africa with his parents in 1959, when they decided to deepen their involvement in the anti-apartheid struggle. His father,a member of the second High Command of Umkhontowe Siswe(the armed wing of the ANC),was arrested in 1963 and sentencedto twenty years in gaol the following year. Along with his mother and sister, Amandla, Steve endured two years of constant police harassment in South Africa following his fathers imprisonment before Norma moved her young family to London. Each December, from the age of sixteen, he used the holiday period to return to South Africa to visit David. On 6 January 1982, while visiting his father in gaol in Pretoria, Steve was detained by the South African authorities, accused of being an ANC courier and breaching prison security by sketching the institution. Steve was violently interrogated tortured during his detention. Norma and her colleague at Red Lion Setters, Carol Brickley (a member of the Revolutionary Communist Group), quickly mobilised everyone they could think of to demand Steves freedom. The Free Steven Kitson Campaign was a success and he was released after six days. Within hours of phoning London with news of his release, Steves aunt, Joan Weinberg (Normas older sister), was murdered in her flat in Johannesburg. With Norma and the children in London, Joan had been Davids most frequent visitor throughout his imprisonment. Her killers were never found; indeed, they were never sought. During its brief existence, the Free Steven Kitson Campaign drew scores of new people into anti-apartheid campaigning for the first time. In order not to lose this momentum, it was decided to transform the campaign into the City Of London Anti-Apartheid Group. Steve played an active role in City Group over the years. On both the86-day picketof the South African Embassy in 1982 andthe Non-Stop Picket four years later, as well as many protests in between, Steve taught picketers South African liberation songs. He frequently performed with City Group Singers. For many years he was a member of City Groups committee, often working tirelessly in the office on the groups financial and membership records, as well as contributing to its political leadership. He used his software skills to develop a membership database for the group at a time when few comparable organisations could invest in such technology. In our research, several people remembered the time and patience that Steve would invest during his picket shifts, explaining the history of South Africa, apartheid, and resistance to it. He was central to the political education of many picketers. Like other members of the Kitson family, Steve was sometimes targeted by the police, but was also prepared to risk arrest to defend the right to protest against apartheid. In that context, one of the other voices that attested to Steves caring personality came from a (now retired) police officer. She told the following story: Weirdly one of my most abiding memories was of being on the picket one evening and a call for assistance from a colleague coming over the radio. There was a fight happening around the corner in the Strand. I remember leaving my post and running round to help out, having a bit of a roll around on the floor helping to arrest a drunken yob and then having to trot back to the picket as by right I shouldnt have left it in the first place but some things would always take precedence. I was obviously out of breath, a bit pale and the after effects of the adrenaline had kicked in and my hands were shaking. Steven Kitson was on the picket that evening and after looking at me in a concerned fashion for a minute or two he came over and asked me if I was alright. I was really rather touched. You have to appreciate there was very little contact with the pickets, they didnt talk to us and we didnt to them unless it was to raise an issue. It was a very nice gesture. To mark this anniversary, I wanted to post something new, that might help enrich this picture of Steve. So, I dipped once again into the two crates of his papers that still sit in my office. Two items from the files for 1984 intrigued me. They both serve as a reminder that, prior to his parents suspension from membership of the ANC and SACP, and City Groups disaffiliation from the national Anti-Apartheid Movement, there were high profile members of the ANC and SACP in London who were prepared to work closely with them. The first item is a facsimile of a Passbook that was produced for an exhibition about apartheid,The Signs of Apartheid, that was organised by the Greater London Councils London Against Racism campaign in 1984. What is perhaps most significant about this small brown booklet, that mimicked the internal passports used to control black workers (but, instead, contained information about apartheid), is the annotation inside it in Steves handwriting. In Steves small, precise, script it states given to me by Adelaide Tambo. I take this both as a personalaide memoire of a small gift from a leading anti-apartheid campaigner who remained close to the Kitson family throughout; but also as political act archiving evidence of Adelaide Tambos friendship against accusations that the Kitson family were ill-disciplined and outside the ANC fold. The second item from Steves papers speaks to the centrality of music to his life and his political work. It is a photocopy of an image of Steve, the City Group Choir, and the South African cultural activist James Madhlope-Phillips. Having arrived in London from South Africa in the 1960s, Madhlope-Phillips home was be a key site of comfort and welcome for new exiles as they arrived in England; it was also a crucial early meeting place for ANC members in London before a formal office was established there. In the 1970s, he was central to the formation of the ANCs cultural armMayibuye. Out of that contribution, he dedicated himself to teaching the freedom songs of Southern African liberation movements to progressive choirs around the world. James Madhlope-Phillips (centre) with City Group Choir. Steve Kitson is third from left. (Source: Steve Kitson papers) The card thanks Madhlope-Phillips for his guidance and for leading the choir in song at a conference (as part of City Groups contribution to month of action against apartheid in March of that year). Once again, Steves decision to keep a photocopy of the thank you card they sent to Madhlope-Phillips suggests a double motivation. It is, of course, a memento of a fun and energizing day of singing. But, it was also an insurance policy, recording a day of cooperation with a leading member of the ANCs cultural wing, at a time when the relationship between City Group and the AAM (as well as between Norma Kitson and the ANC) was heavily under strain. Even so, that a high profile member of the ANC/SACP did cooperate with City Group at this time suggests that the strain on those relationships was not shared universally. Many of the songs that were central to Madhlope-Phillips repertoire became favourites for City Group members frequently led by Steve Kitson, both as part of the choir, but also more spontaneously on shifts on the Non-Stop Picket. So here, then is a wonderful recording of James Madhlope-Phillips leadingShosholoza.Sing along and remember Steve Kitson.

Fair Usage Law

February 28, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Photos in Black and White: Margaret Bourke-White and the …

MARGARET BOURKE-WHITE AND THE DAWN OF APARTHEID In 1949, Margaret Bourke-White, one of the most famous photojournalists in America, travelled to South Africa on assignment for Life magazine. She had begun her career two decades before as an industrial photographer documenting turbines, dams, mines, bridges, steel mills, and other wonders of the mechanical age, in the U.S., in Germany, and in the Soviet Union. Hired by Henry Luce as the first photographer for Fortune magazine in 1929, by the mid-1930s she became one of four staff photographers at Luces renowned illustrated news magazine, Life. As the shuttered factories and bread lines of the Great Depression undermined the nations faith in industry, Bourke-White turned her lens to more social subjects. During the 1930s, many of her contemporariesDorothea Lange, Arthur Rothstein, Walker Evanstook photographs for the governments Farm Security Administration, creating a visual record of the impact of the economic collapse on American life. Although she remained a successful commercial photographer, like the FSA photographersBourke-White documented the crushing poverty of the era. She showed Life readers the ravages of the drought and storms in the Dust Bowl; the desperation of victims displaced when rivers overflowed their banks; and the plight of poor blacks and poor whites in the rural South. Her trip South, resulting in the photo essay, You Have Seen Their Faces (1937), confirmed Bourke-Whites determination to turn her camera in the direction of something that might have some social significance. Her South African travels came at the end of a series of foreign adventures as Lifes star photographer. She travelled to Czechoslovakia after Hitlers annexation of 1938; to Moscow in 1941; to defeated Germany in 1945; and to India during independence and Partition. Bourke-Whites experience as a combat photographer profoundly shaped her vision of the postwar world. She witnessed the horrors of World War II in its most brutal theaters: the Eastern Front in 1941-42; the stalled Allied invasion of Italy in the winter of 1943; and of course, the final assault on Nazi Germany and the liberation of the concentration camps. What is the use of all this bloodshed unless we insure the future for civilization and for peace, she concluded. The hardening of white supremacy in South Africa after 1948came as a rebuke to this hope. These experiences, driven by what she called her insatiable desire to be on the scene while history is being made, made Bourke-White an expert witness to the unfolding story of South Africa. Elected to power by whites in 1948, the Afrikaner nationalist government embarked on an ambitious program of total segregation known as Apartheid. In a country of 10 million Blacks and only 2.5 million whites, the latter retained all political power, controlled all the fertile land, and attempted to reduce Blacks to the status of an impoverished servile class. As Bourke-White wrote a friend at the end of her four month stay, South Africa left me very angry, the complete assumption of white superiority and the total focusing of the whole country around the schemes of keeping black labor cheap, and segregated, and uneducated, and without freedom of movement. Bourke-Whites intentions after this assignment were clear: As she told her editors at Life, Its the most unbelievable system. Its vicious, and its got to be exposed.

Fair Usage Law

February 28, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

What are ten facts about apartheid? | Reference.com

Under the apartheid system, nonwhite South Africans, who comprised the majority of the nations population, were forced to live in separate areas from whites in both rural and urban areas. The districts set aside for nonwhites were generally much poorer agriculturally and located farther from transportation hubs and offices, which put their inhabitants at a disadvantage when getting to and from work and even completing basic tasks like shopping for groceries. Nonwhites had no say in the politics of South Africa, and were required to have documents or passes in order to move from one area to another, which escalated the levels of hardship experienced by the people. At first, apartheid was a social movement, but it was signed into law under the National Party with the adoption and passage of the Population Registration Act of 1950. This legislation created framework for apartheid by classifying South Africans according to their biological races. Then, the National Party enacted a series of land acts, which collectively set aside over eighty percent of the nations lands for whites. In an egregious display of authority, the government evicted thousands of nonwhite South Africans from their rural homes, driving them into cities and selling their land to whites for farming and ranching.

Fair Usage Law

February 2, 2018  Tags:   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed

Apartheid Legislation 1850s-1970s | South African History …

Apartheid Legislation 1850s-1970s 1856-1910 Masters and Servants Acts of1856 These Acts, which had been passed between 1856 and 1904 in the four territories, remained in force after Union. They made it a criminal offence to breach the contract of employment. Desertion, insolence, drunkenness, negligence and strikes were also criminal offences. Theoretically these laws applied to all races, but the courts held that the laws were applicable only to unskilled work, which was performed mostly by Black people (Dugard 1978: 85; Horrell 1978: 6). Repealed by section 51 of the Second General Law Amendment Act No 94 of 1974. Mines and Works Act No 12 of1911 Permitted the granting of certificates of competency for a number of skilled mining occupations to Whites and Coloureds only. Repealed by section 20 of the Mines and Works Amendment Act No 27 of 1956 Black Land Act No 27 of19 June 1913 Prohibited Blacks from owning or renting land outside designated reserves (approximately 7 per cent of land in the country). Commenced: 19 June 1913. Repealed by section 1 of the Abolition of Racially Based Land Measures Act No 108 of 1991. 1920s The Native Affairs Act of 1920 The Native Affairs Act was yet another spin-off of the South African Native Affairs Commission report of 1905. It paved the way for the creation of a countrywide system of tribally based, but government appointed, district councils modelled on the lines of the Glen Grey Act of 1894. The principal of separate, communally-based political representation for Africans was extended by the 1936 Representation of Natives Act. The Durban Land Alienation Ordinance, No 14 of 1922 Timeline: Anti-Indian Legislation. This ordinance enables the Durban City Council to exclude Indians from ownership or occupation of property in White areas. The Natal Provincial Council passes three ordinances of 1922: The Class Areas Bill of 1923 Minister of Interior, Sir Patrick Duncan, introduces Class Areas Bill, which proposes compulsory residential and trading segregation for Indians throughout South Africa. The Natives (Urban Areas) Act No 21 of 1923 The Natives (Urban Areas) Act legislated on a broad front to regulate the presence of Africans in the urban areas. It gave local authorities the power to demarcate and establish African locations on the outskirts of White urban and industrial areas, and to determine access to, and the funding of, these areas. Local authorities were expected to provide housing for Africans, or to require employers to provide housing for those of their workers who did not live in the locations. Africans living in White areas could be forced to move to the locations. Local authorities were empowered to administer the registration of African service contracts, and to determine the extent of African beer brewing or trading in the locations. Municipalities were also instructed to establish separate African revenue accounts based on the income from fines, fees and rents exacted from ‘natives’ in the locations; this money was to be used for the upkeep and improvement of the locations. The critical function entrusted to the local authorities was, however, the administration of tougher Pass laws: Africans deemed surplus to the labour needs of White households, commerce and industry, or those leading an ‘idle, dissolute or disorderly life’, could be deported to the Reserves. In implementing the Act, local authorities were careful to consider the needs of industry. In Johannesburg, for instance, where industrialists made no bones about wanting a large pool of permanent standby labour, it was only intermittently applied until the end of the 1940s. The Act was amended in later years. Boroughs Ordinance No 189 of 1924 This Bill effectively disenfranchises Indians in Natal. They lose vote in boroughs. The Industrial Conciliation Act No 11 of 1924 This act provides for job reservation. Excluded Blacks from membership of registered trade unions and prohibited registration of Black trade unions. Commenced: 8 April 1924. Repealed by section 86 of the Industrial Conciliation Act No 36 of 1937. The Township Franchise Ordinance of 1924 The Township Franchise Ordinance is approved by the Provincial Council of Natal to deprive Indians of municipal franchise rights, vetoed by the Union Government. The Rural Dealers Ordinance of 1924 This Ordinance attempts to cripple Indian trade. This Ordinance prevented Indian ownership of land in White areas. The Transvaal Dealers (Control) Ordinance No 11 of 1925 This ordinance puts obstacles in the way of obtaining licences. Aim to restrict Indian trade. The Minimum Wages Act of 1925 This Act leads to a form of job reservation and promotes White employment. Certain trades are earmarked for Whites. The Class Areas Bill of 1925 This Bill is designed for mere segregation. The Areas Reservation and Immigration and Registration (Further Provision) Bill 1925 Dr. D. F. Malan, Minister of the Interior, introduces Areas Reservation and Immigration and Registration (Further Provision) Bill in Parliament. It defines Indians as aliens and recommends limitation of population through repatriation. The Mines and Works Act (Colour Bar Act) No 25 of 1926. Working Life Factories, Township and Popular Culture 1886 – 1940 by Luli Callinicos Property Rights and Rent Seeking in South Africa by John M. Mbaku The 1926 Mines and Works Act must be seen against the background of the wage and job colour bars in South Africa. The 1911 Act, mentioned earlier, reserved skilled work for Whites only. But in spite of this law, mine owners continued to desk ill jobs and give more and more work to Black miners to save labour costs. (The wages of Black mine workers remained the same no matter what work they were doing they earned about a tenth of the wages of a skilled White worker.) The 1922 strike was caused by the mine owners attempt to replace a number of White workers with lower-paid Black workers. This Act provides certificates of competency for skilled work, Indian workers are excluded. The legislation was a reflection of the belief of most Whites, especially in the labour market, that the welfare of Whites would suffer significantly if Blacks were not legislated out of the market. The Liquor Bill of 1926 Indians and Africans could not be employed by licence holders and were not allowed on licensed premises and liquor supply vehicles. 3000 Indians employed in the brewery trade are affected. The Local Government (Provincial Powers)Act of 1926 This Act denies citizenship rights to Indians. The Immigration and Indian Relief (Further Provision) Bill of 1927 Minister of Interior, Dr Malan, introduces Immigration and Indian Relief Further Provision) Bill, which follows closely on Round Table Conference between India and South Africa. It requires children of South African Indian parents, born outside the Union to enter the country within three months of birth. In addition South Africans who absent themselves for three continuous years from the country forfeit domicile rights, and Indians who have entered the country illegally (mostly at the time of the Anglo-Boer War) condoned and issued with condonation certificates. Families of condonees are not allowed to join them. The Act also establishes a scheme of voluntary repatriation of South African Indians to India. The Indian government complies. Repatriates are to receive bonuses of 20 per adult and 10 per child, plus free passages. The bonus doubled in 1931, and finally abolished in 1955 when it becomes apparent that only the old, intending to retire in India, take advantage of it. The Asiatics in the Northern Districts of Natal Act of 1927 Transvaal laws are to be applied to Indians in Utrecht, Vryheid, and Paulpietersburg. Restrictions placed on land purchase, trade and residence rights. The Liquor Act of 1927 Africans and Indians are denied employment by license holders and are not allowed to serve liquor and drive liquor vans. They are also denied access to licensed premises. The Womens Franchise Bill of 1927 No Indian women are allowed to vote. The Riotous Assembly Act of 1927 Any Indians are considered dangerous agitators subject to deportation. The Immigration and Indian Relief (Further) Provision: Act no 37 of 1927 This Bill becomes law and the scheme of assisted emigration comes into operation. (Repatriation: 1927 1655 Indians repatriated; 1928 3477 repatriated; 1929 1314 repatriated). The Nationality and Flag Act of 1927 Segregation and Apartheid Laws as Applied to Indians (1859-1994) Nationality and Flag Act denies Indians right to become citizens by naturalization. Indians not recognised as South African Nationals. The Old Age Pension Act of 1927 No pension provisions made for Indians. The Liquor Act of 1927 Prohibition (Statutory) of Natives and Indians to be employed in the Liquor Trade. The Black Administration Act No 38 of 1927 The Act stated that all moveable property belonging to a Black and allotted by him or accruing under Black law or custom to any woman with whom he lived in a customary union, or to any house, shall upon his death devolve and be administered under Black law and custom. The Liquor Bill Section 104 of the Liquor Bill of 1928 Prohibiting Indians from entering licensed premises is withdrawn. 1930s The Transvaal Asiatic Land Tenure of 1930 The (Amendment) Bill is introduced by Minister of Interior as a result of recommendations of Select Committee. Proposes segregation: relocation of Indians to designated areas exempted from Gold Law within five years. No protection for those who had acquired interests on proclaimed (mining) land. Timeline: Anti-Indian Legislation. The Industrial Conciliation Act of 1930 Provided for the registration and regulation of trade unions and employers’ organisations, the settlement of disputes between employers and employees, and the regulation of conditions of employment. Repealed by s 56 of the Industrial Conciliation Act No 28 of 1956 The Wage Amendment Act of 1930 This is the continuation of 1925 Act.This Act provides a single national board (the Wage Board) to recommend minimum wages and conditions of unorganised or unregistered groups of workers in all industries. The Act aimed to raise the wages of semi-skilled workers to a civilised level. Ironically, the government recognised that there was a need to fix a minimum for Black workers in order to protect the White workers wages against undercutting. The Women’s Enfranchisement Act of 1930 The Act gave only European women the right to elect and to be elected to the Houses of Parliament. The Riotous Assemblies (Amendment) Act No 19 of 1930 This Act authorised the Governor-General to prohibit the publication or other dissemination of any documentary information calculated to engender feelings of hostility between the European inhabitants of the Union on the one hand and any other section of the inhabitants of the Union on the other hand (Dugard 1978: 177). Commenced: 21 May 1930. Repealed by section 20 of the Riotous Assemblies Act No 17 of 1956. TheAsiatic Immigration Amendment Act of 1931 Indians have to prove the legitimacy of their domicile in the country. The Native Service Contracts Act of 1932 The Act drew all Africans outside of the reserves into the agricultural economy, while extending existing controls over labour tenancy. This meant that a farmer could expel the entire tenant family if any one member defaulted on his or her labour obligation. The Act had additional elements allowing for farmers to whip tenants, as well as compel farm tenants to carry passes. The Transvaal Asiatic Land Tenure (Amendment) Act No 35 of 1932 The Transvaal Asiatic Land Tenure Act and its subsequent amendments in 1934, 1935 and 1937 establish statutory segregation of Indians in the Transvaal end the state of uncertainty about their status in the Province that has obtained since the passing of Law 3, 1885. It is passed in 1935. The Slums Act: Demolition of Slums of 1934 This Act is aimed at improving conditions in locations, but actually expropriates Indian property.Under the pretext of Sanitation, the Act is enforced to demolish and expropriate with the ultimate aim of segregation. Segregation and Apartheid Laws as Applied to Indians (1859-1994) TheRural Dealers Licensing Ordinance Natal of 1935 This Ordinance causes the refusal of licenses to people whose properties have depreciated in value or whose licenses endangers the comfort and health of neighbours. Representation of Blacks Act No 12 of 1936 Removed Black voters in the Cape from the common roll and placed them on a separate roll (Dugard 1978: 90). Blacks throughout the Union were then represented by four White senators. Commenced: 10 July 1936. Repealed by section 15 of the Representation between the Republic of South Africa and self-governing Territories Act No 46 of 1959. The Representation of Natives Act No 16 of 1936 The Bills proposed by General Barry Hertzog in the 1920s finally got the two-thirds majority required to be passed into law 1936, when the Development Trust and Land Act (also referred to as the Native Trust and Land Act and Bantu Trust and Land Act) and the Representation of Natives Act were enacted. The Representation of Natives Act essentially stripped African people in the Cape of their voting rights and offered instead a limited form of parliamentary representation, through special White representatives. Under this Act, a Natives Representative Council (NRC), which was a purely advisory body, was also created. The NRC could make recommendations to Parliament or the Provincial Councils on any legislation regarded as being in the interest of natives. The Development Trust and Land Act No 18 1936 Expanded the reserves to a total of 13, six per cent of the land in South Africa and authorised the Department of Bantu Administration and Development to eliminate Black spots (Black-owned land surrounded by White-owned land) (Horrell 1978: 203). The South African Development Trust (SADT) was established and could, in terms of the Act, acquire land in each of the provinces for Black settlement (RRS 1991/92: 381). Commenced: 31 August 1936. Repealed by Proc R 28 of 1992, 31 March 1992 (phasing out and abolishing the SADT in terms of the Abolition of Racially Based Land Measures Act No 108 of 1991) The Aliens Registration Act No 26 of 1936

Fair Usage Law

December 19, 2017   Posted in: Apartheid  Comments Closed


Fair Use Disclaimer

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.

Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:

"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

  • (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for or nonprofit educational purposes,
  • (2) the nature of the copyrighted work,
  • (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
  • (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."