Monday, March 12, 2007

Nation Without a Country

The history of South Africa and its white population is not well understood outside South Africa.

The Cape Colony came into existence as a station for the Dutch East India Company to replenish its ships on the way to the East. The ownership changed hands and it ended up under British rule. Many of the Dutch objected to British rule and moved inland to establish their own Republics - these were the Boer Republics of the Oranje Vrystaat and the Transvaal. The British colony of Natal was also in existence at this time.

Cecil John Rhodes had always desired British ownership of the whole of Africa and created conditions for the declaration of war against the two republics. The Anglo-Boer War was a particularly bitter conflict with the might of the British Empire being thrown against the two small republics. However, the cunning and highly mobile Boers inflicted a huge amount of damage on the 'redcoats' with their guerilla-style warfare. The respose was for the British troops change their red uniforms to less conspicous 'kahki' and to burn all the Boer farms and round up their women and children into the infamous concentration camps. Hundreds of thousands of women and children died and to this day there is a hatred of the British in many parts of South Africa.

After defeat of the Boers, the British set up governorship and eventually union of the four colonies in 1910. And so the Union of South Africa was created and the flag, which consisted of the Orange, White and Blue (similar to the Dutch flag) with a Union Jack, the Vrystaat Flag and the Transvaal Vierkleur in the centre, was born.

The Union remained under British domination and the industry and financial institutions were firmly in the hands of the British while the Boers/Afrikaners were marginalised from the economy. Most of the wealth generated was sent back to Britain.

The Afrikaner elite formed the Broederbond (Brotherhood) to promote Afrikaans interests and, with rapid urbanisation of poor, uneducated Afrikaners, positions were filled in the bureaucracy and eventually control of it was in the hands of the Afrikaner. The Afrikaner 'volk' was an amalgam of Dutch, French Hugenots and other European nations.

The General Elections of 1948 were the turning point in Afrikaner fortunes when the National Party won (with a minority vote as a result of gerrymandering). New Industrial and Financial institutions were set up and the control of the economy changed hands. The Afrikaans electorate was well looked after with creation of job resevation to prevent the emerging black urban population from getting in the way, huge amounts of money were spent on Afrikaans educational institutions, etc.

The Parliamentary structure, which had been inherited from the British, remained but the voters of coloured (mixed race) origin were removed from the voters role. The Blacks were mainly on the fringes of the development of South Africa and had never been included in the parliamentary structure by the British.

When Dutch born Hendrik Verwoerd became Prime Minister in 1958 he introduced the system of Apartheid, which quite simply means 'separateness'. The idea was to enforce separate development of the white and black South Africans in their own areas. The cornerstones of this policy were 1) The Immorality Act which outlawed any sexual contact between the different races, 2) The Group Areas Act which designated the areas in which the different races had to live and 3) The Separate Amenities Act which allocated race based public toilets, beaches, busses, etc, for each group to use.

These policies were unpopular with the Commonwealth and in 1961 South Africa left the commonwealth and became a Republic (but still kept the flag with the hated Union Jack in its centre). For its race-based politics South Africa became dispised by the world, feelings which are still quite freely expressed.

Against this race-based background, there was also a gulf between the English-speaking South Africans and their Afrikaans-speaking compatriots.

The National Party governed for close on fifty years before handing over power to the black freedom movement, the ANC.. and a new flag was born.

Since then the white South African and especially the Afrikaner have been searching for a new identity. There have been some diehards who have believed that they can overthrow the government but most have ended up in gaol. Many have reluctantly left their homeland. It is a society bereft of leadership and sidelined from the economic development that the demise of Apartheid has brought.

Into this vacuum has come a singer with a rousing rock song, about an admired Boer General from the age of the Anglo-Boer War, that has rallied the white South African and given them a voice.


De La Rey


On a mountain in the night

I lie in the dark and wait

In the mud and the blood

As cold rain clings to my pack



And my house and my farm were burnt to the ground so they could capture our land

But the flame and the fire that once burned now burn profundly within my heart.




De La Rey, De La Rey come lead the Boer

De La Rey, De La Rey

General, General united with you we shall rise or we fall.

General De La Rey.



Against the soldiers that laugh

A handful of us against an army of them

With the cliffs of the mountains against our backs

They think they can run us down


But the heart of a Boer is deeper and wider than the enemy can see

On a horse he has come, The Lion of West Transvaal.




De La Rey, De La Rey come lead the Boer

De La Rey, De La Rey

General, General united with you we shall rise or we fall.

General De La Rey.



Because my wife and my child are forced into prison to die,

As the enemies overruns us again, we are forced to take astand



De La Rey, De La Rey come lead the Boer

De La Rey, De La Rey

General, General united with you we shall rise or we fall

I make no apologies about not including the fortunes of the Black South African in this dissertation as it is about the White South African



AFRIKAANS VERSION:
Op 'n berg in die naglê ons in die donker en wag in die modder en bloed lê ek koud, streepsak en reën kleef teen my
en my huis en my plaas tot kole verbrand sodat hulle ons kanvang, maar daai vlamme en vuur brand nou diep, diep binne my.
De La Rey, De La Rey sal jy die Boere kom lei? De La Rey, De La ReyGeneraal, generaal soos een man, sal ons om jou val. Generaal De La Rey.
Oor die Kakies wat lag,'n handjie van ons teen 'n hele groot magen die kranse lê hier teen ons rug, hulle dink dis verby.
Maar die hart van 'n Boer lê dieper en wyer, hulle gaan dit nog sien. Op 'n perd kom hy aan, die Leeu van die Wes Transvaal.
De La Rey, De La Rey sal jy die Boere kom lei? De La Rey, De La Rey Generaal, generaal soos een man, sal ons om jou val. Generaal De La Rey.
Want my vrou en my kind lê in 'n kamp en vergaan, en die Kakies se murg loop oor 'n nasie wat weer op sal staan.
De La Rey, De La Rey sal jy die Boere kom lei? De La Rey, De La Rey Generaal, generaal soos een man, sal ons om jou val. Generaal De La Rey.

Sunday, March 11, 2007

THE POSTMODERN NARCISSISTIC DILEMMA AND THE PRISM OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

Once upon a time intellectuals who sought to understand the modern world looked to the giants of intellectual thought from humanity's past. In the wisdom of their writings we would be able to find the words and meanings relevant to analyzing the events of today. But now, it is as if history has been turned upside down. We no longer look to the past to understand ourselves and our journey--instead we use our present feelings and our modern understandings and prejudices to reinterpret and deconstruct the past.

Is it any wonder that we are horribly confused and disoriented, not knowing who we are or where we are going? Is it any wonder that today's events do not seem to have any rhyme or reason? Modern philosophical assumptions distort and/or obscure any appreciation of our own past. Where once we strove to understand the thinkers and events of the past by placing them within their own context and culture; it is now common practice to judge them by contemporary standards and inclinations.

That this rather perversely condescending and ultimately nihilistic tendency is a direct result of the essential narcissism of our times there is no doubt. Only a narcissist of the most pathological sort could or would haughtily dismiss Plato or Aristotle as merely primitive Greeks; or reject the writings of a Thomas Jefferson or John Adams because they were white male slaveholders. Only a self-absorbed postmodernist who believes he has all the answers to not only current problems, but that his superior and perfect intellect has nothing to gain by considering the admittedly imperfect thinkers and ideas of the past.

The dilemma of the postmodern narcissist is thus an unqualified belief in his or her own righteousness and moral obligation to judge the past; that is simultaneously combined with an aggressive ignorance about it.