The apartheid policy describes the system of racial discrimination and white political domination adopted by the South African National Party after its rise to power. This essay will critically examine the historical significance of the Nationalist Party’s influence during its governance from 1948 to 1994. Additionally, this paper will analyse the social, political, economic and cultural impact of the Nationalist apartheid legislation. Furthermore, it will examine several major resistance campaigns and significant historical figures that gave rise to the cessation of the apartheid legislation under new democratic rule, including the effects of the Sharpeville Massacre in 1960 and the transformative force of anti-apartheid activist Nelson Mandela.
Since the colonisation of South Africa by the Dutch in the 17th, century, the consolidation of the influence of the whites remained a prominent element of Afrikaner culture until its formal cessation in 1994 (United States Department of State nd). The election of the ‘purified’ National Party in 1948 distinguished the enforcement of aggressive policies in an effort to maintain white supremacy in South Africa. This system of institutionalised racial segregation was labelled ‘apartheid’, an Afrikaans word meaning “the state of being apart” (BlackPast nd). The apartheid system created a society of enormous oppression for non-white South Africans during the Nationalist Party’s era of sovereignty.
(LW) The defeat of the Union Party in
We commence by examining South-African apartheid and its historical and theoretical context. Apartheid was a system of racial segregation used in the overtly racist regime in South Africa from 1948 to 1991. It was based on laws that banned “marriage and sexual relations between different “population groups” and requir[ed] separate residential areas for people of mixed race (“Coloreds”), as well as for Africans” (Fredrickson 3). These laws were based on the same obsession with “race purity” that characterized other racist regimes, most notably Jim Crow America and Nazi Germany. The system was justified in terms of “cultural essentialism” and “seperate development”. Cultural essentialism means that each culture has inherent features that differentiate the members of this cultural group from others. The concept of separate development
Mandela once said, “A man who takes away another man’s freedom is a prisoner of hatred, he is locked behind the bars of prejudice and narrow-mindedness.” (Page 32). This quote is an accurate description of all the people who supported the apartheid in South Africa starting when the National Party was elected in 1948. Knowing why this happened and what brought the apartheid to an end is vital to not making the same detrimental mistake again. Apartheid came to an end because of internal unrest, external pressure, and great leaders.
As a result of racial segregation, resistance from coloured people in both the United States and South Africa escalated. Furthermore, the history of the African civil rights movement validated: “Nationalism has been tested in the people’s struggles . . . and [proved to be] the only antidote against foreign rule and modern imperialism” (Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom 2008, 156) . By comparing and contrasting the American Jim Crow Laws and South African apartheid, we have evidence that both nations’ constitutions led to discrimination, activism, reform and reconciliation.
I have always thought that Nelson Mandela has been one of the most important people in history. I find it very fascinating that one man could end the Apartheid and that is why I want to find out more about this. South Africa is a country with a past of enforced racism and separation of its multi-racial community. The White Europeans invaded South Africa and started a political system known as 'Apartheid' (meaning 'apartness'). This system severely restricted the rights and lifestyle of the non-White inhabitants of the country forcing them to live separately from the White Europeans. I have chosen to investigate how the Apartheid affected people’s lives, and also how and why the Apartheid system rose and fell in South Africa.
Thesis Statement: Apartheid may have been a horrible era in South African history, but only so because the whites were forced to take action against the outrageous and threatening deeds of the blacks in order to sustain their power.
Racism, discrimination and degradation faced by Blacks and other ethnic minorities under the apartheid system was not unlike the segregation and intimidation faced by African-Americans in the Jim Crow south. Jim Crow system of segregation that kept Blacks from fully participating in public and civic activities and relegated African-Americans to substandard conditions at work, school and even in the home. Blacks in South Africa were under the clutches of an overt, national policy of racism and segregation implemented by the country’s highest level of government. Civil and human rights abuses of Blacks in South Africa at the hand of the country’s white minority occurred long before apartheid officially began, but the system’s official start brought strict, sweeping laws such as the rule that all persons in South Africa to be categorized as white, Black, colored and Indian, without exception. Like in the U.S. during Jim Crow, Blacks and whites were not allowed to marry and sexual relations between members of different races was a criminal offense.
The natives of Southern Africa felt political and economical pressure from invading Europeans, as well as the diffusion and growth of the Nguni empire under Shaka. The Dutch agricultural settlers, known as Afrikaners, had a goal of total colonization. They pursued absolute segregation, which in turn conflicted discrimination hardship among the natives. During the climax of its growing stages, this movement became known as apartheid; this act was a product of a party, the National Party of South Africa. This racial oppression lasted from 1948 up to the mid 1980’s.
As a result of racial segregation in both the United States and South Africa, the coloured people’s resistance escalated. In truth, this time of division strengthened nationalism – their weapon that “[transformed their] common suffering into hope for the future” (Mandela, Notes to the Future 2012, 84). Moreover, the American Jim Crow Laws and South African apartheid led to discrimination, activism, reform and most importantly reconciliation.
The Apartheid was initiated as a ploy for Europeans to better control the exploited populations for economic gain, as maintaining tension between the different racial classifications diverted attention from the Europeans as it fed hatred between groups. This assisted in minimizing unity between the exploited to rally against European control as it backhandedly induced “submission” for survival. One way of accomplishing this was by instilling laws that’d force segregation, classification, educational “requirements”, and economic purposes. The Population Registration Act of 1950 enacted, requiring segregation of Europeans from Afrikaans . Following shortly, the Group Areas Act of 1950 was enacted as a new form of legislation alongside the Population Registration Act. This detailed act separated tribes based on ethnics; consequently, further detailing segregation amongst the natives .
The national party achieved power in South Africa in 1948 the government, usually comprised on “white people”, and racially segregated the country by a policy under the Apartheid legislation system. With this new policy in place the black South African people were forced to live segregated from the white people and use separate public facilities. There were many attempts to overthrow the Apartheid regime, it persisted to control for almost 50 years.
History is subjective because it is a subject that is based on a person’s knowledge and opinions. While some events have obvious causes, other events must be analyzed to find their true impetus. One complicated era from history that has a debatable cause is Apartheid. While some historians cite complex causes for Apartheid, most people in the general public simply believe racism was the root of the institution. While racism did factor into later practices of Apartheid, racism was merely a byproduct of the social and cultural effects of the institution. When evidence is examined, the real cause of Apartheid becomes obvious. This era of South African history was not simply based on social practices such as racism; Apartheid was rooted
Apartheid policies entrenched race as the basis for access to power and resources. Conflicts resulted from increasingly polarized groups “Blacks” in majority and ‘Whites” in minority. The Apartheid government relied on security forces to maintain its authority and on the other hand, the African National Congress fought against discriminatory and exploitive social policies both using passive resistance and armed struggle (Democracy in South Africa). Finally, with international support Mandela successfully overthrows the unjust legislation and establishes a justice new republic of South Africa. Therefore, Mandela’s non-violence is successful.
Throughout the apartheid era of 1948 to 1994 under the governance of the National Party, the rights and mobility of the majority of Indigenous South Africans were curtailed while white minority rule was maintained. In the years leading up to Apartheid, Prime Minister Jan Smuts (from 1939-1948 before the apartheid era), initially advocated for racial segregation and the disenfranchisement of black Africans. In 1945, he stated that there needed to be a, “fixed policy to maintain white supremacy in South Africa, [to maintain]… white civilisation and [keep the] white race pure”. This motivated a discriminatory attitude towards non-Afrikaners that manifested itself into South African law under the “Colour Bar” bill, which prevented non-whites from competing for certain employment opportunities monopolized by whites. The National Party, led by David Malan, which defeated Smuts in the 1948 election set the country on an even more white supremacist and racist path as South Africa became an Apartheid State. In the later years of his Prime ministership, Smuts’ ideas became more moderate, and thus, had less appeal to the growing nationalist Afrikaner views of the majority of white South Africans. Malan’s more radical views, influenced by the Dutch Reformed Church, played on fear of being overwhelmed in a “black tide” from the weakening of the Colour Bar in the booming wartime economy. The National Party justified the Apartheid laws by claiming to remove sources of friction between
The South African Apartheid, instituted in 1948 by the country’s Afrikaner National Party, was legalized segregation on the basis of race, and is a system comparable to the segregation of African Americans in the United States. Non-whites - including blacks, Indians, and people of color in general- were prohibited from engaging in any activities specific to whites and prohibited from engaging in interracial marriages, receiving higher education, and obtaining certain jobs. The National Party’s classification of “race” was loosely based on physical appearance and lineage. White individuals were superficially defined as being “obviously white'' on the basis of their “habits, education and speech as well as deportment and demeanor”; an
Many of the contemporary issues in South Africa can easily be associated with the apartheid laws which devastated the country. The people of South Africa struggle day by day to reverse “the most cruel, yet well-crafted,” horrific tactic “of social engineering.” The concept behind apartheid emerged in 1948 when the nationalist party took over government, and the all-white government enforced “racial segregation under a system of legislation” . The central issues stem from 50 years of apartheid include poverty, income inequality, land ownership rates and many other long term affects that still plague the brunt of the South African population while the small white minority still enjoy much of the wealth, most of the land and opportunities