of considerations that faced the Boers and missionaries in South Africa in the nineteenth century. Given the depths of the depravity of American Indians, did they possess sufficient rationality and capacity to exercise property rights, or if they
Theory and Interpretation in the Justification of Colonialism
Advancing regional social integration, social protection, and the free movement of people in Southern Africa
The round table on “Advancing regional social integration, social protection, and free movement of people in Southern Africa” was organized as part of the conference “Regional governance of migration and social policy: Comparing European and African regional integration policies and practices” held at the University of Pretoria (South Africa) on 18–20 April 2012, at which the articles in this special issue were first presented. The discussion was moderated by Prince Mashele of the South African Centre for Politics and Research and the participants included: Yitna Getachew, IOM Regional Representative for Southern Africa, Migration Dialogue for Southern Africa (MIDSA); Jonathan Crush, University of Cape Town and Balsillie School of International Affairs, Canada, representing the Southern Africa Migration Program (SAMP); Vic van Vuuren, Director of Southern African ILO; Vivienne Taylor, South Africa Planning Commission; Sergio Calle Norena, Deputy Regional Representative of UNHCR; Laurent De Boeck, Director, ACP Observatory on Migration, Brussels; Wiseman Magasela, Deputy Director General Social Policy, South African Department of Social Development; and Sanusha Naidu, Open Society Foundation for South Africa.
Post-apartheid Ambiguities at the University of Limpopo, South Africa
Based on an in-depth analysis of the events that took place during a single day at the University of Limpopo, this article makes connections between current and past events in arguing that post-apartheid South Africa is underpinned by several layers of ambiguity. At one level the article seeks to demonstrate the continuing relevance of situational analysis as a research paradigm, while at another level it attempts to provide a fresh look at the dominant cleavage in South African society that was identified by Max Gluckman in 1940. Drawing on a mock funeral held for government-aligned student organizations in October 2006, which revealed strains and uncertainties in South Africa's post-apartheid society, the intent is to show how the government's failure to secure service delivery has created new lines of contestation.
Over the centuries it has become harder and harder to isolate aspects of Judaism that might be termed cultural, religious or even national. But before I start to generalize and talk about Judaism and the world, I think it best to start with myself. I was born in South Africa and grew up in a small farming town some seventy miles from Johannesburg. The South Africa of my youth, as you may know, chose to follow a racial route of attempting to separate people, not just on cultural, but on ethnic, racial and religious grounds. And yet we all know, it was a smokescreen for discrimination and hatred.
South African Anthropology, 1921–2005
Aleksandar Boskovic and Ilana van Wyk
Anthropology began in South Africa with the work of nineteenth century missionaries like Alexandre Junod (Hammond-Tooke 1997; Thornton 1998) and as such it fits nicely into the cliche´ of a ‘colonial’ science. However, even at its humble beginnings in the former British colony, anthropology was much more than that (Thornton 1983; Cocks 2001); it served as an important field where different points of opinion collided or converged, but also as an important laboratory for different political experiments – some of which had lasting and devastating effects on South African societies.
Daniel Herwitz reviews: Adorno, Theodor W. Critical Models: Interventions and Catchwords, translated by Henry Pickford (New York: Columbia Press, 1998).
Suzanne Berry reviews: Lötter, Hennie. Injustice, Violence and Peace. The Case of South Africa (Amsterdam & Atlanta: Editions Rodopi, 1997).
Roger Deacon reviews: Gramsci, Antonio. Prison Notebooks, Volume II, edited and translated by Joseph E. Buttigieg (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996).
David Harvey, A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005, 247 pp., 0-19928-327-3 (paperback).
Patrick Bond, Against the global apartheid: South Africa meets the World Bank, IMF and international finance. 2nd ed. London and New York: Zed Books, 2003. 326 pp, 1-84277-393-3 (paperback).
Politics and Vision: Continuity and Innovation in Western Political Thought (Expanded Edition) by Sheldon S. Wolin Andrew Nash
Democracy Compromised: Chiefs and the Politics of Land in South Africa by Lungisile Ntsebeza Keith Breckenridge
Sociology, Religion and Grace: A Quest for the Renaissance by Arpad Szakolczai Roger Deacon
A response to Narotzky, Collins, and Bertho
Ida Susser and Stéphane Tonnelat
When our article was first written, the Occupy movement was in full swing and we were clearly in optimistic mode. However, as all studies of social movements have shown, from the antiapartheid struggles of South Africa to the rebellious nineteenth century in France or Britain, the road of mobilization is never straightforward. Nor did we assume that “Occupy” in the United States or even the popular rebellions of the Arab Spring would lead to a blossoming of democratic nations. We take these understandings from writers such as Eric Hobsbawm (1996), who understood the French Revolution and the British industrial revolution as complementary processes that set the stage for the imperfect and unequal nation-states of France and Britain today. In South Africa (to pick one historic moment), after the high school students who took to the streets in protest in Soweto were mowed down by South African army tanks, the streets were virtually quiescent for a decade. However, over 40 years of fascism in South Africa, the 1950s bus boycotts, the 1960s Sharpeville massacre, the famous trials of Mandela and others, the Soweto school children, and finally the union mobilization in a United Front and international sanctions led to the end of apartheid. But, as we are all now aware, these battles did not end inequality or neoliberalism.
One of the most fraught and, possibly, most tricky issues, both in theory and in practice, for current literary criticism in post-apartheid South Africa is how to read and reread the texts of those now-canonical white South African writers whose reputations were made, both nationally and internationally, by their ‘writing against apartheid’, now that this particular kind of literature of resistance could be seen as passé. What is at stake here is not just a critical re-evaluation of such writers as J.M. Coetzee, Nadine Gordimer and André Brink, whose voices may now be seen to be marginalised in favour of those ‘subaltern’ voices freed to speak in a post-apartheid state, but a re-situating of the very nature of their literary resistance. Inextricably tied to any such discussion is the complex nature of literary resistance itself and the debates surrounding the categorisation of ‘South African literature’ within ‘world literatures’. These debates have evolved around such questions as whether post-colonial theory and criticism have any relevance to such texts; whether ‘white’ South African literature should be regarded as part of other settler literatures (despite its obvious differences in not having just one ‘imperial centre’ and in the neo-colonial structures of apartheid); and whether even locating such a division between ‘white’ and ‘black’ writing in South Africa imposes a retrospective form of apartheid within critical practice itself. This article addresses some of these issues and considers them as part of a process of reconciling differences and moving beyond the fixed binaries that characterise both the apartheid mentality and colonialism itself.