"APARTHEID FOR THE BEGINNER..."
This year for the first time, the torturous South African historical Apartheid period between 1948 - 1976 will be a compulsory theme in the national testing of grade 10 learners. Previously, the theme had been applied to the grade 12 learners as part of their Matric Exams, which translates to final exams in the U.S. According to the S.A. Department of Education, learners will have to answer either an essay question or a source-based question on the theme.
After one month in South Africa, it is my distinct impression that everyone has their own "take" on this history, which is conveniently demarcated by that 1994 date when Nelson R. Mandela became the first black president for what has been designated as "The New South Africa." Mandela is a god-like figure to just about everyone here--his icon status, in my opinion, extends beyond Martin Luther King Jr. In the late 1980's, King joined Lincoln and Washington as the only Americans with a national holiday reserved to celebrate their respective birthdays. That makes him the most distinguished African American in America's pantheon of Civil Rights leaders. In that regard, Mandela has no peer anywhere--and that is rightly so. South Africans are acutely aware of the fact that he could have turned to violence and retribution following his release from prison in the early 1990's. I have had occasion to discuss Mandela's contribution to South Africa and the world with whites here whom might be considered somewhat racist in any context. They realize he took a path of forgiveness and reconciliation...and they concede the world took a collective sigh of relief that was more of a gasp of thankfulness by the non-black minority in their beloved South Africa.
Hopefully, the Matric Exam encompasses much more than the period of apartheid. It's been over a decade since the massive changes in society here. There is truly hope for humankind here, in the birthplace of same. A revolution of race and status has taken place in South Africa; history is unfolding right before my eyes. Some here would argue privileged whites maintain control, but I do not have that impression. With conversations heard here, it seems as though there is almost a collective national obsession with what occured before Mandela. The debate does not seem to be about race, it's about "what should have been done...or what mistakes the apartheid government made with institutionalized laws of cruel separation that brought the unwanted attention of the world on South Africa." In light of this obsession, I believe Americans have a similar obsession--with color/race, call it what you will, as one of the primary concerns in our culture and society. Perhaps we could learn something from the Constitution of South Africa, which is considered to be one of the most liberal documents ever created by government.
A compulsory, written exam on historical apartheid seems to go hand-in-hand with my contention that there is a national psychosis in South Africa about the subject. A fellow at a party asked me if I had ever heard of "apart-hate." He was convinced that I, as an American, knew of this term. I didn't. I told him it was new to me--never heard of it. He was also convinced that the convulsive period of apartheid in history was nothing new in the world as far as separation of the races . In retrospect, maybe he had a point. The fellow rambled on with a tirade of abusive language toward the laws that were instituted here against blacks. "It could have been simpler, better conceived", he said. The apartheid regime could have "softened" their approach toward separation, he stated...almost apologetically. I was thinking, "How does one soften the blows of a sledge-hammer?"
It's truly fascinating and compelling--the subject of apartheid. Being here in the land of the architects of separation in South Africa makes it especially so. Dramatic change has taken place though--the evidence is everywhere. Everyone has their own interpretation of what needed to be done to rearrange the social/racial conditions here. Importantly, a period of nonracial democracy exists now and many citizens, black and white, along with Asians, are torn by perceived power struggles evident in the present government. This is history in the making: I'm able to take it all in, while trying to read between the lines and attempting to pry open the different layers of understanding and misunderstanding. This, I hope, will enable me to come to conclusions that probably will not be the same by the end of this Fulbright year-2006. Someone told me of an older black woman who said the present government of the African National Congress (ANC),is composed of some "angry, hungry dogs." She related how dogs who haven't eaten for a long time consume more than they can or should. They growl and get mean. They even remain angry and want more to eat. The woman said that is what is happening now with ANC leaders. And she stated it was vital that we attempt to understand them...in this, the new non-racial democracy of South Africa.
It is not that difficult to understand such simple reasoning. All any American has to do is examine our own history of democracy. We have had our own share of angry, hungry dogs, at all levels of government, who have eaten more than than their fair share of wealth at the public trough. Perhaps I am mistaken in this assessment, but I would be willing to bet there are many, many people out there who would agree with me--Americans and foreigners alike.
After one month in South Africa, it is my distinct impression that everyone has their own "take" on this history, which is conveniently demarcated by that 1994 date when Nelson R. Mandela became the first black president for what has been designated as "The New South Africa." Mandela is a god-like figure to just about everyone here--his icon status, in my opinion, extends beyond Martin Luther King Jr. In the late 1980's, King joined Lincoln and Washington as the only Americans with a national holiday reserved to celebrate their respective birthdays. That makes him the most distinguished African American in America's pantheon of Civil Rights leaders. In that regard, Mandela has no peer anywhere--and that is rightly so. South Africans are acutely aware of the fact that he could have turned to violence and retribution following his release from prison in the early 1990's. I have had occasion to discuss Mandela's contribution to South Africa and the world with whites here whom might be considered somewhat racist in any context. They realize he took a path of forgiveness and reconciliation...and they concede the world took a collective sigh of relief that was more of a gasp of thankfulness by the non-black minority in their beloved South Africa.
Hopefully, the Matric Exam encompasses much more than the period of apartheid. It's been over a decade since the massive changes in society here. There is truly hope for humankind here, in the birthplace of same. A revolution of race and status has taken place in South Africa; history is unfolding right before my eyes. Some here would argue privileged whites maintain control, but I do not have that impression. With conversations heard here, it seems as though there is almost a collective national obsession with what occured before Mandela. The debate does not seem to be about race, it's about "what should have been done...or what mistakes the apartheid government made with institutionalized laws of cruel separation that brought the unwanted attention of the world on South Africa." In light of this obsession, I believe Americans have a similar obsession--with color/race, call it what you will, as one of the primary concerns in our culture and society. Perhaps we could learn something from the Constitution of South Africa, which is considered to be one of the most liberal documents ever created by government.
A compulsory, written exam on historical apartheid seems to go hand-in-hand with my contention that there is a national psychosis in South Africa about the subject. A fellow at a party asked me if I had ever heard of "apart-hate." He was convinced that I, as an American, knew of this term. I didn't. I told him it was new to me--never heard of it. He was also convinced that the convulsive period of apartheid in history was nothing new in the world as far as separation of the races . In retrospect, maybe he had a point. The fellow rambled on with a tirade of abusive language toward the laws that were instituted here against blacks. "It could have been simpler, better conceived", he said. The apartheid regime could have "softened" their approach toward separation, he stated...almost apologetically. I was thinking, "How does one soften the blows of a sledge-hammer?"
It's truly fascinating and compelling--the subject of apartheid. Being here in the land of the architects of separation in South Africa makes it especially so. Dramatic change has taken place though--the evidence is everywhere. Everyone has their own interpretation of what needed to be done to rearrange the social/racial conditions here. Importantly, a period of nonracial democracy exists now and many citizens, black and white, along with Asians, are torn by perceived power struggles evident in the present government. This is history in the making: I'm able to take it all in, while trying to read between the lines and attempting to pry open the different layers of understanding and misunderstanding. This, I hope, will enable me to come to conclusions that probably will not be the same by the end of this Fulbright year-2006. Someone told me of an older black woman who said the present government of the African National Congress (ANC),is composed of some "angry, hungry dogs." She related how dogs who haven't eaten for a long time consume more than they can or should. They growl and get mean. They even remain angry and want more to eat. The woman said that is what is happening now with ANC leaders. And she stated it was vital that we attempt to understand them...in this, the new non-racial democracy of South Africa.
It is not that difficult to understand such simple reasoning. All any American has to do is examine our own history of democracy. We have had our own share of angry, hungry dogs, at all levels of government, who have eaten more than than their fair share of wealth at the public trough. Perhaps I am mistaken in this assessment, but I would be willing to bet there are many, many people out there who would agree with me--Americans and foreigners alike.
posted by JOBURG JOURNAL at 1:59 AM
<< Home