Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site persci.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!cord!hudson!bentley!hoxna!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tikal!cholula!persci!bills
From: bills@persci.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: South Africa - moderates vs. militants
Message-ID: <384@persci.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 27-Aug-85 18:32:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: persci.384
Posted: Tue Aug 27 18:32:47 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 30-Aug-85 05:43:36 EDT
Reply-To: bills@persci.UUCP (Bill Swan)
Lines: 55

alright, kiddies, since it seems that South Africa is to be this year's fad
(last year it was Nicaragua, year before El Salvador; what'll it be next 
year?!), here's a little more information on the situation:


People are spouting a lot of garbage lately about why the white government of 
South Africa so adamantly sticks to its policy of apartheid. This falls
into three categories: 1. The whites fear a communist takeover, 2. They
fear being completely overrun ("pushed into the sea") by blacks, or 3. The
wealthy ruling elite fear a loss of privilege and wealth.

What is rarely noted is that Pretoria is really concerned about a white
civil war if apartheid is suddenly abandoned. About 2/3 of South Africa's
white are blue-collar, and many of them are what would be termed "po' white
trash" in the American South, poorly educated, semi-literate, with few skills.
These are the people that have the most to lose from apartheid, from any form
of equality with the blacks of the country, and these are the people that
consistently vote against any changes in apartheid. What little status these
people have is achieved mainly through "baaskap", or "white boss"-ism. It is
the fear of losing that privilege, the basis of their survival, which motivates
their demand for apartheid.

The problem for the government (which is quite moderate by South African
standards, the most willing to concede on apartheid that South Africa
has ever seen), is the numbers of these people, and their strategic placement.
THEY are the ones working in the essential industries, THEY are the ones out
on the borders on their poor farms, THEY are the ones making up the security
forces, wielding the weaponry of South Africa.

They are also the people that gave the British such a fight in the Boer War.
They effectively invented modern guerilla warfare (and gave us the term
"commando"). Their government knows how violent they can be, and how determined
about maintaining baaskap and apartheid they are.

This is what the government of South Africa fears: the enemy within, their
own flesh and blood, who are holding the gun to their heads. They fear these
much more than U.N. sanctions, disinvestment, and black rioting.



Understanding the problem is the first step towards fixing it. Demonstrations,
no matter how much fun they are to hold, are not going to change the attitudes
of the Afrikaaner "po' white trash". Neither will disinvestment.

Disinvestment in fact reinforces the "laager" (round up the wagons!) mentality
of these people, since it strikes first and hardest at the poorer white
element, in a way to most increase their fear and hatred of the blacks.
It is the one policy most guaranteed to lead to civil strife in South Africa,
and the least effective in promoting a truly free state for all its people.


-- 
These opinions are not intended to be representative of my employer,
nor of any site or company involved, wittingly or otherwise, in the
dissemination of the foregoing opinions.