Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watrose.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!water!watrose!gdvsmit
From: gdvsmit@watrose.UUCP (Riel Smit)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Changing Realities in South Africa
Message-ID: <7531@watrose.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 13-Sep-85 09:29:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: watrose.7531
Posted: Fri Sep 13 09:29:00 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 14-Sep-85 05:42:36 EDT
References: <1168@ihlpg.UUCP> <175@batman.UUCP> <704@whuxl.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 48

In article <704@whuxl.UUCP> orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) writes:
>What difference do small changes in "petit apartheid" make when the
>gran apartheid policies which do not even allow blacks *into* white
>areas in the first place continue in effect?  

The same difference that those first hesitant steps of a child learning
to walk, makes.  Yes, I think they could (and should) learn (and do)
faster, but yelling all the time "Dammit, you fool, you can't walk, 
you are BAD, BAD, BAD.  WALK NOW, you sonaofabitch or you won't get 
another meal", won't help much - just retard the process even more.

And by the way, blacks are allowed in white areas, they are just not
allowed to stay there (*).  They may work there (if they have the right 
pass, but fortunately that - the pass laws - is also on its way out).
Given time and encouragement and a little not-in-the-open pressure even
the group areas act will go the way of "petit apartheid".
(*) Note, I am not saying this is not bad, just that it is not as bad
    as you make it out to be.

>                    In South Africa blacks do not even have this most
>fundamental democratic right.  This is what makes ridiculous Falwell's
>attack on Nobel Peace Prizewinner, Desmond Tutu, as not being an
>"elected representative" of blacks. OF COURSE NOT! Blacks cannot vote!
>They have NO elected representatives.  

Blacks can vote, just not in the "right" places.  They can vote for
representatives on community or town councils.  They can vote for their 
own "government representatives" in the homelands.  So, in a sense they
do have "elected representatives".  Whether this is a meaningful vote,
well that is a whole different story.

>Moreover a division of Gallup from London found that 77% of blacks polled
>in South Africa supported divestment

I am wary of a poll done in Africa by a company in Europe.  There are
many factors that come in play when polling.  While Gallup is a respected
polling agency in the Western world, it does not mean that the same
techniques can be applied in a completely different culture, and a Third
World one at that.  (I don't say that is what they did, but before I know
the details of how the poll was taken, I take it with not just a grain of
salt.)

>In fact in Zimbabwe right now Ian Smith is still in the Parliament.

And if you listen to what Mugabe has to say, it won't be for long, and
should never have been in the first place.  Zimbabwe is to become a one-
party state.  Where will that leave the "shining example of democracy"
as some people have termed Zimbabwe?