short reflection essay on apartheid

Apartheid in South Africa Essay

Introduction.

South Africa is one of the countries with rich and fascinating history in the world. It is regarded as the most developed state in Africa and among the last to have an elected black president towards the end of the 20 th century. Besides its rich history, the South African state has abundant natural resources, fertile farms and a wide range of minerals including gold.

The country is the world’s leading miner of diamonds and gold with several metal ores distributed around the country like platinum (Rosmarin & Rissik, 2004). South Africa experiences a mild climate that resembles that of San Francisco bay.

With its geographical location and development, South Africa is one of the most accessible African countries. All these factors contribute to South Africa’s global prominence, especially before and after the reign of its first black President, Nelson Mandela in 1994.

However, these alone do not add up to what the country’s history. In fact, South Africa’s history sounds incomplete without the mention of Apartheid, a system that significantly shaped and transformed the country in what it is today.

Without apartheid, many argue that South Africa would have probably been a different country with unique ideologies, politics and overall identity. In other words, apartheid greatly affected South Africa in all spheres of a country’s operation. From segregation to all forms of unfairness, apartheid system negatively affected South Africans and the entire country (Pfister, 2005).

On the other hand, some people argue that apartheid positively affected South Africa in countless ways. This essay gives a detailed coverage of the issue of apartheid in South Africa and its impact to the economy, politics and social life of South Africans.

To achieve this task, the analysis is divided into useful sections, which give concise and authentic information concerning the topic. Up to date sources were consulted in researching the topic to ensure that data and information used in describing the concept is up to date, from reputable and recommended authors.

Among important segments of the essay include but not limited to the literature review, history, background information and recommendations.

Research questions

In addressing the issue of Apartheid in South Africa, this essay intends to provide answers to the following questions:

What was apartheid system?
What are the factors that led to the apartheid system?
What were the negative effects of the apartheid system?
What were the positive effects of the apartheid system?
Why was it necessary to end apartheid in South Africa?

Literature Review

Apartheid in South Africa is one of the topics which have received massive literature coverage even after the end of the regime. Most of the documented information describes life before 1994 and what transpired after Nelson Mandela took leadership as the first black African President of the state.

This segment, therefore, explores the concept concerning what authors, scholars and researchers have recorded in books, journals and on websites as expounded in the following analytical sections.

Apartheid in South Africa

Apartheid refers to a South African system that propagated racial discrimination imposed between 1948 and 1994 by National Party regimes. During this period of decades, the rights of the majority “blacks” were undermined as white minority settlers maintained their supremacy and rule through suppressive tactics.

Apartheid was primarily developed after the Second World War by the Broederbond and Afrikaner organizations and was extended to other parts of South West Africa, currently known as Namibia until it became an independent state four years before the end of apartheid.

According to Allen 2005, discrimination of black people in South Africa began long before apartheid was born during the colonial era. In his survey, Allen noted that apartheid was ratified after the general election which was held in 1948.

The new legislation that the governments adopted classified all South African inhabitants into four groups based on their racial identity (Allen, 2005). These groups were Asians, whites, natives and colored. This led to all manners of segregation that ensured complete distinction among these groups, achieved through forced displacement of the oppressed groups without necessarily thinking about their rights.

The practice continued throughout the period, reaching heightened moments when non-whites were deprived of political representation in 1970, the year when blacks were denied citizenship right causing them to become members of Bantustans who belonged to self-governing homes (Allen, 2005).

Besides residential removal and displacement, other forms of discrimination dominated in public institutions like education centers, hospitals and beaches among other places which were legally meant for everybody regardless of their skin color, gender or country of origin.

In rare cases where black accessed these services, they were provided with inferior options as compared to what whites received (Allen, 2005). As a result, there was significant violence witnessed across the country, accompanied by internal resistance from people who believed that they were being exploited and languishing in poverty at the expense of white minorities.

Consequently, the country suffered trade embargoes as other countries around the world distanced themselves from South African rule as a way of condemning it and raising their voices in support for those who were considered less human in their own country.

Overwhelmed by the desire for equality, South Africa witnessed countless uprisings and revolts, which were welcomed with imprisoning of political and human rights activists who were strongly opposed to the apartheid rule.

Banning of opposition politics was also adopted in order to suppress leaders who believed in justice for humanity (Edwards & Hecht, 2010). As violence escalated around the country, several state organizations responded by sponsoring violence and increasing the intensity of oppression.

The peak of apartheid opposition was in 1980s when attempts to amend apartheid legislation failed to calm black people forcing President Frederik Willem de Klerk to enter into negotiations with black leaders to end apartheid in 1990.

The culmination of the negotiations was in 1994 when a multi-racial and democratic election was held with Nelson Mandela of African National Congress emerging the winner and the first black president in South Africa (Edwards & Hecht, 2010). Although apartheid ended more than a decade ago, it is important to note its impact and ruins are still evident in South Africa.

Background Information

Segregation took shape in the Union of South Africa in order to suppress the black people’s participation in politics and economic life. White rulers believed that the only way of maintaining their rule was to ensure that black people do not have opportunities to organize themselves into groups that would augment their ability to systematize themselves and fight back for their rights.

However, despite these efforts, black people in South Africa became integrated into the economic and industrial society than any other group of people in Africa during the 20 th century (Edwards & Hecht, 2010).

Clerics, educations and other professionals grew up to be key players as the influence of blacks sprouted with Mission Christianity significantly influencing the political landscape of the union. Studying in abroad also played a major role as blacks gained the momentum to fight for their rights as the move received support from other parts of the world (Burger, 2011).

There were continuous attempts from the government to control and manipulate black people through skewed policies, which were aimed at benefiting whites at the expense of the majority. The year 1902 saw the formation of the first political organization by Dr Abdurrahman which was mainly based in Cape Province.

However, the formation of the African National Congress in 1912 was a milestone as it brought together traditional authorities, educationists and Christian leaders (Burger, 2011). Its initial concern was defined by constitutional protests as its leaders demanded recognition and representation of the blacks.

Efforts by union workers to form organizations for the purpose of voicing their concerns were short-lived as their efforts were short down by white authorities. This led to strikes and militancy, which was experienced throughout 1920s. The formation of the Communist Party proved to be a force to last as it united workers’ organizations and non-racialism individuals (Beinart & Dubow, 1995).

Segregation of blacks was also witnessed in job regulations as skilled job opportunities remained reserved for white people. The introduction of pass-laws further aimed at restricting African mobility thus limiting their chances of getting organized.

These laws were also designed to have all blacks participate in forced labor as they did not have a clear channel to air their views. According to historic findings, all these efforts were inclined towards laying the foundation for apartheid in later years.

Noteworthy, there were divisions among whites as they differed with regard to certain ideologies and stances. For instance, they could not agree on their involvement in First World War I as the National Party dislodged from the South African Party (Beinart & Dubow, 1995). Conversely, allocation of skilled jobs to whites targeted high productivity from people who had experience while pass-laws prevented aimless movement.

Labor issues continued to emerge through organized strikes though these efforts were constantly thwarted by the government using brutal and inhumane ways like seclusion of migrant residential houses using compounds.

Miners also protested against low payment and poor living standards, conditions which promoted hostility between black and white labor forces, culminating into a bloody rebellion in 1922 (Beinart & Dubow, 1995).

Intensified discrimination against blacks mounted to serve the interests of white rulers through reinforcement of the unfair government policies and employment bar in certain areas like the railway and postal service to address the infamous “poor-white problem”.

The world depression of early 1930s led to the union of major white parties which was closely followed by the breakaway by a new Afrikaner led by Dr. DF Malan. The entrenchment of the white domination led to the elimination of Africans from the voters’ role in 1936 (Burger, 2011).

These continued up to the end of the Second World War when the government intensified segregation rules in 1948 that led to the conception and birth of Apartheid in South Africa.

Desmond Tutu against Apartheid

As mentioned above, Mission Christianity played a major role in the fight against apartheid and restoration of justice in South Africa. This saw several leaders rise to the limelight as they emerged to be the voice of the voiceless in the South African State.

One of these Christian leaders was Archbishop Desmond Tutu who has remained in the history of South Africa, featuring prominently in the reign of apartheid (BBC, 2010). He is well known worldwide for his anti-apartheid role and for boldly speaking for the blacks.

He served a very important role, especially during the entire time when Nelson Mandela was serving his prison term making him nominated for the highly coveted and prestigious Nobel Peace Prize award in 1984 for his relentless anti-apartheid efforts.

This was a real implication that the world had not only observed Tutu’s efforts but also raised its voice against the discriminatory rule in South Africa.

After Nelson Mandela was elected democratically in 1984, he appointed Archbishop Desmond Tutu to steer the South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission which was mandated to investigate all forms of crimes committed by blacks and whites during the whole period of apartheid.

Although Tutu was a teacher by training, he dropped the career after the adoption of the Bantu Education Act in 1953 (BBC, 2010). The act was meant to extend apartheid to black schools around the country, causing several schools to close down due to lack of finances after the government discontinued subsidized programs for those that did not comply.

To confirm and affirm that apartheid was not the best regime option in South Africa, Desmond Tutu was highly influenced by white clergymen like Bishop Trevor Huddleston, who strongly opposed the idea of racial discrimination that was being propagated by the white government (BBC, 2010).

Although he was closely involved in active politics, he remained focused on religious motivation, arguing that racialism was not the will of God, and that it was not to live forever. His appointment as the head of the Anglican church in 1986 did not deter him from fighting apartheid as he risked being jailed after he called the public to boycott municipal elections that were held in 1988.

He welcomed President FW De Klerk’s reforms in 1989, which included the release of the one who was later to become the first black president of South Africa, Nelson Mandela and the reinstatement of the African National Congress (BBC, 2010).

Nelson Mandela against Apartheid

Nelson Mandela is regarded as a key player in the fight against apartheid in South Africa as he led black people together with other activists to publicly denounce and condemn the discriminatory regimes of the time. As a way of demonstrating his dissatisfaction and criticism of apartheid, Mandela publicly burnt his “pass”.

All blacks were required to carry their passes as the government prohibited the movement of people to other districts (Atlas College, 2011). While working with ANC, Mandela’s involvement in anti-apartheid efforts was increased as he realized the need to have active resistance in dealing with apartheid.

He was severally charged with treason and acquitted although in 1964, Mandela was life imprisoned a move that was considered to be ill-motivated to maintain the white rule supremacy. He continued his fight while in prison as his message penetrated every village and district in the country.

Although he acted together with like-minded people, Nelson Mandela’s name stands high as the leader of the anti-apartheid campaign which culminated in his election as the first black president of South Africa in 1994 (Atlas College, 2011).

Opposing opinion

Although apartheid was highly condemned and still receives high-charged criticism, some people view it from a different perspective. Did apartheid have any benefit to the people of South Africa and to the nation at large?

Apart from propagating injustices across the country, apartheid is one of the economic drivers of South Africa with some of the policies and strategies used during that time still under active implementation by the government.

For instance, the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) was orchestrated by ANC and served as the core platform during the elections that were held in 1994 (Lundahl & Petersson, 2009). The programme focused on improvement of infrastructure, improvement of housing facilities, free schooling, sharing of land to the landless, clean water and affordable health facilities among others.

This led to the improvement of social amenities in the country. RDP also continued financing the budget revenue. It therefore suffices to mention that those who support apartheid base their argument on the status of the country after 1994 when subsequent governments chose to adopt some strategies from apartheid to drive the reconstruction agenda (Lundahl & Petersson, 2009).

As one of the leading economies in Africa, some of the institutions, factories and companies which were established during apartheid significantly contribute to development in the country. Even though new plans have been adopted, majority have their foundations rocked on apartheid.

As a result of these development initiatives, a lot has changed in South Africa. There has been substantive economic growth augmented by several factors which relate to apartheid (Lundahl & Petersson, 2009). Improved living standards among South Africans cannot also be ignored in any discussion of apartheid.

Many jobs have been created for the skilled people who never found an opportunity to work when the regime was at its operational peak. South Africa also prides on some of the most prestigious learning institutions in the region which are highly ranked on the world list. It therefore suffices to mention that apartheid had several advantages which cannot be overshadowed by its disadvantages.

Against Apartheid

Despite the advantages of apartheid discussed above, there is no doubt that the system negatively impacted South Africans in a myriad of ways. From undermining of human rights to promotion of hostility and violence among residents, there is enough evidence to condemn the regime. It affected several social structures people were not allowed to freely intermarry and interact.

This was coupled with limited expression rights as they were believed not to have rights. Movement was highly restricted as black people were to walk with passes and restricted to move within one district. Additionally, forceful evacuation was a norm as black people never owned land and houses permanently (Burger, 2011). What about employment?

Many skilled jobs were strictly reserved for whites as black people survived on manual duties with little or no pay. This contributed to low living standards and inability to meet their needs, manifested through labor strikes which were continuously witnessed in several organizations.

Consequently, violence escalated with police brutality hitting high levels and several people losing their lives as others spent the rest of their lives in jail. It was a system that needed more condemnation than just protesting in order to allow justice to prevail (Pfister, 2005).

Apartheid in South Africa is one of the most outstanding in the history of the country with millions of people with painful and remarkable memories.

With its culmination in 1994 democratic elections which saw Nelson Mandela rise to power, the regime had severe negative effects, which necessitated the need to end it and pave the way for a fair nation that respects humanity regardless of skin color, ethnicity, country of origin and gender (Pfister, 2005).

Based on the above analysis, it is important for a number of lessons to be learnt from it. World leaders need to establish and implement leadership mechanisms that would prevent recurrence of apartheid in South Africa or in other parts of the world.

To the millions who suffered under rule, reconciliation efforts are essential in allowing them to accept themselves and move on with life as they mingle with thousands of white settlers who continue owning parcels of land in the country. It should however to be forgotten that apartheid was important in transforming South Africa into what it is today. From factories and infrastructure to a stable economy, it had lifetime merits that ought to be acknowledged throughout in history.

Allen, J. (2005). Apartheid South Africa: An Insider’s Overview of the Origin and Effects of Separate Development . Bloomington, Indiana: iUniverse.

Atlas College. (2011). Nelson Mandela and Apartheid. Atlas College . Web.

BBC. (2010). Profile: Archbishop Desmond Tutu . BBC News . Web.

Beinart, W., & Dubow, S. (1995). Segregation and apartheid in twentieth-century South Africa . London: Routledge.

Burger, D. (2011). History. South African Government Information . Web.

Edwards, P., & Hecht, G. (2010). History and the Techno politics of Identity: The Case of Apartheid South Africa. Journal of Southern African Studies, 36 (3), p. 619-639.

Lundahl, M., & Petersson, L. (2009). Post-Apartheid South Africa; an Economic Success Story? United Nations University . Web.

Pfister, R. (2005). Apartheid South Africa and African states: from pariah to middle power, 1961-1994 . London: I.B.Tauris.

Rosmarin, I., & Rissik, D. (2004). South Africa. Singapore: Marshall Cavendish.

Dynamics of the Relationship between Central Government and Regional Administrations in Spain since 1978
Impact of Apartheid on Education in South Africa
Achievements of Nelson Mandela
Mandela’s Leadership
Nelson Mandela: Biography and Influences
Peace and Justice
Disease in The News
The Construction of the Postmodern Subject in Professional Writing
The Syrian Conflict: An International Crisis
Some of the most significant innovations of the 20th Century
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, March 27). Apartheid in South Africa. https://ivypanda.com/essays/apartheid-in-south-africa/

"Apartheid in South Africa." IvyPanda , 27 Mar. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/apartheid-in-south-africa/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Apartheid in South Africa'. 27 March.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Apartheid in South Africa." March 27, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/apartheid-in-south-africa/.

1. IvyPanda . "Apartheid in South Africa." March 27, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/apartheid-in-south-africa/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Apartheid in South Africa." March 27, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/apartheid-in-south-africa/.

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

Basic site functions
Ensuring secure, safe transactions
Secure account login
Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
Remembering privacy and security settings
Analyzing site traffic and usage
Personalized search, content, and recommendations
Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

Remembering general and regional preferences
Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Apartheid South Africa 1940s to 1960s Essay for Grade 11

On this page, we guide grade 11 student on how to write “Apartheid South Africa 1940s to 1960s Essay”.

Apartheid in South Africa was a system of institutionalised racial segregation and discrimination that existed from the late 1940s until the early 1990s. This period in South African history is marked by the enforcement of legal policies and practices aimed at separating the races and maintaining white dominance in all aspects of life. The years between the 1940s and the 1960s were critical in laying the foundations and entrenching the policies that would define this era. This essay will explore the implementation of apartheid laws , resistance movements , and international reactions to apartheid from the 1940s to the 1960s.

Implementation of Apartheid Laws

The formal introduction of apartheid can be traced back to the National Party’s victory in the 1948 elections . The party, which represented the Afrikaner nationalist interest, institutionalised apartheid as a means of securing white dominance. Key legislation enacted during this period included:

The Population Registration Act (1950): This act classified all South Africans into racial groups – ‘white’, ‘black’, ‘coloured’, and ‘Indian’. This classification was a prerequisite for the implementation of other apartheid laws.
The Group Areas Act (1950): This law geographically segregated South Africans by race , determining where different racial groups could live, work, and own property.
The Suppression of Communism Act (1950): Though ostensibly aimed at combating communism , this act was frequently used to silence critics of apartheid, including non-communists.

Resistance Movements

Resistance against apartheid came from various quarters, including political parties, trade unions, and individual activists. The most prominent of these movements included:

The African National Congress (ANC): Initially adopting a policy of peaceful protest, the ANC organised strikes, boycotts, and civil disobedience campaigns. Following the Sharpeville Massacre in 1960, the ANC shifted to a strategy of armed struggle .
The Pan Africanist Congress (PAC): A breakaway from the ANC, the PAC also played a significant role in organising protests against apartheid, notably the anti-Pass Laws protest that led to the Sharpeville Massacre.
Sharpeville Massacre (1960): A turning point in the resistance against apartheid, where a peaceful protest against pass laws in Sharpeville turned deadly, with police opening fire on demonstrators, resulting in 69 deaths.

International Reactions to Apartheid

The international community’s response to apartheid was initially muted, but as the realities of apartheid became more widely known, international condemnation grew. Significant aspects of the international reaction included:

United Nations Condemnation: The UN General Assembly adopted a resolution in 1962 calling for sanctions against South Africa, urging member states to cease military and economic relations with the apartheid regime.
Isolation in Sports: South Africa was banned from the Olympic Games and other international sporting events, highlighting the growing international isolation of the apartheid government.

Student Guide

When writing an essay on Apartheid in South Africa from the 1940s to the 1960s, focusing on clarity, depth, and evidence-based arguments is crucial. Here are some useful tips to enhance your essay writing:

Start with a Strong Thesis Statement:
Clearly state your essay’s main argument or analysis point at the end of your introduction. This sets the direction and tone of your essay. For example, “This essay argues that the apartheid laws enacted between the 1940s and 1960s not only institutionalised racial segregation but also laid the foundation for the resistance movements that eventually led to apartheid’s downfall.”
Organise Your Essay Logically:
Use subheadings to divide your essay into manageable sections, such as the implementation of apartheid laws, resistance movements, and international reactions. This helps readers follow your argument more easily.
Use Evidence to Support Your Points:
Incorporate specific examples and quotes from primary and secondary sources to back up your statements. For instance, reference the Population Registration Act when discussing racial classification or cite international condemnation from United Nations resolutions.
Analyse, Don’t Just Describe:
Go beyond simply describing events by analysing their impact and significance . For example, when discussing the Sharpeville Massacre, explore its effect on both the apartheid government’s policies and the tactics of resistance movements.
Acknowledge Different Perspectives:
While focusing on the factual history of apartheid, also acknowledge the various perspectives on apartheid policies and resistance efforts, including those of the government, opposition movements, and international bodies.
Conclude Effectively:
Summarise the main points of your essay and reiterate your thesis in the context of the information discussed. Offer a concluding thought that encourages further reflection, such as the legacy of apartheid in contemporary South Africa.
Reference Accurately:
Ensure all sources are accurately cited in your essay to avoid plagiarism and to lend credibility to your arguments. Follow the specific referencing style required by your teacher or educational institution.
Proofread and Revise:
Check your essay for spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors. Also, ensure that your argument flows logically and that each section supports your thesis statement.
Seek Feedback:
Before final submission, consider getting feedback from teachers, peers, or tutors. Fresh eyes can offer valuable insights and identify areas for improvement.

By incorporating these tips, you can create a well-argued, informative, and engaging essay on Apartheid in South Africa that meets the expectations of a Grade 11 history assignment.

The period from the 1940s to the 1960s was pivotal in the establishment and consolidation of the apartheid system in South Africa. Through the enactment of draconian laws, the apartheid government institutionalised racial discrimination, which led to widespread resistance within the country and condemnation from the international community. This era laid the groundwork for the struggles and transformations that would eventually lead to the end of apartheid.

Looking for something specific?

Did you see these.

30+ Unprepared Speech Topics for Grade 10
Effects of Load Shedding Essay Guide
Why I Admire Nelson Mandela Essay Guide and Example
Guide: Writing a Conclusion for an Essay on “Why the Bantu Education Act Is Interesting or Important to Know About Today”

Grade 11 - Apartheid South Africa 1940s to 1960s

The global pervasiveness of racism and segregation in the 1920s and 1930s

During the 1920s and 1930s, there were discriminatory policies in different parts of the world. These were mostly in European countries like Britain and European colonies like South Africa. These discriminatory policies were mostly on basis of Race, and were often in favour of white people’s interests. Black and white people were not allowed contact in different social domains. For instance in schools, white people had well-resourced schools with better facilities, while Black people had inadequate facilities like overcrowded schools with poor teaching and learning resources.

Segregation after formation of the Union

By 1910, South Africa (then Union of South Africa ) was ruled by White people (descendants of white European settlers). This government was exclusively for white people. They were the only ones who participated in it, the only ones allowed to vote.

Under their leadership segregation laws were predominant and highly active. These segregation laws were implemented in spaces such as the work place. In the job market white people were given first priority, they were given upper position and paid higher salaries even if they had the same qualifications, experience and capabilities as Black people. Black people worked under poor and unsafe conditions and were denied the rights to join or form trade unions. In the army only white people could serve main roles like being a soldier, Black people were given supporting roles such as cooking and cleaning. Other segregation laws and policies included the Native Land Act of 1913 and the Pass laws .

National Party victory 1948

The National Party ’s victory in the 1948 elections can be linked with the dismantlement of segregation in South Africa during the Second World War . This was because of the growth in industries, where black people were in demand for labour in industries. Black people filled the positions that were left empty by the whites. White people could not fill these positions because they were few in numbers and most white people already occupied better jobs rather than physical manual labour. Large numbers of black people then moved to the cities to fill these vacancies and soon Blacks became the majority of labour in cities.

Black people were then given pieces of land outside cities to occupy. These pieces of lands were known as ghettos. The ghettos were often not too far from the cities, so Black people could get to work in the cities easy.

In the same year, 1948, when the National Party came to power, apartheid started. Apartheid resulted from white people’s frustrations and their dissatisfactions by the then overwhelming presence of Black people in cities. The large numbers of Black people in cities threatened white people’s power. To whites, it seemed like Black people would be difficult to control in cities than in Homelands . For Whites, apartheid would then re-affirm white superiority and would keep that Black people under their control.

Overcoming Apartheid - the nature of internal resistance to Apartheid before 1960

Internal resistance against apartheid began in the 1950s. This was when anti-apartheid groups rejected the apartheid system. They adopted a programme called the “ programme of action ”, which encompassed other internal resistance programmes such as:

The Defiance campaign
The African National congress
The Freedom Charter
The women Resistance movement
Sharpeville Massacre
Rivonia Trial

Also see: http://www.sahistory.org.za/topic/popular-struggles-early-years-apartheid-1948-1960

Review - ‘Apartheid’ becomes an international word; putting South Africa within a broader world context in relation to the uniqueness of Apartheid

Under the apartheid system, the South African profile in terms of foreign relations did not look good. Many countries began ending their relationship with South Africa. As a result, South Africa became relatively isolated. Most countries in the world did not approve of the apartheid system in South Africa. This was because most countries and most people became more aware of human rights and learnt from past experiences of discriminations like the Holocaust .

See: http://www.sahistory.org.za/dated-event/european-community-lifts-sanctions-against-sa

See: http://www.sahistory.org.za/dated-event/un-lifts-mandatory-sanctions-against-sa

In 1946, the United Nations expressed its concerns about South Africa’s discriminatory policies, particularly how South Africa handled the issues of South African Indians , which caused tensions between South Africa and India.

In 1952, after the Defiance Campaign, the United Nations appointed a task team to monitor the progress of the apartheid system in South Africa. Possibly the UN was a bit lenient with South Africa regarding apartheid. Many countries in the UN felt that apartheid was South Africa’s internal issue, and was quite outside from UN issues.

However the UN became hard on South Africa regarding administration of South West Africa (now Namibia ). This was because South Africa had refused grant South West Africa independence to Germany as it was stated on the Treaty of Versailles . The NP treated SWA as the fifth province of South Africa and spread apartheid in the country too.

In 1960 Liberia and Ethiopia called for the International Court of Justice to take legal actions against South Africa’s control of SWA. These two countries realised that apartheid was also expanding to other regions of in south west Africa.

In November 1960, a lawsuit, which would last for six years, was given to South Africa for poor administration of SWA. The International Court of Justice ruled that announced that Ethiopia and Liberia had no right to intervene in South Africa’s internal issues. No further rulings were made by the court regarding South Africa’s legitimacy over the administration of SWA. South Africa then continued to administer SA until its independence in 1988.

After showing signs of improvement on racial discrimination, such as negotiations about ending the apartheid system, the release of Political prisoners like the release of Nelson Mandela in 1990, and the African National Congress ’ lift on the armed struggle, South Africa finally earned its freedom in 1994, and soon formed the

Collections in the Archives

Know something about this topic.

Towards a people's history

10 Ways Apartheid Affected People’s Lives and How They Responded

Apartheid was a system of institutional racial segregation and discrimination that existed in South Africa from 1948 to the early 1990s. The word “apartheid” is an Afrikaans word that means “separateness.”

Under apartheid, the government divided the population into racial groups and classified individuals based on their skin color, ethnic origin, and social status.

The white minority government used this classification to justify separate facilities, education systems, and living areas for different racial groups.

The apartheid system was characterized by racial discrimination, human rights abuses, and the denial of political and economic rights to non-white South Africans. It was officially abolished in 1994 when Nelson Mandela became the first black president of South Africa

How Apartheid Affected People’s Lives and How They Responded

Limited access to education.

Under apartheid, the education system was segregated based on race. White students received the best education, while non-white students received an inferior education. Non-white schools had fewer resources, poorly trained teachers, and overcrowded classrooms.

This limited the opportunities for non-white students to succeed academically and professionally.

Non-white students and their families responded to this injustice by protesting and boycotting schools, demanding better education and equal opportunities.

The Soweto Uprising in 1976, where thousands of students protested against being taught in Afrikaans, is a notable example of this resistance.

Related: 10 Effects of Bantu Education Act on South Africans

Forced Removals

The apartheid government forcibly removed non-white communities from their homes and relocated them to segregated areas known as townships.

This caused great upheaval and trauma for many families, as they were often removed from their ancestral lands and forced to live in overcrowded, under-resourced areas.

Many families resisted these forced removals, with some refusing to leave their homes and others engaging in protests and acts of civil disobedience.

The Sharpeville Massacre in 1960, where 69 black protesters were killed by police while protesting against forced removals, is a notable example of resistance against this policy.

The government introduced laws that required non-white South Africans to carry identification documents, known as “passes,” at all times. This allowed the government to control the movement of non-white people and limit their access to certain areas of the country.

Non-white people responded to the passed laws by engaging in acts of civil disobedience and protest. The Defiance Campaign in 1952, led by the African National Congress (ANC), encouraged non-white South Africans to refuse to carry their passes and engage in acts of civil disobedience.

This campaign was met with brutal repression, with many protesters being arrested and imprisoned.

Related: List of All Apartheid Laws from 1948 to 1994 + PDF

Limited Employment Opportunities

Apartheid limited the employment opportunities available to non-white South Africans, with many jobs being reserved exclusively for white people. This meant that non-white people were often forced to work in low-paying, menial jobs with little opportunity for advancement.

Non-white workers responded to this injustice by engaging in strikes and protests, demanding better working conditions and equal pay.

The 1973 Durban strikes, which involved over 100,000 non-white workers demanding better wages and working conditions, is a notable example of this resistance.

Related: 34 Interview Questions and Answers Based on Apartheid + PDF

Political Repression

Under apartheid, non-white South Africans were denied the right to vote and participate in the political process. Political parties representing non-white people were also banned, and activists were routinely harassed, arrested, and imprisoned.

Non-white South Africans responded to this political repression by engaging in acts of civil disobedience and protest.

The Sharpeville Massacre in 1960 and the Soweto Uprising in 1976 are examples of protests against political repression.

The ANC and other political organizations also engaged in armed resistance against the apartheid government, with the ANC’s armed wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe, launching a campaign of sabotage and guerrilla warfare against government targets.

Limited Access to Healthcare

Non-white South Africans had limited access to healthcare under apartheid, with segregated healthcare systems providing inferior services to non-white patients.

Non-white communities responded to this injustice by setting up their healthcare facilities and engaging in acts of civil disobedience.

The 1985 Vaal Triangle protests, which were sparked by a lack of access to healthcare facilities, are a notable example of this resistance.

Cultural Suppression

Under apartheid, non-white South Africans were denied the right to express their cultural identities and were forced to conform to white cultural norms.

Non-white communities responded to this cultural suppression by engaging in acts of cultural resistance and protest. The use of traditional dress, music, and dance was a way for non-white South Africans to assert their cultural identity and resist the cultural hegemony of the apartheid state.

The cultural boycott of South Africa, led by the international community, was also an important form of resistance against apartheid.

Apartheid was a violent system, with the government using violence to suppress opposition and enforce its policies. Non-white South Africans also engaged in violence as a means of resistance, with some resorting to armed struggle against the government.

The violence associated with apartheid had a profound impact on South African society, with many families and communities experiencing loss and trauma.

However, violence was also seen by some as a necessary means of resistance against an oppressive regime.

Economic Inequality

Apartheid created massive economic inequality in South Africa, with non-white people being denied access to economic opportunities and resources.

Non-white South Africans responded to this economic inequality by engaging in acts of protest and boycotts. The consumer boycotts of the 1980s, which targeted companies that supported the apartheid regime, were an important form of economic resistance against apartheid.

International Solidarity

Non-white South Africans also received support from the international community in their struggle against apartheid. The anti-apartheid movement, which emerged in the 1960s and 1970s, mobilized people around the world to support the struggle for freedom in South Africa.

International solidarity took many forms, including boycotts, divestment campaigns, and sanctions against South Africa.

The international pressure exerted on South Africa played a key role in bringing about the end of apartheid, with the international community imposing economic and political sanctions on South Africa that helped to isolate the apartheid regime and bring about its downfall.

Apartheid had a profound impact on the lives of South Africans, with many people responding to its injustices through acts of resistance and protest.

From the Sharpeville Massacre to the consumer boycotts of the 1980s, the struggle against apartheid involved a wide range of tactics and strategies, and ultimately led to the end of apartheid and the emergence of a new, democratic South Africa.

Related: Apartheid Essay 300 Words + PDF

Olusegun Iyejare is a career coach and certified counselor. He helps individuals discover and maximize their potential to live satisfying lives regardless of obvious limitations holding them back.

Apartheid in South Africa

Racial segregation and white supremacy had become central aspects of South African policy long before apartheid began. The controversial 1913 Land Act , passed three years after South Africa gained its independence, marked the beginning of territorial segregation by forcing Black Africans to live in reserves and making it illegal for them to work as sharecroppers. Opponents of the Land Act formed the South African National Native Congress, which would become the African National Congress (ANC).

Did you know? ANC leader Nelson Mandela, released from prison in February 1990, worked closely with President F.W. de Klerk's government to draw up a new constitution for South Africa. After both sides made concessions, they reached agreement in 1993, and would share the Nobel Peace Prize that year for their efforts.

The Great Depression and World War II brought increasing economic woes to South Africa, and convinced the government to strengthen its policies of racial segregation. In 1948, the Afrikaner National Party won the general election under the slogan “apartheid” (literally “apartness”). Their goal was not only to separate South Africa’s white minority from its non-white majority, but also to separate non-whites from each other, and to divide Black South Africans along tribal lines in order to decrease their political power.

Apartheid Becomes Law

By 1950, the government had banned marriages between whites and people of other races, and prohibited sexual relations between Black and white South Africans. The Population Registration Act of 1950 provided the basic framework for apartheid by classifying all South Africans by race, including Bantu (Black Africans), Coloured (mixed race) and white.

A fourth category, Asian (meaning Indian and Pakistani) was later added. In some cases, the legislation split families; a parent could be classified as white, while their children were classified as colored.

A series of Land Acts set aside more than 80 percent of the country’s land for the white minority, and “pass laws” required non-whites to carry documents authorizing their presence in restricted areas.

In order to limit contact between the races, the government established separate public facilities for whites and non-whites, limited the activity of nonwhite labor unions and denied non-white participation in national government.

Apartheid and Separate Development

Hendrik Verwoerd , who became prime minister in 1958, refined apartheid policy further into a system he referred to as “separate development.” The Promotion of Bantu Self-Government Act of 1959 created 10 Bantu homelands known as Bantustans. Separating Black South Africans from each other enabled the government to claim there was no Black majority and reduced the possibility that Black people would unify into one nationalist organization.

Every Black South African was designated as a citizen as one of the Bantustans, a system that supposedly gave them full political rights, but effectively removed them from the nation’s political body.

In one of the most devastating aspects of apartheid, the government forcibly removed Black South Africans from rural areas designated as “white” to the homelands and sold their land at low prices to white farmers. From 1961 to 1994, more than 3.5 million people were forcibly removed from their homes and deposited in the Bantustans, where they were plunged into poverty and hopelessness.

Opposition to Apartheid

Resistance to apartheid within South Africa took many forms over the years, from non-violent demonstrations, protests and strikes to political action and eventually to armed resistance.

Together with the South Indian National Congress, the ANC organized a mass meeting in 1952, during which attendees burned their pass books. A group calling itself the Congress of the People adopted a Freedom Charter in 1955 asserting that “South Africa belongs to all who live in it, Black or white.” The government broke up the meeting and arrested 150 people, charging them with high treason.

Sharpeville Massacre

In 1960, at the Black township of Sharpeville, the police opened fire on a group of unarmed Black people associated with the Pan-African Congress (PAC), an offshoot of the ANC. The group had arrived at the police station without passes, inviting arrest as an act of resistance. At least 67 people were killed and more than 180 wounded.

The Sharpeville massacre convinced many anti-apartheid leaders that they could not achieve their objectives by peaceful means, and both the PAC and ANC established military wings, neither of which ever posed a serious military threat to the state.

Nelson Mandela

By 1961, most resistance leaders had been captured and sentenced to long prison terms or executed. Nelson Mandela , a founder of Umkhonto we Sizwe (“Spear of the Nation”), the military wing of the ANC, was incarcerated from 1963 to 1990; his imprisonment would draw international attention and help garner support for the anti-apartheid cause.

On June 10, 1980, his followers smuggled a letter from Mandela in prison and made it public: “UNITE! MOBILIZE! FIGHT ON! BETWEEN THE ANVIL OF UNITED MASS ACTION AND THE HAMMER OF THE ARMED STRUGGLE WE SHALL CRUSH APARTHEID!”

Key Steps That Led to End of Apartheid

A combination of internal and international resistance to apartheid helped dismantle the white supremacist regime.

Nelson Mandela: His Written Legacy

Read excerpts from letters, speeches and memoirs reflecting on each stage of his life—from the innocence of a tribal village boy to the triumphs and pressures of being South Africa's first black president.

How Nelson Mandela Used Rugby as a Symbol of South African Unity

In a nation bitterly divided by apartheid, Mandela used the game to foster shared national pride.

President F.W. de Klerk

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 any remaining 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 another conservative president, F.W. de Klerk, who had supported apartheid throughout his political career.

When Did Apartheid End?

Though a conservative, De Klerk underwent a conversion to a more pragmatic political philosophy, and his government subsequently repealed the Population Registration Act, as well as most of the other legislation that formed the legal basis for apartheid. De Klerk freed Nelson Mandela on February 11, 1990.

A new constitution, which enfranchised Black citizens 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.

The End of Apartheid. Archive: U.S. Department of State . A History of Apartheid in South Africa. South African History Online . South Africa: Twenty-Five Years Since Apartheid. The Ohio State University: Stanton Foundation .

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

Civil Resistance Series: South Africa’s Anti-Apartheid Struggle

Civil resistance exists as a pivotal catalyst, effecting transformation within oppressive regimes and confronting unjust policies that impede civil liberties. Civil resistance’s impact has changed the course of cultural and historical identities throughout history. The study of civil resistance has shed light on the intricate power dynamics present in governance; moreover, it has illuminated a pathway of discourse that empowers nonviolent actions to pursue justice and equitable change. The narratives of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks, and Nelson Mandela, among others, attest to the potential of civil resistance to dismantle the seemingly insurmountable walls of injustice. It is through these series of civil resistance that the reader will unearth the subtle intricacies of power dynamics within governance structures. This series exposes how resolute people are. Civil resistance, in its essence, is a testament to the resilient human spirit, forging a pathway of discourse that transcends the realm of violence. This series focuses on the foundational principles of democracy, equity, and human rights. Moreover, civil resistance is a testament to the perseverance of humanity to shape its own destiny, fight oppression, and create a trajectory towards a more just and equitable world.

In the context of an international relations and history degree curriculum, this multifaceted study of civil resistance is vital for understanding philosophies, theories, and historical movements, enabling those to analyze, interpret, and actively pave the way for a humanistic, ethical, and peaceful future. This series of articles will embark on a journey through a comprehensive exploration of civil resistance. It will weave together threads of international relations theories, and conflict resolution approaches, and discuss historical movements to provide insightful and indispensable knowledge to the reader. The series aims to provide the reader with a thorough understanding of civil resistance’s impact on societies and how it has left an enduring mark on society today.

This series is divided into the following chapters:

1. Civil Resistance Series: Defining The Idea and Motives of Civil Resistance

2. Civil Resistance Series: From Protest to Progress in Women’s Suffrage

3. Civil Resistance Series: India’s Quest for Independence

4. Civil Resistance Series : South Africa’s Anti-Apartheid Struggle

5. Civil Resistance Series : Achieving Equality through the Civil Rights Movement

6. Civil Resistance Series : Unmasking the Berlin Wall’s Liberation

7. Civil Resistance Series : Unearthing the Power of Civil Resistance for the Future

Introduction to Apartheid

In 1652, a Dutch explorer named Afrikaner developed an interest in South Africa. Shortly afterward, the British engaged in three wars with the Dutch, seeking control of the region's diamonds and the incorporation of South Africa into their colonial holdings (Ayubi, 2023, p. 124). This early colonial history laid the groundwork for profound transformations. From 1910 to 1970, South Africa witnessed the establishment and consolidation of the apartheid state (Luiz, 1998, p. 51). Apartheid, derived from the Afrikaans word for "separation," is a term that explains the system of racial segregation that took place in South Africa (Ayubi, 2023, p. 125). This system put individuals into four distinct racial groups: the privileged white community, followed by the colored population, then the Asian community, and the marginalized black Africans (Ayubi, 2023, p. 127).

During the apartheid movement, the National Party (NP) was extremely powerful (Luiz, 1998, pp. 66-67). They were able to institute laws that gave them immeasurable control over their wishes and wants of maintaining and promoting apartheid. Their strength was supported by creating rules and laws that were so stringent and segregated that they were able to “systematically weaken civil society” (Luiz, 1998, pp. 66-67). With the advent of apartheid, it was the first time ever that a “highly industrialized state” was overpowered by its own people (Zunes, 1999, p. 137). Resisting the rules and laws of the National Party was considered a direct betrayal, leading to severe punishment within their society (Luiz, 1998, pp. 66-67). The system they established rewarded whites while causing harm to blacks through a carefully engineered structure of dominance and segregation laws (Luiz, 1998, pp. 66-67). At the same time, they appointed many whites into the public sectors of society (Luiz, 1998, pp. 66-67). The formidable challenge in overcoming apartheid stemmed from the entrenched social structure that severely constrained protest opportunities (Zunes, 1999, p. 137). With more than four-fifths of the South African population being black and subject to the dominance of the whites, the control exerted by the ruling class further hindered the potential for effective opposition and resistance against the oppressive system (Zunes, 1999, p. 137).

In 1910, the Union of South Africa emerged as a formal state, marking the beginning of a discriminatory era (Luiz, 1998, p. 51). The white ruling population came from aristocratic and rich backgrounds - controlling much of the gold and minerals in Africa (which represented the majority in the world) (Zunes, 1999, p. 138). Overall, the economy and social society represented extreme oppression while maintaining a level of modernity similar to that of Western nations; essentially, it was a paradox of its own existence (Zunes, 1999, p. 138). The black population found themselves excluded from political participation, trapped in a web of institutionalized segregation governed by a series of rules and laws (Luiz, 1998, p. 51). Beginning in 1912, the African National Congress (ANC) was there to represent black South Africans legally and politically by nonviolent means (Ayubi, 2023, p. 139). The Native Land Act of 1913 allocated a mere 7% of property ownership rights to Africans, compelling impoverished individuals to seek "urban work" as agricultural lands faced closure (Luiz, 1998, p. 51). The year 1923 witnessed the implementation of the Urban Areas Act, which confined Africans to designated areas or "townships" (Luiz, 1998, p. 51). Subsequently, in 1924, the Pact government enacted laws eradicating any black presence in "Government jobs" and empowering whites to assume those roles (Luiz, 1998, p. 51). By 1931, South Africa fell under the control of Great Britain (Ayubi, 2023, p. 124). With the advent of the fusion government in 1934 due to World War II, the white government's grip on white supremacy weakened, leading to Africans attaining positions of greater respect. However, government control was still shared between the British and the Afrikaners until the 1940s when the National Party favoring the Afrikaners won the vote (Ayubi, 2023, p. 124). The National Party set the ground rules for establishing Apartheid and preserving a white-controlled government and racist society in South Africa (Ayubi, 2023, p. 124).

Further, in 1948, non-white Africans, as a whole, became completely limited and nearly powerless at the hands of the white minority (Luiz, 1998, p. 51). The National Party (NP) won the elections in South Africa (Luiz, 1998, p. 52). From 1948-1970, the National Party was able to create a new land that focused and successful in Afrikaner jobs, interests, opportunities, and nationalism (Luiz, 1998, p. 52). Ultimately, apartheid law set certain restrictions; there was to be no relationships between whites and non-whites, all public facilities would be segregated, and all non-whites would be banned from representation in the national governments (Ayubi, 2023, p. 125).

This government created a proclamation of the land that centered on apartheid and “Afrikaner empowerment” (Luiz, 1998, p. 52). The Afrikaners focused on supporting and promoting their Afrikaner nationalism; to achieve this, they created segregation laws, assisted in creating job opportunities for Afrikaners while creating laws to keep the blacks behind, and ultimately tried to put their interests in helping the Afrikaner people in a variety of sectors (Luiz, 1998, p. 52). In 1950, the Population Registration Act was created by the National Party to acknowledge an individual based on their race (Luiz, 1998, p. 52). Regions were established to further divide the groups and zones: the black zones were known as “Homelands” or “Bantustans” (Ayubi, 2023, p. 127). These regions were impoverished and suffered from resource allocation and weak autonomy (Ayubi, 2023, p. 127). These regions were known to be dirty, population-dense, and filled with laborers or unemployed black persons (Ayubi, 2023, p. 127).

Desmond Tutu & Nelson Mandela

Archbishop Desmond Tutu emerged as a significant advocate for the anti-apartheid movement, championing nonviolent resistance throughout his career (McCarty, 2012, p. 971). Desmond Tutu became a moral leader in the anti-apartheid movement, merging his role as an Anglican bishop with a strong commitment to justice. His church speeches were focused on reconciliation as he closely connected to the wider political struggle for equality in South Africa (Rensburg, 2002, p. 746). Tutu boldly confronted the National Party (NP), insisting that their segregated policies contradicted God's wishes (Rensburg, 2002, p. 746). Through his influential stance, Tutu inspired a moral awakening and played a vital role in breaking down apartheid, making a lasting impact on the fight for a fairer society (Rensburg, 2002, p. 746). Additionally, up until the 1990s, Tutu would participate in boycotts and protest marches, often leading both in the efforts to end Apartheid (McCarty, 2012, p. 980). His teachings and beliefs come from the African idea known as “ubuntu” which has its roots in the belief that all individuals are connected and reliant upon one another and their very sense of humanity (McCarty, 2012, p. 981). Simply, he applied this principle to show that humanity is what connects black South Africans to white South Africans (McCarty, 2012, p. 982). The other aspect of “ubuntu” refers to the idea that all individuals are created in God’s image; therefore, there is no distinction between races in the sense that all humans are created as God created them (McCarty, 2012, p. 984).

Nelson Mandela, part of the minority of newly educated black Africans in the 1940s, emerged as a leader within the African National Congress's Youth League (Freund, 2014, p. 292). During this period, the ANC, under Mandela's influence, adopted a more confrontational stance against the segregation and political divisions imposed by the white minority in power (Freund, 2014, p. 292). Simultaneously his wife, Winnie Mandela, surfaced in the 1950s and 1960s, symbolizing the struggles faced by non-whites and women during apartheid (Chalhang, 2020, p. 34). Subjected to government harassment for years, Winnie Mandela was eventually banned, compelling her to relocate to the Orange Free State in the 1970s (Chalhang, 2020, p. 34). Prior to Mandela’s imprisonment in 1962, he was a central figure of the ANC and its faction known as “Umkhonto we Sizwe” (Olesen, 2015, p. 46). The Rivonia trial was a symbolic demonstration of his anti-apartheid values and principles as he was sent off to prison as he was sentenced for treason (Olesen, 2015, p. 46). At the Rivonia trial, he made a four-hour-long speech detailing his commitment to a liberated and democratic African society and one he would die for (Olesen, 2015, p. 46).

Tutu’s roles varied from priest to professor, leader of the South African Council of Churches, and then to Archbishop (McCarty, 2012, p. 978). His character and words had the power to sway public opinion and drive change. For example, in March 1975, he was even elected the first black dean of St. Mary’s Cathedral, which was made up of white parishioners (McCarty, 2012, p. 980). With this election, he was allowed to reside in the white district where the church was constructed; this allowance was technically in direct violation of the Group Area Act which separated whites from non-whites (McCarty, 2012, p. 980). However, in an act of nonviolent resistance, he refused the offer to live in the white community and stated “I do not want to apologize for my blackness” (McCarty, 2012, p. 980). In other efforts to ensure peace and political change, Tutu issued letters to the Prime Minister of South Africa in the 1970s, stating that without change, violence would ensue (McCarty, 2012, p. 980). During this time, Nelson Mandela was taken to jail as a prisoner (Olesen, 2015, p. 45). From 1962-1990, Nelson Mandela would remain in prison in South Africa at Robben Island (Olesen, 2015, p. 45). After he and fellow ANC members were imprisoned between 1962 and 1964, populations inside as well as outside of South Africa saw these imprisonments as a means to silence anti-apartheid activists (Olesen, 2015, p. 46).

Women & Anti-Apartheid

Women played a crucial role in the emerging nonviolent resistance movements in South Africa, actively participating in various protests such as bus ticket boycotts, squatter movement protests, and pass-law demonstrations, as documented by Chalhang (2020, p. 33). The backdrop of their struggle included the oppressive Immorality Act of 1927, which criminalized "extra-marital sex across racial frontiers" (Luiz, 1998, p. 51). The years 1930 and 1937 witnessed municipal attempts to restrict African women from finding employment, reflecting a challenging period for their economic prospects (Chalhang, 2020, p. 32). In 1943, Madi-hall Xuma became the African National Congress Women’s League president; a major milestone under her guidance was to protest the Communism Act of 1950 which allowed government leaders to “ban” citizens for committing specific acts (Chalhang, 2020, p. 33).

Throughout the 1950s, additional legislation further excluded women while also segregating blacks from whites, particularly in settlements and education (Luiz, 1998, p. 52). In 1952, official exclusion of women from employment without authorities' permission became a stark reality, accompanied by the implementation of "rigid legislation," such as passbooks and restrictions on staying in urban areas for more than 72 hours without permission (Chalhang, 2020, p. 32). In response to these oppressive pass laws, women developed a form of "passive resistance" (Chalhang, 2020, p. 32). The discriminatory environment expanded with the introduction of acts like the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act, the Immorality Act of 1950, the Separate Representation of Voters Act of 1951, and the 1953 Reservation of Separate Amenities Act (Luiz, 1998, p. 52).

In response to these hardships, the Federation of South African Women (FSAW) was established in 1954, providing a platform for women to engage in more formal nonviolent protests against the discriminatory Pass laws (Chalhang, 2020, p. 33). The FSAW's impact was notably evident in the 1956 march to Pretoria, where 20,000 women showcased their defiance against unjust laws (Chalhang, 2020, p. 33). The government, under the National Party's rule, enforced stringent laws penalizing those who questioned or opposed racial statutes, including the banning of The Natives Representative Council in 1951 (Luiz, 1998, p. 52).

Pan Africanist Congress

In contrast to the ANC's nonviolent stance, the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) emerged in 1957, advocating armed resistance to challenge apartheid (Zunes, 1999, p. 139). The PAC's commitment to violent actions, exemplified by the Umkonto We Sizwe or “Spear of the Nation” bombings and campaigns causing harm to children and black government supporters, marked a departure from nonviolent civil resistance (Zunes, 1999, pp. 139-140).

Simultaneously, the National Party (NP) initiated the "homeland system" in the 1960s, establishing ten self-governing lands with the aim of severing South African connections (Luiz, 1998, p. 53). Transkei became a self-governing land in 1963 and gained independence in 1976, followed by Bophutatswana, Venda, and Ciskei (Luiz, 1998, p. 53). During this period, the NP perceived the ANC as a threat, prompting the creation of repressive laws such as the Unlawful Organisations Act (1960), the Sabotage Act (1962), and the Internal Security Act (1976), hindering opposition to the apartheid movement (Luiz, 1998, p. 53).

From 1963 to 1983, the NP legally displaced 3.5 million "coloreds, Asians, and Africans" to self-governing territories (Luiz, 1998, p. 53). However, the PAC's turn to violent tactics during the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s had negative consequences for the broader anti-apartheid movement (Zunes, 1999, p. 139). Despite early support, the PAC's adoption of violence undermined the nonviolent civil resistance movement, revealing the challenges posed by the military advantage of the white South African government (Zunes, 1999, p. 139). By 1977, approximately 540,000 individuals were white and employed in the "public service" sector, with the top 10% of positions predominantly held by Afrikaners (Luiz, 1998, pp. 66-67). Additionally, white South Africans possessed a formidable army of 180,000, with the potential for reinforcements totaling 500,000 men (Zunes, 1999, p. 139). Moreover, they ranked among the highest globally in guns per capita, and the South African airforce boasted an unparalleled arsenal of aircraft, tanks, vehicles, and firearms (Zunes, 1999, p. 140). Ultimately, by 1978, the South African police force comprised 55% white members, particularly in the security sector, where they frequently persecuted those politically opposed to the apartheid state (Luiz, 1998, pp. 66-67).

Sharpesville Massacre and the Soweto Uprising

Two pivotal events underscored the nonviolent civil resistance movement during apartheid: the Sharpesville Massacre and the Soweto uprising (Chalhang, 2020, p. 34). On March 21, 1960, the Sharpesville Massacre unfolded in Transvaal as hundreds peacefully protested pass-laws outside the police station (Chalhang, 2020, p. 34). In a mere 40 seconds, the police responded with fatal force, initiating a chain reaction of violence and legislative acts aimed at suppressing anti-apartheid sentiments, including the “Unlawful Organisations Act of 1960, Defence Act, Police Amendment Act, and the General Laws Amendment Act of 1961” (Chalhang, 2020, p. 34). Simultaneously, in Sharpesville, the African National Congress (ANC) and the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) rallied against labor issues, culminating in the Sharpesville Massacre on March 21, 1960 (Ayubi, 2023, p. 127). The police's lethal response resulted in 69 deaths and over 180 injuries, triggering widespread protests and strikes nationwide, prompting the government to declare a state of emergency (Ayubi, 2023, p. 127-128). In the aftermath, the ANC and PAC faced a ban imposed by the South African government (Ayubi, 2023, p. 128).

The 1970s witnessed the Soweto uprising, rooted in educational disparities, where the South African government mandated Afrikaans as the official language in African schools, replacing English (Chalhang, 2020, p. 34). African students, perceiving this as a further infringement on their rights, congregated at Orlando West High School on June 16, 1976, to protest the language substitution (Chalhang, 2020, p. 34). The situation escalated when the police, in a panicked response, fired shots without hesitation, resulting in the tragic death of 13-year-old Hector Peterson (Chalhang, 2020, p. 34). This incident fueled widespread rioting across various townships, amplifying the fervor of the anti-apartheid movement (Chalhang, 2020, p. 34).

After being released from prison in 1990, Mandela entered the global circuit and prepared a speech at Wembley Stadium in London; his words were gracious as he thanked the anti-apartheid activists and the world figures who helped free him (Olesen, 2015, p. 52). Similar to Tutu’s vision of reconciliation, Mandela stated that he saw a future for South African politics rooted in democracy and nonviolence, one focused on the very humanity of people (Olesen, 2015, p. 54).

On February 2, 1990, President de Klerk of South Africa took a historic step by dismantling all laws that prohibited resistance against apartheid and subsequently releasing Nelson Mandela just a few days later (Chalhang, 2020, p. 35). The pivotal moment marked a significant turning point in South Africa's political landscape. Exactly a year later, on February 1, 1991, apartheid was officially abolished, marking the advent of a new political era commonly referred to as the "transition" (Chalhang, 2020, p. 35).

In 1993, Mandela received the Nobel Peace Prize (Olesen, 2015, p. 55). In 1994, Nelson Mandela was elected president of South Africa (Hughes, 2023, p. 33). This new government symbolized a united nation with a new constitution focused on reconciliation and moving forward from the injustices imposed on the black population in the preceding decades (Hughes, 2023, p. 33). The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was created by Tutu in 1995; it became a driving force for change and the recognition of past violence and political suppression (Hughes, 2023, p. 33). Serving as the Chairperson of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), Tutu assumed a pivotal role as a symbol and leader of democracy and nonviolence (McCarty, 2012, p. 972). The TRC, a groundbreaking initiative in South Africa, signified a legal commitment to democratic change through nonviolent means, representing the first of its kind globally (McCarty, 2012, pp. 972 & 977). Established to address the social and political wrongs committed during apartheid, the TRC aimed at achieving reconciliation (McCarty, 2012, p. 977). From the TRC, "legacy projects" emerged as symbols of South Africa's newly founded democratic principles (Hughes, 2023, p. 34). One such project included transforming Robben Island, where Mandela and other anti-apartheid activists were imprisoned, into a museum in 1997 (Hughes, 2023, p. 34). Another legacy project, initiated in 1999, was Freedom Park, resulting in a museum and a symbol of reparation in Pretoria, completed in 2013 (Hughes, 2023, p. 34).

In South Africa, the white ruling power hinged on both its black citizens and Western nations during the apartheid era, creating a system that endured due to this interdependence (Zunes, 1999, p. 138). Without any true legality, apartheid continued to persist from 1948 until the 1990s solely due to social, political and economic control (Ayubi, 2023, p. 125). The nonviolent resistance witnessed during apartheid focused not only on areas where whites were successful but specifically targeted the infrastructure of their dominance (Zunes, 1999, p. 138). This strategic approach aimed to challenge the very foundations of the oppressive system. Nonviolent action, as defined by Zunes (1999, p. 138), involves purposeful change through unusual acts of peaceful protest that avoid causing harm. The overarching issue prevalent under the apartheid government was its profound dependency on the passivity of its black citizens (Zunes, 1999, p. 138). In contrast to other theorists, Gene Sharp believed that even in a government as institutionally racist as that of South Africa, it remained reliant on the "consent" of its people (Zunes, 1999, p. 138). Sharp further argued that by educating the black majority, they could effectively and peacefully fight back against the oppressive system (Zunes, 1999, p. 139). In essence, the nonviolent resistance illuminated the power of strategic dissent, targeting the roots of oppression rather than merely reacting to its manifestations (Zunes, 1999, p. 138). Consequently, this approach not only challenged the apartheid system's endurance but also underscored the transformative potential inherent in meaningful nonviolent actions.

Bibliographical References

Ayubi, A. (2023). Apartheid policy in South Africa. International Journal of Science and Society , 5(1), 124-131. https://doi.org/10.54783/ijsoc.v5i1.634

Chalhang, K. (2021). An assessment of women’s involvement in the antiapartheid struggle in South Africa. International Journal of Political Science and Governance , 3(1), 32-36. https://doi.org/10.33545/26646021.2021.v3.i1a.83

Freund, B. (2014). The shadow of Nelson Mandela, 1918–2013. Review of African Political Economy , 41(140), 292-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/03056244.2014.883111

Hughes, H. (2023). Public Histories in South Africa: Between Contest and Reconciliation. Public History Review, 30, 31-42. https://doi . org/10.5130/phrj.v30i0.8374

Luiz, J.M. (1998). The Evolution and Fall of the South African Apartheid State: A Political Economy Perspective. Ufahamu: A Journal of African Studies , 26(2-3), 49-72. 10.5070/F7262-3016619

McCarty III, J.W. (2012). Nonviolent Law? Linking Nonviolent Social Change and Truth and Reconciliation Commissions. West Virginia Law Review , 114, 969-1005. https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/wvlr/vol114/iss3/8

Olesen, T. (2015). Global political iconography: The making of Nelson Mandela. American Journal of Cultural Sociology, 3(1), 34-64.

Rensburg, R. (2002). Archbishop Desmond Tutu as moral sage and servant leader: A compassionate zealot. Verbum et Ecclesia , 23(3). https://doi.org/10.4102/ve.v23i3.1237

Zunes, S. (1999). The Role of Non-Violent Action in the Downfall of Apartheid. The Journal of Modern African Studies , 37(1), 137-169. http://www.jstor.org/stable/161471

Visual Sources

D.W. (2012). Mandela turns 94. [Photography] DW. https://www.dw.com/en/millions-wish-mandela-a-happy-birthday/a-16103996

Figure 1: Wikipedia. (2024). History of the African National Congress. [Photography] Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_African_National_Congress

Figure 2: Facing History. (2018). Afrikaner Identity . [Photography] Facing History & Ourselves. https://www.facinghistory.org/resource-library/afrikaner-identity

Figure 3: Mail & Guardian. (2013). Tutu: We thank God for Madiba . [Photography] Mail & Guardian.

https://mg.co.za/article/2013-12-06-00-tutu-we-thank-god-for-madiba/

Figure 4: Speak Magazine. (2024). Speak: ANC Women’s League . [Photography] Speak Magazine.

https://www.saha.org.za/women/speak_anc_womens_league_south_african_women_march_to_freedom.htm

Figure 5: Wikipedia. (2021). Founding members of the Pan Africanist Congress in 1957. [Photography] Wikipedia.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Founding_members_of_the_Pan_Africanist_Congress_in_1957.jpg

Figure 6: Divestment for Humanity. (2015). The Sharpeville Massacre, 1960 . [Photography] Divestment for Humanity.

https://michiganintheworld.history.lsa.umich.edu/antiapartheid/exhibits/show/exhibit/origins/sharpeville

Figure 7: Torchia, C. & Eliason, M. (2013). Nelson Mandela was global symbol of sacrifice and reconciliation . [Photography] Columbia Missourian. https://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/nelson-mandela-was-global-symbol-of-sacrifice-and-reconciliation/article_807a10b5-ea7e-528f-a2a0-53b3767635b4.html

Research Series
International relations

Alexandra Gimpel

Arcadia has an extensive catalog of articles on everything from literature to science — all available for free! If you liked this article and would like to read more, subscribe below and click the “Read More” button to discover a world of unique content.

Let the posts come to you!

Thanks for submitting!

The story of a working man who lived through apartheid – and his struggles after it ended

Associate Professor in Sociology, University of Zululand

Distinguished Reserach Professor, Southern Centre for Inequality Studies, University of the Witwatersrand

Disclosure statement

Edward Webster receives funding from the Ford Foundation and the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. He is affiliated to the Southern Centre for Inequality Studies, University of the Witwatersrand.

Paul Stewart does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

University of the Witwatersrand provides support as a hosting partner of The Conversation AFRICA.

View all partners

A white man holds up his hand as he instructs labourers who are digging sludge with spades as water gushes from a pipe.

On 25 June, Mandlenkosi Makhoba, one of the last of a generation of grassroots worker leaders of the Federation of South African Trade Unions ( Fosatu ), was laid to rest above the majestic Mahlabathini plain in KwaZulu-Natal. He was 78.

Industrial workers such as Makhoba formed the basis of Fosatu, established in 1979 when democratic workers’ organisations forced the apartheid system to recognise their trade unions . This federation went on to win rights for black workers, contributed to a new workplace order and the establishment of national collective bargaining, while challenging racism and inequality in the workplace. It laid the basis for the formation of the Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) in 1985 with organised labour proving decisive in the transition to democracy.

Makhoba was, therefore, one of the “agents of change” who gave birth to South Africa’s modern labour movement. But he was not one of its beneficiaries. His death marks the passing of the era of the ‘labouring man’ – those industrial workers who were involved largely in manual labour, denied much formal education but stood for worker solidarity.

A working man’s life under apartheid

Makhoba’s life story illustrates the transition of established organised labour, from the voice of the dispossessed production worker struggling for recognition, to the relatively well protected suburban worker of today. He also represents the losers in the new South Africa, showing how inequality is consistently produced and reproduced. It tells the story of dreams lost and the need to recover the vision of a disappearing generation.

The stories of these working men and women has long been overshadowed by the big men and women of the successful struggle for democracy. Fortunately Makhoba lived to see the republication, in 2018, of his autobiography, The Story of One Tells the Struggle of All: Metalworkers under Apartheid . His story prefigures what has happened both locally and globally, namely how organised factory- and mine-based manual labour became sidelined by both advances in technology and the rise of neoliberalism.

We first met Makhoba, a foundry worker on the East Rand, now Ekhuruleni, nearly 40 years ago while researching the changing world of work in the metal industry. This archetypal, barrel-chested ‘labouring man’ poured molten metal to mould machine parts long before health and safety was taken seriously.

Alongside so many of his compatriots, he had migrated from his rural home in the “ Bantustan ” of KwaZulu to perform the toughest jobs that demanded physical strength and industrial discipline. “Bantustans” were the then mainly rural, undeveloped areas were black people were required to live under apartheid.

Seen as an unskilled “cast boy” under apartheid, Makhoba was paid considerably less than the white “supervisors” he had trained. “That made me angry,” he said at the time.

I don’t get the money he is getting, but I am supposed to be his teacher! How can a clever man be taught by a stupid man like myself?

Throughout his working life Makhoba oscillated between town and countryside. He lived in the sprawling single sex hostel complex for black male migrant workers in Vosloorus, to the east of Johannesburg, a bus drive from his workplace. He was deeply dissatisfied with the filthy conditions in the hostel and the lack of privacy, with 16 men to a room and not much better than the mine compounds and concrete bunks these hostels had replaced. Men had to cook after a long day’s work and travel. Theft was rife and excessive drinking and violent assaults marked the weekends.

Accompanying this sense of deprivation was the resigned acceptance of being unable to live a normal social life. Of greatest concern for Makhoba was going home to Mahlabathini, only to find the decline of parental authority. This affected him deeply.

When a man comes home there is no respect for him anymore, because he has been away from home for such a long time.

It is not surprising then that in July 1979 Makhoba joined a fledgling metal union at the time, later to become the National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa . He said:

I joined the union because workers are not treated like human beings by management, but like animals.

The men who joined the union came from similar districts in KwaZulu and elsewhere and shared the rigours of hostel life. They were, in other words, rooted in networks of mutual support.

Although Makhoba had been working in the city intermittently for 20 years when we first met him, his cultural world was shaped by his rural values:

I work here, but my spirit is in Mahlabathini. My spirit is there because I come from the countryside. I was born there and my father was born there.

In 1983 he was dismissed from the foundry for participating in an illegal strike. Following episodic periods of temporary employment, he returned home permanently.

Deprivations of rural life

In 1991 we tracked him down to his homestead on a mountain top in Mahlabathini. He had acquired 15 head of cattle, ten from the ilobolo (bride price) of his two oldest daughters.

Fifteen people – his wife and 14 children – lived with him in the six rondavels of his neatly swept homestead where he had access to land on which he grew maize and some vegetables.

But a closer examination of this household revealed a sad reality: Mandlenkosi’s home was a picturesque version of a rural slum. The children spent their days doing household chores, chopping firewood and collecting water twice daily from the local stream half a kilometre away. Their diet, except on special occasions, was confined to mealie meal and they often faced hunger.

As the children matured and moved away, Makhoba suffered increasingly poor health. Unable to continue working at a local store, the lack of food intensified. As he drifted into the long autumn of his life, suffering with Parkinson’s disease, the family had become too poor to farm their land. The hopes of yesteryear, of a new start and a new, better society, had become “a dream”.

The inequality in life-chances that shaped Mandlenkosi’s life continues as his children are part of the growing millions of marginalised workers eking out an existence in the rural slums and informal settlements of our urban areas.

Meanwhile, today Cosatu is largely a home for relatively privileged public sector workers, a third of whom have post high school qualifications and 40% have professional jobs . Production in the foundry where Makhoba once worked is now largely robotised.

With many of the manual jobs disappearing, it is farewell to the traditional labouring man as the precarious worker of the digital age is ushered in.

Neoliberalism
Trade unions
inequality in South Africa
Digital era
wage discrimination
Labour reform
Workers' rights
Manual work
Urban informal settlements

Postdoctoral Research Associate

Project Manager – Contraceptive Development

Editorial Internship

Integrated Management of Invasive Pampas Grass for Enhanced Land Rehabilitation

Chronicle Conversations
Article archives
Issue archives
Join our mailing list

The Struggle against Apartheid: Lessons for Today's World

About the author, enuga s. reddy.

The United Nations has been concerned with the issue of racial discrimination since its inception. The UN General Assembly adopted on 19 November 1946 during its first session a resolution declaring that "it is in the higher interests of humanity to put an immediate end to religious and so-called racial persecution and discrimination", and calling on "Governments and responsible authorities to conform both to the letter and to the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations, and to take the most prompt and energetic steps to that end". Racial discrimination became one of the main items on the United Nations agenda after African nations attained independence and after the Sharpeville massacre in South Africa on 21 March 1960 sensitized world opinion to the perils of apartheid and racial discrimination. In 1963, the Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which led to the International Convention in 1965. It proclaimed the International Year for Action to Combat Racial Discrimination in 1971 and the three Decades for Action to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination, starting in 1973, as well as the International Year of Mobilization against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in 2001. The United Nations also organized two world conferences against racial discrimination, more recently the 2001 World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, in Durban, South Africa. The General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and the Commission on Human Rights have devoted thousands of meetings to the discussions on racial discrimination and adopted hundreds of resolutions. Other UN agencies, notably the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), have made significant contributions to the common effort. Racial discrimination is now being condemned by all Governments, and racially discriminatory legislation has been abrogated by most Member States. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, a body of independent experts monitoring the implementation of the International Convention, has had some success in persuading Governments to take further action. The progress made by these efforts should not be minimized. Yet, the Durban Conference pointed out with grave concern that, despite all the efforts of the international community, countless human beings continued to be victims of racial discrimination. New developments worldwide, such as the greatly increased migration, have led to a resurgence of manifestations of racism. Xenophobia has also caused violent conflicts and even genocide. Why is it that the international community, which achieved remarkable success in dealing with apartheid in South Africa, has been as yet unsuccessful in eliminating racial discrimination from Earth? And are there any further lessons to be learned from the struggle against apartheid? It must be recognized at the outset that apartheid was a unique case of blatant racism. The National Party, which came to power in South Africa in 1948, made apartheid a State policy and espoused the vicious ideology that people of different racial origins could not live together in equality and harmony. Successive Governments reinforced the legacy of racist oppression against the non-white people-the indigenous Africans, people of Asian origin and of mixed descent -- who constitute over 80 per cent of the population. National liberation rather than human rights became the objective of the struggle against racist tyranny.Apartheid was an affront to the nations of Africa and Asia that were emerging into independence from colonial rule. They demanded that the United Nations consider the grave situation in South Africa as a threat to international peace and to take effective measures, including sanctions, for the liberation of the South African people. They received support from ever-increasing majorities in the United Nations. The liberation of South Africa from racist tyranny and the national reconciliation that followed were the result of the struggle of the South African people and the international action promoted by the United Nations for almost half a century. While the minority racist regime was replaced by a non-racial democratic Government, and the main racist laws abrogated in the process, the task of eliminating the vestiges of apartheid and its effects was left to the new Government. At present, no government espouses racism, and the problem is not the enactment of new racist laws. The victims of oppression and racial discrimination are generally minorities or non-citizens. Racial discrimination in individual countries is seen in terms of human rights rather than as a threat to the peace. While United Nations declarations and resolutions have been adopted with unanimous support, a number of Governments have not shown the political will to combat age-old prejudices, traditional or customary inequities, or even violence against oppressed communities. Politicians and political parties incite racial hostility, while public authorities and local officials ignore national legislation on racial equality. The oppressed communities continue to have little representation in police forces, the judiciary, the legislatures and other decision-making bodies. Governments are reluctant to complain about racial discrimination in other countries unless their own nationals are victimized. Hence, racist oppression in individual countries rarely appears on the agenda of major United Nations organs. In the 1960s, when there was a deadlock on sanctions against South Africa because of the opposition of its trading partners, the United Nations launched an international campaign against apartheid to encourage committed Governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and individuals to implement a wide range of measures to isolate the South African regime and its supporters and assist the freedom movement. Writers, artists, musicians and athletes, among others, were mobilized in support of the freedom movement, whose representatives were given observer status in the United Nations and participated in decision-making. The campaign eventually helped to persuade the major trading partners to impose an arms embargo and take other measures. It may be that the experience of that campaign can be emulated in some ways in the struggle against racial discrimination. If the constraints of the United Nations as an organization of Governments prove a hurdle, the initiative may perhaps be taken by individual Governments that recognize the grave dangers of racial discrimination and related ills. With their support, NGOs could launch an effective campaign, set up structures to monitor constantly all developments concerning racial discrimination and violence, and expose those who profit from or incite racism. A worldwide campaign can help the United Nations to find ways to consider the situation in individual countries and take more effective actions than mere appeals. If complaints of violations of trade union rights can be considered by the ILO and the UN Economic and Social Council, there is no reason why the denial of rights of communities subjected to racial discrimination cannot be considered without any formal complaint by Member States.The Commission on Human Rights, responding to suggestions by African countries and other States, has taken the initiative to prepare studies on discrimination against people of African origin, which concerns a number of States. It is perhaps timely for African, Caribbean and other States to call for effective procedures for action, as in the case of apartheid. It may be recalled that meaningful action followed the establishment of the Special Committee against Apartheid, with a mandate to promote international action and report, with recommendations, to the General Assembly and the Security Council. The experience of the Ad Hoc Working Group of experts, set up by the Commission to investigate and report on human rights violations in southern Africa, may also be an example in considering action on the plight of Roma and immigrants. During the struggle against apartheid, the Special Committee found it essential to promote the establishment of funds and agencies outside the United Nations, with the assistance of committed Governments and NGOs, to supplement and support UN action, as they were able to do what UN organs could not. That experience may also have lessons for the present, as the following illustrate: the International Defence and Aid Fund for Southern Africa, which provided legal assistance to political prisoners and maintenance for their families in need, resorting to secret channels when the South African Government banned the Fund; the World Campaign against Military and Nuclear Collaboration with South Africa, whose support was crucial in the implementation of the arms embargo against that country, as the Security Council Committee received no information from Governments on violations; and the Shipping Research Bureau (Shirebu), which helped greatly in monitoring the implementation of UN recommendations on the oil embargo. The Association of West European Parliamentarians against Apartheid and the NGO Sub-Committee against Colonialism, Apartheid and Racial Discrimination also made significant contributions. The elimination of racial discrimination, entrenched for centuries and reinforced by some recent developments, is not an easy task. It needs perseverance and determination, building on past achievements and developing new strategies as necessary. There must be a sense of urgency. The example of struggle against apartheid remains an inspiration for such an effort.

The UN Chronicle is not an official record. It is privileged to host senior United Nations officials as well as distinguished contributors from outside the United Nations system whose views are not necessarily those of the United Nations. Similarly, the boundaries and names shown, and the designations used, in maps or articles do not necessarily imply endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.

The Global Challenges of Defining Genocide: Responses to Renewed Debates

Currently, the global community is experiencing an increase in the propensity of extraordinary crimes. Conflicts are changing and becoming more complex. Protracted crises remain unresolved. The spread of misinformation on social media is causing hate speech and polarization to spike, making it harder for communities to come together to address crises that are unfolding in real time.

Geospatial information refers to data that identifies the geographic location and characteristics of natural and constructed features and boundaries on Earth.

A Chronicle Conversation with Paloma Merodio Gómez

Leading up to the Seventh High-level Forum on United Nations Global Geospatial Information Management (UN-GGIM) in October, the UN Chronicle asked Paloma Merodio Gómez, former UN-GGIM Co-Chair and Vice President of the Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía of Mexico, about geospatial information as fundamental to sustainable development.

A primary care centre in Toledo, Spain. WHO / Andreas Beck

Improving Diagnosis for Patient Safety: A Global Imperative for Health Systems

States are increasingly recognizing the importance of ensuring access to safe diagnostic tools and services, towards avoiding preventable harm and achieving positive patient outcomes.

Documents and publications

Yearbook of the United Nations
Basic Facts About the United Nations
Journal of the United Nations
Meetings Coverage and Press Releases
United Nations Official Document System (ODS)
Africa Renewal

Libraries and Archives

Dag Hammarskjöld Library
UN Audiovisual Library
UN Archives and Records Management
Audiovisual Library of International Law
UN iLibrary

News and media

UN News Centre
UN Chronicle on Twitter
UN Chronicle on Facebook

The UN at Work

17 Goals to Transform Our World
Official observances
United Nations Academic Impact (UNAI)
Protecting Human Rights
Maintaining International Peace and Security
The Office of the Secretary-General’s Envoy on Youth
United Nations Careers

Eight narrative units arranged chronologically form the backbone of this site. Units 3 through 7 contain the greatest wealth of material, focusing on apartheid (Unit 3), the struggle against apartheid (Units 4 and 5), negotiations (Unit 6), and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (Unit 7). All resources can be accessed from these units. Also, a full list of Units, Essays, and Multimedia Pages appears in Contents .

Apartheid describes a system of racist laws and policies of total segregation in South Africa that began in 1948, when the National Party came to power, and ended in 1994, when Nelson Mandela was elected President in the first democratic elections. This unit briefly summarizes the region's pre-colonial past and its connections to world history. It describes South Africa's diversity and highlights how African societies underwent important transformations before the arrival of European colonizers in 1652.

This unit explores the history of South Africa from the colonial occupation of the Cape in 1652 through the creation of the Union of South Africa in 1910 and the segregation period (1910-1948). The emphasis is on patterns of economic and political transformation and how racism and segregation increasingly restricted the lives of black South Africans. Topics include: slavery at the Cape; the mineral revolution caused by the discovery of diamonds (1867) and gold (1886); loss of African independence and the South African War (1899-1902); the creation of the Union of South Africa (1910) which enforced racial separation in economy and society and promulgated an ideology of white supremacy before the advent of apartheid.

This unit examines the rise of apartheid and its subsequent development. In 1948 the Afrikaner ethnic nationalist Reunited National Party (renamed National Party in 1951) won a national election on a racist platform of total segregation under the slogan of "apartheid" - or "apartness" in the Afrikaans language. Apartheid built upon earlier laws, but made segregation more rigid enforced it far more aggressively. With the support of big business and other white interest groups, the state signifcantly extended its power and control. Apartheid led to a systematic and profound deterioration of the position of black people in South Africa for the next four decades.

This section investigates the activities of twentieth-century political movements and individuals who fought for freedom, democracy, and equal rights in a racist South Africa. It charts the rise of the African National Congress, the South African Indian Congress, and the Communist Party of South Africa and their adoption of polite constitutional protest tactics before the 1940s. After 1948, the liberation struggle gained mass support at home and abroad; a powerful leadership propelled the movement's growth as tactics changed from polite protest to direct challenges to apartheid guided by the principle of "one person, one vote." Brutal government repression resulted in the banning of the main liberation organizations and to the arrest of Nelson Mandela and many other leaders; others fled into exile. A decade of relative quiescence followed.

After a decade of relative quiescence due to the government crackdown on liberation movements in the early 1960s, black workers and students reignited resistance against apartheid in the 1970s. The apartheid regime responded with a mix of harsh repression and modest reforms inside South Africa and violent attacks on the liberation movements and their allies outside the country. Yet a combination of growing protest, international support, and significant changes in the political context of the region changed the balance of power by 1990, when Nelson Mandela was released from prison and negotiations for a new democratic South Africa began in earnest.

The final stage of apartheid's demise happened so quickly as to have taken many people in South Africa and throughout the world by surprise. As the Cold War ended, Nelson Mandela was released from prison in February 1990 and the ban of the African National Congress (ANC) and other liberation movements was lifted, thus leading to political negotiations out of which emerged a democratic constitution and the first free election in the country's history. The final transfer of power was remarkably peaceful; it is often is described as a "miracle" because many thought that South Africa would erupt into violent civil war. But democracy did not emerge spontaneously; it had to be built laboriously, brick by brick.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was almost certainly the most extensive investigation into past human rights abuses the world has known. It was more successful than other truth commissions, for example in Chile or Guatemala, and often is seen as a model of effective conflict resolution. A product of political compromise and of South Africa's need for political stability, the TRC helped reveal the worst excesses of apartheid and its lessons to the world for conflict resolution were profound. Despite its shortcomings, the TRC process had a cathartic effect that enabled the country to transcend the violence and acrimony of the apartheid years.

After almost two decades of freedom, South Africa's democracy is a work-in-progress. Economic growth, a stable currency, and the respect of international financial institutions has come at the cost of jobs and wealth redistribution. While the government has built many houses, it has been unable to meet demand. Land redistribution stands at less than 5 percent, well short of the ANC's targets. The government made some serious mistakes, as in the case of HIV-AIDS policy. Also, corruption is an increasingly serious concern. On the other hand, South Africa has achieved impressive gains in a relatively short time. Basic services now reach millions of people previously denied access to them, and the government has established a progressive constitutional democracy, maintained peace, and fostered unity and reconciliation in a divided society.

Reflections on the black consciousness movement and the South African revolution - Selby Semela, Sam Thompson and Norman Abraham

A situationist-influenced text decribing how a protest by Soweto school students in 1976 spread and became a country-wide revolt - involving mass workers' strikes and violent confrontations that shook the foundations of white South Africa. Written as a collaboration between an American and two South Africans, the text also deals with the rise and fall of the Black Consciousness Movement.

Originally published in August 1979 c/o p.o. box 4644, Berkeley, CA 94704, USA [address presumably obsolete]

From the endangeredphoenix.com website

=============

Reflections on the Black Consciousness Movement and the South African Revolution

by Selby Semela, Sam Thompson & Norman Abraham

[b]The 1976/77 Insurrection[/b]

“The school for the oppressed is a revolution!” - Soweto pamphlet, 1976

The manner in which the violent uprisings that swept South Africa in 1976/77 have been defined by the international spectacular society and its pseudo-opposition exposes their willful determination to misinterpret, misrepresent, and misunderstand what was a decisive event in the history of proletarian struggle in that country. Everything emanating from established circles - from the Nat regime in South Africa to the racist white man or woman on a Johannesburg street and from the African National Congress and the Pan Africanist Congress (ANC and PAC) to pseudo-oppositional leftists the world over - has not only undermined but also distorted the events that occurred in South Africa. For a start; what happened in South Africa cannot be encapsulated in alienated notions of time and space. It was not isolated to June of 1976. It was not restricted to Soweto. It was not merely the act of students. Nor was it simply a revolt, rebellion or unrest. It was creative revolution in the making, in the desperately clear moment of confrontation.

The events that shook the entire edifice of white South Africa, and threw into stark relief the notion of total revolution, began with relative inconspicuousness. A group of Soweto junior high school students at a single school protested the use of Afrikaans (the official language of the oppressors) as a medium of instruction. The revolt of high school students against the enforcement of learning in the Boer language was significant in itself. It marked, from the outset, a highly advanced struggle to the extent that it was a rejection of the colonisation of consciousness which triggered off the insurrection, even when so many other material reasons for resistance existed.

Initially, however, the Soweto student protest followed the traditional defeatist lines of oppositional politics: the students boycotted classes. But in a community such as Soweto, where any contestation immediately brings down upon itself the entire repressive apparatus, symbolic protest cannot be contained to the symbol, but must overflow into the realm of real struggle. For a community that is all too well acquainted with lumpen criminality and with unrelenting brutality on a daily basis, violence is always a ready-at-hand implement to pit against the contradictions of daily life. The striking students were no exception. Not for them the “ponderous” problem of morality and constraint. A teacher who ignored student demands was stabbed by screwdriver-wielding youths. Police were stoned. Two government officials were killed by a young man from Soweto.

In a matter of days the students had gained the support of their parents, and had coerced the teachers into backing their demands. The authorities still refused to concede. Afrikaans remained as a medium of instruction.

At this point the confrontation between the students and the state (in the institutionalised form of the school) was contained to, at the most, a handful of campuses. How was the transformation made so that these grievances ignited the fury of all black South Africa? Those who sought the answer in the form of an effective and extensive centralised organization - be they the South African state on the search for scapegoats, or the international humanitarian conscience on the search for superstars - were in for a rude surprise. (Eventually the South African state was able to fabricate its scapegoats whom the international opposition were then able to turn into superstars. Thus symbiotically, the state and its pseudo-opposition succeeded in fooling themselves and almost everybody else except the real participants in the struggle, by recreating the events that began on June 16, in their own image.)

But there were no leaders - only a handful of militant individuals (prior to June 16), inspired by their frustration in the face of unyielding authority, who with the help of friends set out to organise something, the content of which, let alone the consequences, they were in no position to anticipate.

A group of students from Orlando West Junior High School - the first school to boycott classes - and some of their friends from other schools such as Morris Isaacson High School - as yet unaffected by the Afrikaans issue - arranged a general demonstration in protest of the state’s design to use the language of the oppressor as a language of instruction.

Once again the tactics, the form of protest - a demonstration - was a symbolic one, albeit more dangerous, since demonstrations of any kind in South Africa are, by statute, punishable offences. The organisers of the demonstration - the embryo of a later-to-be self-proclaimed leadership - proceeded to visit all local schools to gather support.

The response of the Soweto students who attended that demonstration on June 16 far exceeded the expectations of the organisers. As opposed to the anticipated couple of thousand demonstrators expected by the organisers, about 30,000 students gathered at Orlando West High School.

The placards carried by those gathered already portended things to come. There were slogans not only denouncing Afrikaans and Bantu Education, but such slogans as: “Power”, “Smash the system,” “Away with Vorster”, “We’ll fight until total liberation.”

In festive mood the students took their protest to the streets. Inevitably they were confronted by the brute force of the South African state, who, by ruse of history, understood the implications of the students’ actions even more clearly than most of the students themselves were able to at that time. Without warning the police opened fire on the singing and marching students. The students at the front of the procession began to retreat, but their flight was halted by the act of one person. One young woman stood her ground, then defiantly walked towards the police shouting: “Shoot me!” Inspired by this incredible act - so incredible that the police did not shoot—the students’ retreat turned into a regroupment and frenzied counterattack. Rocks were torn from the ground and hurled at the police. After a second volley of shots had left more students dead and wounded, the leadership suddenly reappeared, in the form of one Tsietsi Mashinini, who stood up on an overturned vehicle and exhorted his fellow students to disperse. He was promptly forced to scuttle when the students turned their rocks on him. While the leadership was thus “left in the bush part three,” so was their newfound style of contestation—demonstration; for the students did disperse, not to seek refuge at home from “inevitable” suicide, as the self-proclaimed leadership had urged, but to rampage through the streets of Soweto in a potlatch of destruction.

Within days spontaneous rioting had broken out in every major area of the country. The South African blacks launched a vicious attack on apartheid, commodities and state power. The original grievance was quickly superseded, not because it was insignificant, but because the extremity of the insurrection put everything else in question along with it.

By August 1976, the white state was being forced to retreat on all fronts.

• Almost all schools had been attacked and many had been burnt down. The students were in almost daily confrontation with the police.

• Almost every beerhall in the black townships had been razed to the ground.

• Collaborators within the townships had been severely attacked. Not a single “respectable” black community figure was able to come forward as mediator.

• High school students and young “ex-thugs” prevented workers from going to work in Johannesburg, threatening taxi-drivers, blocking trains and sabotaging railroads. Workers quickly responded, and even after coercion had abated, strikes in Johannesburg and in Cape Town were 80 - 100% effective. Some of the workers who went to work went, not because they were intimidated by the system, but in order to sabotage white-owned technology and commodities.

• Coloureds and Indians had been drawn into the struggle, thus bridging an historical gap among the oppressed that had existed for generations.

• The Bophutatswana (a government-created black “homeland”) houses of parliament had been razed to the ground. All government appointed black leaders were in danger of losing their lives. Many lost their houses.

• Numerous black policemen had fled the townships. Several were killed. After nightfall one-time “lumpen criminals” joined with students and workers to attend to community needs.

• The worker stay-aways drew the adult population into the struggle. Before then they would leave to work in the white cities in the early morning and return after nightfall, while the students squared off against the state. During the stay-aways, the workers were drawn into the confrontation, being forced by the sheer magnitude of the bitter struggle to join the youth in their battle against the system.

For the remainder of 1976 and through to June of 1977, violence continued across the country. Within four months of June 16, about two hundred black communities had been swept along by the tide of revolution. Major areas like Soweto, Guguletu, New Brighton, etc, are still shaken at times by new revolts.

Let the moralists and the humanitarians pretend the students were always peace-loving, and mere victims of the violence. The events in South Africa have exploded that insipid myth. In a situation in which state violence is institutionalised on such an overwhelming scale, one affirms one’s humanity not by “turning the other cheek” and suffering with dignity, but by willfully and consciously accepting one’s share of violence and by understanding that brute systematic force can only be destroyed by the creative violence of the masses.

In June 1977 the executive of a student organisation, whose credibility as a vanguard emerged out of the hero and/or agitator seeking of the South African press, was detained by the South African police. The recent trial of these individuals along with a great many others of the same type are important to note, for by means of these sham efforts of justice the South African state has attempted to delineate in time a quasi-official ending to the period of open class struggle in South Africa. The logic is: arrest the leaders, arrest the revolution . This official self-delusion of the state is mimicked by many of its opponents in exile. The exile’s lament, in spite of his real anguish and homesickness, his glum belief that “the revolution has been suppressed again,” is pitifully vacuous. It is designed only to convince his listeners that despite his present passivity he remains committed to a struggle in which his past participation is often very dubious anyway.

But the struggle has not been suppressed as is witnessed by the consistent reports of unrest and sporadic violence in the South African press. Such events underline the ongoing ferment that sustains the revolutionary spirit from day to day throughout South Africa.

The Soweto Students Representative Council

“The repulsive absurdity of certain hierarchies and the fact that the whole strength of commodities is directed blindly and automatically towards their protection, leads us to see that every hierarchy is absurd.” - Situationist International, The Decline and Fall of the Spectacular Commodity Economy (1965)

If any organisation had grounds on which to ascribe itself a vanguard role in the 1976/77 period of the struggle, it was the Soweto Students Representative Council (SSRC). The SSRC, which emerged from the zealous superstar scouting of the South African press more than anything else, has since then laid firm claim to the dubious honour of the avant-garde party. Internationally this claim has been contested by the old spinster/huckster organisations: the African National Congress (ANC), the Communist Party of South Africa (CPSA), and the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC). At home in South Africa, and among exiles in Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland, the bidding of the old league nationalist-Stalinists have largely fallen on deaf ears. Unfortunately not so the pretensions of the careerists who were one-time leaders of the SSRC and who now parade under the title of the “Third Force”. There are many exiled students who seem quite contented to submit to the spectacle of their self-styled leadership and titillate themselves with the memory of their past participation in the struggle. Too bad for those in search of a shepherd that the hunt for a vanguard party will only find a fleeting shadow.

As for the leadership of the “Third Force,” it is one of the most hideous hierarchical freaks ever spawned by revolutionary experience, and history has never been lacking in grotesque examples. Concocted in the fashion of a passively consumable item, at a time when its later consumers were far from idle, it had to wait for exile before it could raise its ugly head. From outside South Africa the “Third Force” has joined the ANC and PAC in perpetuating the self-same myths that have always crippled proletarian struggle, and even indulges in the same ruthless and coercive tactics when it comes to dealing with others who do not subscribe to its own stupidity, and when it comes to expanding its tiny ranks.

The SSRC grew out of an organisation known as the South African Students Movement (SASM), although its relation to that organisation was extremely dubious. In the heat of the first week of the uprisings, a number of the earlier coordinators of the June 16 demonstration, wanting to lend legitimacy to their claims of leadership, hijacked the controls of the Black Consciousness Movement (BCM) organisation, SASM, from its elected executives who were based in Cape Town.

How could an open struggle that raged for almost two years, and spread the length and breadth of the country, involving at least two hundred cities or towns and hundreds of thousands of active participants, have been under the control of an ad hoc committee that only emerged full-fledged in August, almost two months after June 16, and a fortnight or so before its first self-appointed leadership went into exile?

All revolutionary history shows the part played in the defeat of popular struggle by the appearance of an ideology advocating popular struggle. Within the BCM the ideology of “mass action” lay latent almost from the start. With the uprisings that began in Soweto, the ideology of “mass action” found the SSRC as its vehicle and came to the fore. The black proletariat’s spontaneous organisation of its struggle assured its early successes; but this gave way to a second phase in which the “fifth column” worked from the inside in the form of the SSRC as the vanguard movement. The mass movement sacrificed its reality for the shadow of its defeat.

Even though the SSRC did have widespread support amongst the Soweto high school students and gained international recognition, to justify it on the strength of its allegiance is to miss the point. Popularity of a hierarchical organisation does not condone the organisation, but exposes the degree to which the consciousness of its supporters has been colonised.

The most important point to recognise is that the SSRC owed its reputation to the very organisation of South African daily life, to institutions compatible with apartheid and the white state, which the proletariat in action was out to destroy. It was the press that gave it a name both literally and metaphorically. It was an intellectually intimidated community both at home and abroad which was highly susceptible to advertisable commodities that gave it pride of place on the stage of revolution.

Inside Soweto the SSRC’s ability to stabilise itself and to advance its vanguard aspirations at the very time that the struggle intensified, and when all other organisations were key Black Consciousness organisations (ANC and PAC having all but disappeared), is not testimony to its indispensability. On the contrary in Soweto the SSRC enjoyed a deep degree of very bourgeois respectability, being recognised by moderates (who highly condemned the folly of the struggle), as the only visible and legal organ still operable, and which seemed to be the only possible starting point for some sort of detente. High ranking officials in the South African Police shared the same opinion.

A concrete example of the SSRC’s moderation is to be found in one of its press releases in October, 1976. In this statement the SSRC leadership condemned anonymous leaflefts which had been circulated in Soweto and which incited people to violence. Small wonder that as a result senior police officers in Johannesburg as much as thanked the SSRC for its collaboration, when the police issued a press statement immediately afterwards, in which they said that they felt that the township would be peaceful and law-abiding because the SSRC had repudiated the leaflets.

In acknowledging its authority, the police confirmed the SSRC’s legitimacy. To be legitimised by one’s immediate enemy is a sure sign of one’s fundamental conciliation.

A look at the organisational structure of the SSRC is helpful in that it exposes with clarity the alienated and stultified social relations that characterised the “vanguard of Soweto.” The self-appointed executive, dictatorially controlled by its chairman, deliberately distanced itself from its supporters until a group of several students under the chairman’s direct control were elevated to the position of national leaders. The more their reputation grew, even amongst the students themselves, the less they participated in the struggle. Their activities revolved around the traditional and banal specialisations of the administrative and the propagandistic, while the masses they pretended to lead were out on the streets in their thousands. Where the leadership avoids the line of battle, its claim as supreme leaders rebounds invariably upon itself in the form of ridicule at its own cowardice. Not surprising then that the great SSRC leadership steers its bastard “party” from the safe helm of the Nigerian state.

In exile there are a barrage of students who in many cases have fled hot from the struggle at home. Everywhere they are captives of the ideologies of the world their revolution has demanded they destroy. There are those who have joined the old liberation organisations and sit in army camps in Stalinist countries throughout the world, being fed the cynical lie of a victorious return. There are those who still pay obeisance to the superficial power of the SSRC. They are merely museum pieces in different museums, all marked “revolutionary.” Everywhere revolutionaries, but what has happened to the revolution? Everywhere the same alienation is preponderate, everywhere the spectacular consumption of ideology, everywhere obedience to hierarchy and the veneration of the past. To hell with the ideological variations, and the different names and faces. Under all the rhetoric there is nothing.

For those students who have evaded the pitfalls of those of their peers who have made their unhappy ways into the voracious jaws of either ANC, PAC, or Third Force, there awaits another odious misconception—the pitiful glorification and mimicry of the defeated revolutionary projects of the past. Once courageous participants in their own revolutionary history, they now content themselves with being dazzled by the pseudo-revolutionary glitter of the revolutions that have been lost, invariably in dedication to the solid temple of names radical—Lenin, Trotsky, Mao, Guevara, Cabral and all the rest.

Black Consciousness and the Black Consciousness Movement

Ever since June, 1976, much has been said of the Black Consciousness Movement (BCM).

The more perceptive, less dogmatic cretins of the left, who ever-predictably impute vanguard explanations to every struggle, have used BCM as a surrogate vanguard to explain the events of 1976/77, seeing that there is not a single established party which could credibly fit the bill. Some even go so far as to blame the continued existence of the whole South African state on the fact that BCM was not sufficiently elitist, professional, organised: bureaucratic. Some take the opposite tack, and announce the BCM’s vagueness as its greatest virtue: it is promoted in the image of a non-sectarian proletarian base up for grabs on the market of international constituencies.

It is high time that the miserable use to which the BCM has been put ever since 1976/77 be put to an end, that justice be done to its achievements. Which is to say, the BCM’s shortcomings must now be criticized pitilessly . Its principal contribution to the struggle in South Africa is, at this point in time, mere dead weight; the more it is eulogised, the more a critical analysis of an experience laden with revolutionary lessons is suppressed. It is not enough to heap shit on the self-serving actions of those who praise it and of the exiles who continue to act in its name: the ideas and the activities that gave Black Consciousness and the BCM their life must be held responsible for allowing room for all the post-1977 BCM bullshit.

The main accomplishment of Black Consciousness had very little to do with elaborating the necessary goals and methods of the South African revolution; its main accomplishment was much more to leave in the dust the false goals and methods of the struggles of the forties and fifties, and at the same time to expose the ineefectual strategies of the traditional “liberation” organisations.

Because of the conditions forced upon it by the state, Black Consciousness deliberately side-stepped the whole question of what in fact its goals were. Pronouncing itself as revolutionary could serve no purpose other than to bring down the wrath of the police. To openly favour violence, or to attempt to lead people into any direct confrontation with the state could only have led to failure. On the other hand, although BCM claimed itself to be nonviolent, it did not engage in the impotent acts of civil disobedience practiced in a previous generation by the ANC and PAC (as well as by the American civil rights movement). “Non-violence” was simply a means of self-defence; it certainly was not a strategy, as is shown by any perusal of Black Consciousness literature, which constantly stresses the absurdity of expecting any significant changes by the state in response to moral pressure.

Organisationally, Black Consciousness took the entire logic of Leninism - the “enlightened” party (“theory”) and the passive base (“practice”) - and turned it upside-down. Everything was staked on the activity of the masses at the level of their everyday life. This was extremely ingenious and absolutely necessary: not only as a means of self-defence against the State, which would, as a matter of course, seek out and destroy the leadership of any “revolutionary” group, but for the advance of the struggle itself.

As an organisational framework, the BCM had only one practical goal: the popularisation of the philosophy of Black Consciousness, either by word or by practical example. What is at the core of this philosophy? That the individual black man must recognise clearly his situation, overcome his intimidation, and decide upon his own solution . That in other words he put himself in a position where he has no need for an organisation.

The political groups that came into being out of Black Consciousness—most significantly the Black People’s Convention (BPC), South African Students Organisation (SASO), South African Students Movement (SASM), Black Allied Workers Union (BAWU), Black Community Programmes (BCP)—expressed the fundamental absurdity of vanguard organisation in South Africa—and in fact are a concrete case of the reality of avant-garde organisations in general. As organisations, these groups had no reason for existence other than to exist. They had no role to play as mediators between the masses and Power (the South African white rulers don’t negotiate with blacks), and in any case rejected that role. They had no role as mediators between theory and practice because they did not really have a theory—or, if you will, their theory was that the theory of struggle is made by those in struggle, not by a leadership elite. They took up the role of mediators against mediation.

The BCM did not really break with the logic of an hierarchical, avant-garde type organisation, but simply put off the question because of national circumstances. This is evident in the umbrella structure of the Black Consciousness Movement. While dealing with the “unorganised” blacks, the BCM heralded the individual ; but when dealing in organisational terms, it put forward the ideology of the federation of autonomous organisations . A distinct hierarchy of those “organised” and those unorganised is implied. For those who are unorganised, the essential referent is “the system’ But when one becomes organised, the referent becomes a matter of building the organisation. The organisation does not spring from a determined agreement of individuals on common activity, from defining what is really organizable in their activity, but rather acts to publicise itself—the organisation.

Black Consciousness, defined in as really broad and really vague terms as it was, had run, from the start, the risk of becoming an apologist for all the actions taken by those who claimed to be a part of it: stooges like Nthatho Motlana and Gatsha Buthelezi still pose as Black Consciousness advocates to legitimise their campaigns for better scraps at the white man’s trough. At the time when the best of Black Consciousness theory was put into practice in the streets (and when the BCM organisations were left in the dust) - 1976/77 - the use of Black Consciousness as an apologia for specialists became the rule rather than the exception. The movement which claimed to have “analysed, assessed and defined the black community’s needs, aspirations, ideals and goals” was never so stagnant as in the period when the black South African community was starting to do these things for itself .

Certainly, the point is not - according to the faded leninist dream - that the BCM was not there in 1976/77 to “lead” the struggle. Nor is the point that certain BCM members did not make important contributions in the struggle itself: some undeniably did (though one has seen in this and the preceding chapter the quality of the contributions made by others!) The point is rather that when it came to analysis, the remaining spokesmen of the BCM showed themselves capable of originality only in the sense of choosing which clichés most gloriously describe the struggle and their own participation in it. Nationalism re-emerged, less as a developed ideology, than out of wholesale approval of everything done by their black countrymen. Criticism of all but the most obvious targets — whites and sell-outs — became scarcer than three-legged dogs.

The conspicuous decline of the BCM into isolated groups of radical cheerleaders did not stem from a sudden eclipse of intelligence, and even less from the absence of things to criticize, analyse and precise. Rather, it stemmed from the fact that a radical analysis of conditions by the black proletariat in action necessarily implied the correction of numerous aspects—theoretical as well as practical — of Black Consciousness itself ; and it was precisely before the critique of its own house that Black Consciousness trembled.

With the visible return of open struggle to South Africa, Black Consciousness was confronted with the choice of either shattering its entire petrified organisational edifice or of denying that this organisational edifice was both an edifice and was petrified. Faced with the amazing capacity of the masses for spontaneous organisation the BCM chose the alternative of presenting the movement in the streets as though it was simply an adjunct to the Black Consciousness Movement, with a capital “M” for movement. The distinction between BCM leaders and the masses—a distinction made in practice by the BCM leaders—was concealed by pretending that everyone who acted intelligently in struggle was an honorary leader of a “movement” which had been left behind. The real history made by the masses was hierarchically accorded a substitute history — the history of mass support for the BCM; and it was this substitute history that the partisans of BCM proclaimed as the black proletariat’s essence and truth. “Mass support,” the BCM’s own corrective to hierarchical leadership, in fact became a rubric by which the really hierarchical leaders of the BCM affirmed their success and their authority in just about everything. This “success” and “authority” became an abstract standard for measuring all struggle .

Thus the Black Consciousness Movement found a refuge in the myth of its power, which was inversely proportional to its practical effectiveness. The further it became separated from practical contestation, the more important the myth became. The BCM never claimed to be a monolithic organisation; in actuality it was premised on the fact that it was not a monolithic organisation. The myth that Black Consciousness incorporated the activity of every rebellious black South African was exactly what became the semantic substitute for the monolithic organisation toward which the BCM logically tended, but whose inevitable symptoms of stultification the BCM leadership was sophisticated enough to want to avoid for as long as possible.

In mid-1979, however, the tireless bureaucratic work-mules in various BCM bureaucracies, realising that the ideology of mass support could no longer suffice now that the organisations were banned in South Africa and visibly decaying in exile, steered the BCM to its logical conclusion. The reality of organisation as a substitute for real struggle could no longer be diffused, and instead was affirmed openly. The BCM was made into an official liberation movement, with headquarters in Gaberones, and chapters in London, Bonn and New York. And the ideological raison d’etre for its existence? To mediate, but not in a traditional leninist style, but rather in the wishy-washy fashion of a UN peace-keeping force. To mediate not between theory and practice, or between the masses and power, but to mediate between the ANC and the PAC. From the sublime to the most absolute form of cretinism! All the worms have crawled out of the corpse. The BCM’s official proclamation as an organisation spells out unfailingly that in its true colours as ideology and hierarchy, it is an enemy of real black proletarian struggle in South Africa.

South Africa
school students
Soweto Uprising
Selby Semela
Sam Thompson
Norman Abraham

1976: The Soweto riots

Ovambo miners towards the end of the strike

Ovambo migrant workers general strike for rights, Namibia: 1971-72

Atlanta 1963: High school student arrested at civil rights protest.

A disgrace before God: Striking black sanitation workers vs. black officialdom in 1977 Atlanta – Jason Schultz

[Video] Modibo Kadalie on the 1977 Atlanta sanitation workers' strike and direct action

Syndicalism on the shopfloor: the denver shop-stewards strike, transvaal, november-december 1919 - ea mantzaris.

Black Consciousness 1977-1987: The dialectics of liberation in South Africa

IMAGES

Apartheid Essay
A Must-Read: An Unforgettable Apartheid Essay Conclusion August 2024
Apartheid Essay
Apartheid Essay
Apartheid Essay 300 Words
International Response to Apartheid in South Africa Essays Grade 12

VIDEO

Personal reflection essay
Apartheid Unveiled: A Glimpse into South Africa's Past #history
YOUR MOM!
Changing Lenses: A short film about youth empowerment (with credits)
Would you still support Tyla if you knew this?
Cape Town's segregation in post-apartheid

COMMENTS

Apartheid in South Africa
Get a custom essay on Apartheid in South Africa. 182 writers online. Learn More. The country is the world's leading miner of diamonds and gold with several metal ores distributed around the country like platinum (Rosmarin & Rissik, 2004). South Africa experiences a mild climate that resembles that of San Francisco bay.
Apartheid Essay for Grade 9 Examples: 300 -1000 Words
Section 5: End of Apartheid. Introduction: Discuss how apartheid came to an end and the transition to democracy.; Examples: Refer to negotiations, elections, and the role of global pressure.; Keyword: Democracy, reconciliation.; Conclusion. Summary: Recap the main points and restate your thesis.; Closing Thoughts: Offer a reflection on the legacy of apartheid in contemporary South Africa.
Apartheid South Africa 1940s to 1960s Essay for Grade 11
When writing an essay on Apartheid in South Africa from the 1940s to the 1960s, focusing on clarity, depth, and evidence-based arguments is crucial. Here are some useful tips to enhance your essay writing: Start with a Strong Thesis Statement: Clearly state your essay's main argument or analysis point at the end of your introduction.
Grade 11
Grade 11 - Apartheid South Africa 1940s to 1960s. The global pervasiveness of racism and segregation in the 1920s and 1930s. During the 1920s and 1930s, there were discriminatory policies in different parts of the world. These were mostly in European countries like Britain and European colonies like South Africa.
PDF Resistance to Apartheid
NON-VIOLENT PROTEST IN THE 1950s. "Open the jail doors, we want to enter!": The Defiance Campaign. Repressive government legislation and actions. "The People shall govern": The Freedom Charter. The Treason Trial. "Strijdom, you have struck a rock!": Women's resistance.
10 Ways Apartheid Affected People's Lives and How They Responded
Apartheid was a system of institutional racial segregation and discrimination that existed in South Africa from 1948 to the early 1990s. The word "apartheid" is an Afrikaans word that means "separateness.". Under apartheid, the government divided the population into racial groups and classified individuals based on their skin color ...
Apartheid: Definition & South Africa
Apartheid, the legal and cultural segregation of the non‑white citizens of South Africa, ended in 1994 thanks to activist Nelson Mandela and F.W. de Klerk.
Experiencing Apartheid
Experiencing Apartheid. Writer Mtutuzeli Matshoba provides a vivid account of life under apartheid through the story of his friend who was forcibly ejected from his home. Mtutuzeli Matshoba was born shortly after the National Party was elected to power in South Africa.
8
Then it goes some way toward explaining the quiescence that followed the banning of African nationalist organisations in 1960 and understanding the burden of coping with the intensified apartheid controls that followed. Thereafter, it identifies some of the ambivalence in responses to the various stages of Bantustan (homeland self-government ...
South Africa: Overcoming Apartheid
The racial tyranny of apartheid ended with a negotiated transition to a non-racial democracy, but not without considerable personal cost to thousands of men, women, and young people who were involved. South Africa: Overcoming Apartheid, Building Democracy presents first-hand accounts of this important political movement.
PDF International Pressure on Apartheid South Africa, 1980-1989
Three years later, in 1973, Apartheid was declared a "Crime Against Humanity" by the UNO, composed of a majority of Third World States, who in 1964 urged the Security Council of the UNO to apply sanctions against Apartheid South Africa. Hence, the UNO, in 1977, declared mandatory, the existing embargo on the sale of arms to Apartheid South ...
Apartheid News, Research and Analysis
Ordinary white South Africans and apartheid - bound to a racist system they helped prop up. Neil Roos, University of Fort Hare. Ordinary Whites in Apartheid South Africa is a new book that ...
Civil Resistance Series: South Africa's Anti-Apartheid Struggle
Foreword. Civil resistance exists as a pivotal catalyst, effecting transformation within oppressive regimes and confronting unjust policies that impede civil liberties. Civil resistance's impact has changed the course of cultural and historical identities throughout history. The study of civil resistance has shed light on the intricate power ...
Introduction: Transition to Democracy
As negotiations between the National Party and the ANC became public in the early 1990s, South Africans began to imagine a democratic future. Leaders of the anti-apartheid struggle sought to create a government that reflected the country's diversity, transforming a state long committed to white supremacy into what many began to describe as a "rainbow nation."
4 Things the World Can Learn From South Africa About Racial Justice
Here are four things that the fight against apartheid can teach the world about racial justice. 1. The world needs to rally behind the movements aimed at ending racial injustice. "Global responses are necessary in dismantling systems of oppression," Hatang says. "It was clear that without global support from the rest of the world ...
The story of a working man who lived through apartheid
Published: August 28, 2020 2:21am EDT. Black labourers extracting sludge. on a mine near Johannesburg at the height of apartheid in the 1980s. David Turnley/Corbis/VCG via Getty Images. The life ...
The Struggle against Apartheid: Lessons for Today's World
National liberation rather than human rights became the objective of the struggle against racist tyranny.Apartheid was an affront to the nations of Africa and Asia that were emerging into ...
South Africa: Overcoming Apartheid
Apartheid describes a system of racist laws and policies of total segregation in South Africa that began in 1948, when the National Party came to power, and ended in 1994, when Nelson Mandela was elected President in the first democratic elections. This unit briefly summarizes the region's pre-colonial past and its connections to world history.
Reflections on the black consciousness movement and the South African
A situationist-influenced text decribing how a protest by Soweto school students in 1976 spread and became a country-wide revolt - involving mass workers' strikes and violent confrontations that shook the foundations of white South Africa. Written as a collaboration between an American and two South Africans, the text also deals with the rise and fall of the Black Consciousness Movement.

Apartheid in South Africa Essay

Research questions

Literature Review

Apartheid in South Africa

Background Information

Desmond Tutu against Apartheid

Nelson Mandela against Apartheid

Opposing opinion

Against Apartheid

Apartheid South Africa 1940s to 1960s Essay for Grade 11

Implementation of Apartheid Laws

Resistance Movements

International Reactions to Apartheid

Student Guide

Looking for something specific?

Leave a comment Cancel reply

Grade 11 - Apartheid South Africa 1940s to 1960s

Collections in the Archives

10 Ways Apartheid Affected People’s Lives and How They Responded

How Apartheid Affected People’s Lives and How They Responded

Forced Removals

Limited Employment Opportunities

Political Repression

Limited Access to Healthcare

Cultural Suppression

Economic Inequality

International Solidarity

Similar Posts By Author:

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Apartheid in South Africa

Apartheid Becomes Law

Apartheid and Separate Development

Opposition to Apartheid

Sharpeville Massacre

Nelson Mandela

Key Steps That Led to End of Apartheid

Nelson Mandela: His Written Legacy

How Nelson Mandela Used Rugby as a Symbol of South African Unity

President F.W. de Klerk

When Did Apartheid End?

Sign up for Inside History

Civil Resistance Series: South Africa’s Anti-Apartheid Struggle

Introduction to Apartheid

Desmond Tutu & Nelson Mandela

Women & Anti-Apartheid

Pan Africanist Congress

Sharpesville Massacre and the Soweto Uprising

Bibliographical References

Visual Sources

Alexandra Gimpel

Let the posts come to you!

The story of a working man who lived through apartheid – and his struggles after it ended

Disclosure statement

A working man’s life under apartheid

Deprivations of rural life

Postdoctoral Research Associate

Project Manager – Contraceptive Development

Editorial Internship

Integrated Management of Invasive Pampas Grass for Enhanced Land Rehabilitation

The Struggle against Apartheid: Lessons for Today's World

The Global Challenges of Defining Genocide: Responses to Renewed Debates

A Chronicle Conversation with Paloma Merodio Gómez

Improving Diagnosis for Patient Safety: A Global Imperative for Health Systems

Documents and publications

Libraries and Archives

News and media

The UN at Work

Reflections on the black consciousness movement and the South African revolution - Selby Semela, Sam Thompson and Norman Abraham

Related content

1976: The Soweto riots

Ovambo migrant workers general strike for rights, Namibia: 1971-72

A disgrace before God: Striking black sanitation workers vs. black officialdom in 1977 Atlanta – Jason Schultz

[Video] Modibo Kadalie on the 1977 Atlanta sanitation workers' strike and direct action

Black Consciousness 1977-1987: The dialectics of liberation in South Africa

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS