Apartheid and Resistance in South Africa, 1948 – 1994
Any account of the polarisation of African society into distinct white and black polarities, on the right and left wings of the political spectrum respectively, between 1960 and 1964 must be considered in the light of pre-existing relationships between whites and non-whites in South Africa, which manifested themselves in microcosm with events at Sharpeville on 21 March 1960. Critical to the discussion will be the role played by the National Party government, particularly relating to the creation of the Republic of South Africa in 1961, withdrawal from the Commonwealth of Nations in the same year, the 1961 General Election and the government’s racial policy. The function of the United Party, as the party of Official opposition, will also be scrutinised, together with the role of the Liberal Party and the Progressive Party. Analysis of the ideologies of the African resistance movements, including the African National Congress, with Umkhonto we Sizwe, and the Pan-Africanist Congress, with Poqo, will further reveal reasons for the adoption of extreme opposing attitudes. Moreover, these diametric attitudes were subjected to influence from, and response to, international events both within Africa and globally.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Events at Sharpeville
3. Polarisation through National Party policies
4. The weakness of the United Party
5. The failure of the Progressive Party
6. The failure of the Liberal Party
7. The changing ideology of the African National Congress
8. The ideology of the Pan-Africanist Congress
9. Internationalisation of apartheid
10. Conclusion
Objectives & Research Themes
This essay examines the factors that led to the profound polarisation of South African society between 1960 and 1964. It analyzes how government policies, the collapse of opposition parties, and the radicalization of resistance movements transformed the political landscape into distinct, adversarial camps.
- The impact of the Sharpeville massacre on political radicalization.
- The influence of National Party policies, including the formation of the Republic.
- The failure of moderate opposition parties like the United, Progressive, and Liberal parties.
- The shift in resistance ideologies from non-violence to armed struggle.
- The role of international pressure and external political shifts on domestic polarisation.
Excerpt from the Book
Events at Sharpeville demonstrate in microcosm the pre-existing state of affairs between whites and non-whites in South Africa, highlighting the gulf between black political and socio-economic aspirations and white supremacy and might in the “race-obsessed fantasies of apartheid South Africa.” Prime Minister Hendrik Verwoerd was correct in at least one aspect of the killing of sixty–nine pass law protesters and the wounding of a further one hundred and eighty at Sharpeville, inasmuch that it “had all happened before.” The extent of the carnage wrought at Sharpeville may not have happened before, but government repression of peaceful African national protest was not a phenomenon which was new to 1960s South Africa. Witness the brutal repression of a black mineworkers’ strike in the Witwatersrand by the Smuts’ government in 1946,and numerous Anti-Pass Campaigns repressed by overwhelming government subjection to ‘baaskap.’ Nevertheless, Sharpeville, and similar disturbances at Langa and Nyanga, were instrumental in creating diverse extremes in South Africa in the early 1960s. Verwoerd was partly culpable for the polarisation of South Africa with his blinkered attitude that the disturbances of March 1960 “should not be seen in terms of our policy of apartheid” but “as the result of incitement in regard to some or other matter of law.” Therefore, the refusal to accept that the root cause of the persistent race problems was the policy of apartheid was instrumental in the polarisation of society.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the historical context of South African polarisation between 1960 and 1964 and defines the research scope.
2. Events at Sharpeville: Analyzes the massacre as a turning point that exposed the deep racial divide and the failure of non-violent resistance.
3. Polarisation through National Party policies: Discusses the government's push for a Republic and its withdrawal from the Commonwealth as catalysts for white unity and racial division.
4. The weakness of the United Party: Examines the complicity and ineffectiveness of the official opposition in challenging apartheid legislation.
5. The failure of the Progressive Party: Details why the party’s moderate stance failed to gain support from either the white establishment or the black population.
6. The failure of the Liberal Party: Highlights the party's inability to provide a meaningful alternative or occupy the political center ground.
7. The changing ideology of the African National Congress: Explores the shift from passive resistance to the adoption of armed struggle and the formation of MK.
8. The ideology of the Pan-Africanist Congress: Focuses on the radicalization of the PAC and its reliance on terrorism and armed resistance.
9. Internationalisation of apartheid: Investigates the impact of global pressure and the ambivalent response of the international community.
10. Conclusion: Summarizes how these combined factors created a vortex of polarisation that forced the country into entrenched, opposing camps.
Keywords
Apartheid, South Africa, Sharpeville, National Party, African National Congress, Pan-Africanist Congress, Polarisation, Umkhonto we Sizwe, Liberal Party, Progressive Party, Resistance, Hendrik Verwoerd, Racism, Political Opposition, Radicalisation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this study?
The essay focuses on the systematic polarisation of South African society between 1960 and 1964, exploring how the country moved toward extreme ideological divisions.
What are the central themes of the work?
Key themes include the failure of moderate politics, the radicalization of black liberation movements, the role of government repression, and the impact of international isolation.
What is the primary research goal?
The research aims to account for the increasing separation between white and black political spheres during the early 1960s.
Which methodology is employed in this research?
The author utilizes a historical analytical approach, relying on primary documents, government records, and contemporary accounts to assess the political climate.
What topics are covered in the main section of the essay?
The main section covers the Sharpeville incident, government legislative maneuvers, the failure of various political parties (United, Liberal, Progressive), and the transformation of resistance movements.
Which keywords best characterize the work?
The work is defined by terms such as Apartheid, Polarisation, National Party, African Nationalism, and Armed Struggle.
How did the Sharpeville massacre contribute to the polarization of society?
Sharpeville served as a "point of no return," exposing the futility of peaceful protest and prompting the government to adopt harsher repressive measures.
Why does the author argue that the United Party was complicit in the polarisation process?
The author argues that the United Party's inability to offer a viable alternative and its support for repressive legislation effectively facilitated the National Party's agenda.
What role did the international community play during this period?
While the international community criticized apartheid, the essay notes that concrete action was minimal because economic interests often took precedence over human rights.
- Citar trabajo
- Murray Baird (Autor), 2007, Account for the polarisation of South African society between 1960 and 1964, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/203304
