Introduction
Apartheid, a racist political structure in South Africa from 1948 to 1994, has left a lasting legacy that the nation is now attempting to erase. Even though South Africa has come a long way since the end of apartheid, many problems must be resolved to guarantee complete equality for all citizens. This essay will examine the causes of apartheid’s extended survival and eventual demise in 1994. It will discuss the political, social, and economic factors that allowed the system to continue operating and the numerous organizations and people who tried to stop it.
Economic Factors
Labor Exploitation
During the apartheid era, the South African economy largely depended on exploiting its black population. The arrangement allowed white South Africans to reap the benefits of the nation’s wealth and resources disproportionately, while black South Africans were mainly shut out of economic prospects (Klug, 2021). The exploitation of cheap labor was the primary economic driver of apartheid.
Black South Africans were restricted to low-wage, unskilled labor and were not given access to the same economic prospects as white South Africans. This made it possible for the government to direct funds toward services and infrastructure that disproportionately benefited white South Africans (Minefee & Bucheli, 2021). The segregation of the labor force by race also allowed companies to pay black workers less while still getting the same amount of work done. As a result, an economy heavily dependent on cheap labor, primarily provided by black workers, was developed.
Government Involvement in Economics
The government’s control over essential sectors was the second economic justification for apartheid. For instance, its grip over the mining, manufacturing, and banking industries allowed it to deny white South Africans access to economic opportunities and monopolize resources (Manulak, 2020). Due to this, white South Africans gained an advantage in the market while black South Africans’ access to the economy was constrained. As a result, the nation’s distribution of wealth and resources became incredibly unequal.
Racial Segregation
The third economic element that kept apartheid in place was the system of racial segregation. The government enacted laws that severely limited economic opportunities and restricted the freedom of travel for black South Africans (Minefee & Bucheli, 2021). Black South Africans found it challenging to benefit from other economic prospects and higher-paying professions as a result of this. This increased the economic divide created by the apartheid system between white and black South Africans and further cemented it.
Political Factors
Various political forces supported apartheid, including the National Party, whose dedication to upholding white supremacy and racial segregation was the main factor in apartheid’s long-term success. The party put several legislation and regulations into place that guaranteed white dominance and control over South Africa’s government and society while restricting the rights of black South Africans (Manulak, 2020).
These included the Group Areas Act of 1950, which determined where black South Africans could live and work, and the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act of 1949, which outlawed interracial marriage (Minefee & Bucheli, 2021). As a result, white South Africans were guaranteed to enjoy the benefits of economic and social dominance. At the same time, black South Africans were reduced to second-class citizens with little access to opportunities for employment, education, and other services.
Additionally, the National Party employed harsh and violent tactics to support its apartheid policies while in charge of the South African government. The party implemented numerous rules and regulations, including the Criminal Law (Enforcement of Apartheid) Amendment Act of 1965, which made it illegal for black South Africans to protest the apartheid system (Minefee & Bucheli, 2021). The South African Police also employed harsh tactics, such as mass arrests and torture, to stop anti-apartheid activities.
As a result of the National Party’s grip over the South African government, the people were unable to acquire alternative perspectives or factual information about the reality of apartheid. Due to this, the party could hang onto power even as the world community started to denounce the repressive practices and policies of the apartheid system (Klug, 2021).
However, as international pressure and domestic opposition to apartheid grew, the party’s hold on power gradually waned in the late 1980s (Minefee & Bucheli, 2021). As a result, apartheid gradually ended in 1994, when Nelson Mandela became South Africa’s first black president, and the National Party lost its hold on power.
Social Factors
The country’s long history of racial segregation significantly contributed to the societal elements that underpin apartheid in South Africa. When the first immigrants arrived in the Cape in the late nineteenth century, the Dutch government began to pursue its “divide and rule” program (Klug, 2021). The settlers could maintain a clear racial order with whites at the top of the social hierarchy and people of color at the bottom. When the National Party came to power in 1948, it strengthened and enlarged this system of racial segregation (Minefee & Bucheli, 2021).
The social views of South Africa’s white population supported apartheid as well. Apartheid was seen by many white people as vital to preserve their power and privilege because they believed themselves to be superior to those of color (Onaolapo et al., 2020). The National Party received much support from white people, which was indicative of this mentality. It wasn’t until the late 1980s that a rising number of white people started to oppose apartheid; this opposition ultimately contributed to the regime’s fall in 1994.
International Pressure
Global Critique
Due to systemic racism and a lack of outside pressure, the apartheid system in South Africa could endure for a long time. The repressive regulations that kept the mass population divided and the climate of fear that prevented people from speaking out against the dictatorship allowed the South African government to retain the status quo (Onaolapo et al., 2020). This was made worse by the lack of strong opposition to the apartheid system from the international community.
However, as the years went by, pressure from abroad grew. The United Nations and other foreign organizations pressured the South African government to abolish apartheid in the 1960s and 1970s (Minefee & Bucheli, 2021). While nations like the US, the UK, and the USSR started to pressure the government to remove apartheid, the UN imposed economic sanctions and boycotts. Due to the pressure, the South African government began to relax the discriminatory legislation, leading to the abolition of apartheid in 1994.
Economic Sanctions
Economic sanctions, boycotts, and other forms of opposition to the South African government significantly influenced the apartheid’s collapse. Economic sanctions significantly influenced the South African economy and compelled the government to address the apartheid issue. These measures included trade restrictions on specific commodities and services and the suspension of all diplomatic, military, and political contacts with South Africa (Minefee & Bucheli, 2021). Another aspect of the economic sanctions was the suspension of South African government assets and investments in the nation.
Boycotts
Boycotts against the South African government were another powerful method of protest (Manulak, 2020). Boycotts comprised a reluctance to use goods and services from South Africa and a refusal to visit the nation. These boycotts, which people, groups, and governments orchestrated, greatly affected the South African economy (Onaolapo et al., 2020). Additionally, boycotts influenced the South African government to act by raising awareness of the issue of apartheid and applying pressure.
African National Congress
Due in significant part to the absence of a coordinated and organized opposition, the repressive system of racial segregation in South Africa could endure for such a prolonged period. The African National Congress (ANC) was established in 1912 to challenge the government’s policies favoring the white majority (Van Hout & Wessels, 2021). Over time, the group gained power and notoriety and was a significant player in the anti-apartheid movement. Nelson Mandela was one of many well-known individuals who headed the ANC and employed various strategies to fight against apartheid and defend the rights of the non-white majority.
The African National Congress successfully drew attention to and backed the anti-apartheid movement globally through its nonviolent demonstrations, strikes, and other acts of civil disobedience. The ANC’s efforts finally resulted in the system’s overthrow in 1994, along with other factors, including the end of the Cold War and the subsequent international criticism of apartheid (Van Hout & Wessels, 2021). The Congress then seized control of South Africa and put into effect a new constitution that ended apartheid and gave all citizens equal rights. The anti-apartheid movement needed its assistance to abolish this oppressive regime.
Nelson Mandela
The absence of political will to dismantle apartheid was one of the fundamental reasons it persisted for such a long time. Most of South Africa’s white people backed apartheid, and the white administration was unwilling to renounce its hold on power (Manulak, 2020). Nelson Mandela, who rose to prominence in the anti-apartheid struggle in the late 1960s, played a significant role in the eventual defeat of apartheid. Mandela was imprisoned due to his involvement in rallies against the system (Van Hout & Wessels, 2021).
While incarcerated, he rose to prominence as a representative of the fight against apartheid, and his name began to be linked to the movement. In the years following his 1990 release from prison, Mandela struggled to abolish apartheid (Minefee & Bucheli, 2021). He orchestrated nonviolent demonstrations and negotiated with the government, removing numerous pieces of legislation that had backed apartheid.
In South Africa, Mandela also tried to promote amity between the white and black communities, which was essential for a smooth transition to a new political order. Mandela’s efforts to dismantle apartheid successfully shifted public opinion about the system and had the laws supporting it repealed (Onaolapo et al., 2020). Apartheid was finally put to an end in 1994, thanks in large part to Mandela’s charisma and resolve to ensure a smooth transition to a new form of government.
Role of Media
In the latter half of the 20th century, South Africa’s Apartheid system largely survived thanks to the media. To squelch opposition and shape public opinion, the South African government, committed to holding onto power, employed the media (Onaolapo et al., 2020). Newspapers, radio, and television were the media sources used to spread state propaganda.
As a result, the public only heard the government’s narrative, which portrayed apartheid as a necessary and effective system (Van Hout & Wessels, 2021). Newspapers were also used to smear anti-Apartheid activists and organizations by spreading untrue information about them. To extend the notion that all South Africans supported apartheid, themes of national solidarity and patriotism were frequently broadcast on radio and television.
Additionally, the administration implemented a stringent censorship system to prevent the public from hearing any criticism of the government. Under this regime, any material perceived as critical of the government was either censored or forbidden, impacting both public and commercial media. As a result, the administration was able to maintain its narrative and control over the information flow (Arieli, 2019).
The media was also employed to instill terror in the public. The administration attempted to intimidate people into supporting the rule by using the media to promote rumors and accounts of violence. Newspapers were also used to disseminate fabricated reports of “black on white” crimes to incite fear and animosity toward the black community (Van Hout & Wessels, 2021).
Finally, the government used the media to promote nationalism and togetherness among white people. This was accomplished by highlighting that whites and blacks were “superior” to one another and that the Apartheid system was required to uphold this superiority (Manulak, 2020). It was also accomplished by promoting patriotism and national pride and enticing white people to see themselves as part of a more powerful, cohesive nation.
The bravery and tenacity of South Africa’s people in the face of oppression and unfair laws are primarily responsible for the end of apartheid rule in that country. Nevertheless, it is impossible to overestimate the importance of the media in the eventual abolition of apartheid. In South Africa, the media were crucial in the struggle against racial inequality by giving activists’ and citizens’ views a free forum (Arieli, 2019).
The media made the world aware of the terrible injustices South African residents faced, which led to a surge in public pressure and support for the anti-apartheid campaign. The media gave activists a stage to air their complaints and draw attention to their battles (Onaolapo et al., 2020). For instance, the 1988 television series “Apartheid: A World Apart” focused on the struggles of its residents and the conditions in apartheid-era South Africa. The series helped draw attention to the situation of South African inhabitants by being widely viewed globally.
The media also gave the opposition a platform to voice their ideas and beliefs. Activists might promote their message and gain support for their cause through newspapers, magazines, and other publications. In the 1980s, media outlets like The Weekly Mail and the South African periodical New Nation gave anti-apartheid campaigners a platform to express their ideas and draw attention to their cause (Klug, 2021).
International boycotts of South African products and services were also made possible by the media, which pressured the government to repeal the harsh legislation. For instance, the South African government’s policy of “separate development” (apartheid) suffered greatly as a result of the global media campaign against it (Minefee & Bucheli, 2021). The South African government was pressured to end its discriminatory practices due to the drop in tourism revenue.
The Impact of Apartheid
South Africa’s landscape still bears the scars of apartheid. Despite apartheid’s conclusion in 1994, the country is still dealing with the effects of a policy that separated and persecuted black South Africans. The differences between black and white South Africans in terms of wealth, employment, health, and education reflect the legacy of this system. Black South Africans now have less access to resources and opportunities than white South Africans due to decades of institutionalized discrimination and exclusion.
The predominance of poverty in South Africa is another indication of apartheid’s effects (Van Hout & Wessels, 2021). The lingering effects of apartheid have been acknowledged as a significant contributor to the perpetuation of inequality in the nation. The high percentage of poverty in South Africa is a result of several factors, with black South Africans being disproportionately affected by this problem. These factors include inadequate access to education, employment prospects, and health care.
The political landscape of South Africa also shows the effects of apartheid. A new democracy was born after apartheid, but it has been challenging for the nation to move to a fully functional democracy due to problems left over from apartheid (Arieli, 2019). The country is still dealing with the impacts of racial and economic injustice, and political tensions between various racial and ethnic groups still exist.
Conclusion
Various variables, including racial biases, political and economic interests, and foreign support, contributed to apartheid’s persistence in South Africa for a long time. The National Party’s capacity to manage the media, silence critics, and control the military and government all contributed significantly to maintaining the racial segregation system. However, mounting internal and international pressure, together with the initiatives of anti-apartheid campaigners and leaders like Nelson Mandela, ultimately resulted in the end of apartheid in 1994. Apartheid’s demise was a win for the oppressed majority of South Africans and democracy and human rights. South Africa has made great strides toward addressing its historical injustices and creating a more just and equal society, although the legacy of apartheid still looms large in the nation.
References
Arieli, R. M. (2019). Ahmed Kathrada in post-war Europe: Holocaust memory and apartheid South Africa (1951-1952). African Identities, 17(1), 1–17. Web.
Klug, H. (2021). Between principles & power: Water law principles & the governance of water in post-apartheid South Africa. Daedalus, 150(4), 220–239. Web.
Manulak, D. (2020). ‘An African representative’: Canada, the third world, and South African apartheid, 1984–1990. The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 49(2), 368–399. Web.
Minefee, I., & Bucheli, M. (2021). MNC responses to international NGO activist campaigns: Evidence from Royal Dutch/Shell in apartheid South Africa. Journal of International Business Studies, 52(5), 971–998. Web.
Onaolapo, T. F., Okello, T. W., & Adelabu, S. A. (2020). Assessing spatiotemporal settlement patterns in Eastern Free State, South Africa, pre- and post-transition from apartheid to majority rule. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa, 75(2), 140–158. Web.
Van Hout, M. C., & Wessels, J. (2021). Human rights and the invisible nature of incarcerated women in post-apartheid South Africa: Prison system progress in adopting the Bangkok Rules. International Journal of Prisoner Health, 18(3), 300–315. Web.