Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:01:59.667Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Forces And Divisions that Contribute to Violence in South Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2024

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Very few people in South Africa are satisfied with the present sociopolitical scene and its prevailing violence; most people agree that change is necessary. But that is the limit of their agreement There are great internal differences amongst both black and white people about the means to be used in bringing about change. These differences amongst people of the same race, national group and even political party complicate the problem, generate further conflict and could contribute to violence.

Alternatively, such differences could be an optimistic sign in that people often shape their political goals in terms of their own individual thought and interest, instead of just adhering to a racial or national block. Leaving aside the varieties of political aim and outlook, this article focuses on the models of ‘identity’ different groups are using or are prepared to use (consciously or unconsciously) to generate or provoke violence in South Africa. To make this analysis I have distinguished five categories: race and apartheid; fear and closedmindedness; clash of ideologies; fear and propaganda; and the international implications of conflict in South Africa. These categories should be discussed in the context of the present ‘dominating’ counteridentities existing in South Africa. These, in turn, centre around the idea of National Security, the maintenance of Afrikaner identity through racial separation, Black Consciousness, ‘ Liberalism’, Capitalism, Marxism in its various forms, the Liberation struggle and several forms of ethno-nationalism or tribal exclusiveness. It is through understanding each of these ‘counter-identities’ that we can grasp the complex forces forging South African ‘identities’.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 Provincial Council of the English Province of the Order of Preachers

References

1 The United Nations and Human Rights, (UNO, New York, 1984), p.212Google Scholar.

2 see Rokeach, M, The Open and Closed Mind, (Basic Books, New York), 1960Google Scholar

3 Some examples are given in SABC, Report on Police Conduct during Township Protests (August ‐ November 1984), 1984.

4 Lifton, R.J., Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, (Norton, New York, 1961), pp. 429–30Google Scholar

5 UNO Security Council, 1970. In 1983 the AD Hoc Working Group of the Commission on Human Rights described the policy of apartheid as ‘a collective form of slavery’.

6 CF. World Conference on Religion and Peace, Statement on South Africa of the IVth World Assembly (Nairobi 1984)