The lie of apartheid. And the truth PDF Print E-mail
Sunday, 05 December 2010 08:59

An RSA's flag above a cross

What it follows is a comment of about the essay “The Lie of Apartheid”, in the book “The Lie of Apartheid and other true stories from Southern Africa” by Arthur Kemp.

Much of what has been written by Arthur Kemp in his essay can be partaked, but not all.
In the first place is necessary premise that:
1. The apartheid regime of the RSA (Republic of South Africa) guaranteed freedom to many (even if not all) peoples and nations of southern Africa, unlike the current regime, which has created a unique macrostate;
2. The apartheid system, capitalist and also responsible for to have changed the demography of southern Africa, was really considered by many Afrikaners (the Whites Afrikaans-speaking) - in good faith - as a tool to promote growth and development of all peoples, safeguarding the specificities of each nation. A big lie of international capitalism in which, unfortunately, many nationalists believed for years, waking up at the end in the capitalist-communist empire of today, evolution (and development) of this policy.
3. The author - Arthur Kemp - show a tendency to consider all blacks resident at that time in South Africa as one entity, and therefore a single force. Almost like a nation. But it isn’t correct. Each race develops itself into tribes, ethnic groups and nations, entirely different to each other. And in fact in South Africa (RSA) there wasn’t a black nation, but millions of blacks, divided by tribe, ethnicity and nation.

Granted that, the fundamental point of disagreement with Arthur Kemp in “The Lie of Apartheid”, isn’t about that RSA-regime should end, but about how, when and why.
As supporters of the Boer indipendentist cause, the end of RSA was desirable, and more: all (true) nationalist movements supported the creation of a Boer independent state (“Volkstaat” or “Boerestaat”), in the territories of the Boer republics.
In his essay, Arthur Kemp, when describing the last decades of the RSA, working to give the impression of a country increasingly adrift, seriously threatened by the millions of blacks who lived there, ready to rise up to overthrow the government. All this is very far from reality.
When the situation came to indeed be unstable, was not only because South Africa had changed demographically, but also because from 30 years were implemented policies - by the economic and political elite of the RSA, and by the international economic and political elite – finalized to destabilize the entire region. From the mid of 1960s, many policies on which based and lived the RSA were gradually reversed. One example: whereas before the terrorists were fought by all means, inside and outside the RSA’s borders, gradually RSA ceased to fight against them, and then started to free them, to support them, till to help them to take over on the entire region.
The RSA policies set by Hendrik Verwoerd, even if had severely weakened the “nation” on demographic side (big mistake), on the other side they had defeated terrorism, and South Africa was (at least temporarily) stable  and peaceful. Stop fighting terrorism, supported and free terrorists, bring down one by one all the segregation policies on which it held the RSA, weren’t obligate ways, but precise patterns of power.
The chaos generated by the (South African and international) power, was used to scare people, “white” South African (with only reference to skin color - the only one which had rights to vote, at that time, in the territory of RSA), convincing - through massive propaganda campaigns - that the only way was to pursue the implementation of “reforms”.
If RSA had to end, could end in another way, without the establishment of a single (capitalist-communist) regime, on the whole southern Africa. Maybe it could end in the right way, ensuring freedom to all nations of southern Africa (the blacks, and white: the Boer nation), on the lands that historically belong to them. The fact that didn’t went so, is because the power wanted so.
In the 1980s and 1990s, to ensure freedom to Boer people in an indipendent Volkstaat, wouldn’t be very difficult. The RSA still had the political and military power to does it. Simply it wouldn’t. The power so hand over all the peoples of southern Africa in the hands of a single political entity, trying to legitimize the process with multinational election (and therefore completely illegitimate). To stimulate the participation of the Boers to vote, was spread the grotesque illusion that independence would have been offers... after having voted for the single regime. The Vryheidsfront (VF) - today Vryheidsfront Plus (VF+, in English: Freedom Front Plus, FF+) – was the party organized to publicize this illusion, as well as to disrupt the Boer independence front.