SOUTH AFRICA: Not Yet uhuru

 SOUTH AFRICA: Not yet Uhuru

 (Uhuru is a Swahili word that means “freedom”.)

It was  a Conservative British Prime Minister, Sir Winston Churchill, who in response to the stirrings of nationalism in different parts of  the British Empire during World War 1 truculently declared that he had not become the First Minister of the Crown in order to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire.’ It is therefore interesting that it was another conservative Prime Minister, the velvet-smooth Harold Macmillan, who stood up almost 20 eventful years later in the Parliament Building in Cape Town to acknowledge that a wind of change was blowing through Africa and that the aspiration for freedom from foreign domination had become irresistible. In other words, he was admitting that the days of the British Empire were numbered.

It is therefore not surprising that the sixties was the decade of Africa independence. One after the other, Africa countries which for many years were under British suzerainty composed brand new national anthems, designed flags, and took their places in the United Nations as independent states. The British Empire was liquidated in the space of a few years.

Macmillan’s speech was directed at the white South African legislator because he could see that those unimaginative Boers, living in their make-believe world of white supremacy, had not been sufficiently alive to their situation to perceive that their days of privilege were soon to be consigned to the pages of history. His brilliant speech, however, fell on stony ground. Rather than build a bridge to their black countrymen, the whites of South Africa found it expedient to enact more draconian laws and make life absolutely impossible for black people in the land of their birth.

Today, 30 hard and unfortunate years after “Supremacies” momentous speech, the blacks of South Africa are still a colonized people, they are still a people who have no voice in the affairs of their country,. They are still people who are rigorously excluded from the enjoyment of the succulent fruits of their labor on the fruitful soil (and subsoil) of their native land. They are still people who are somehow are not recognized as people in the land of their birth. But above all these, they are a people who are longing for freedom with the fierce intensity which can only be incomprehensible to those who did no more than push down a rotten door to attain what they have taken to calling independence.

The situation in South Africa transcends the irritation of segregation and marriage across the color line. Black people are still well and truly under the lash. Their labor in the mines, factories, and farms is appropriated by the minority whites who thereby enjoy a fantastic standard of living. It is this economic domination that is in fact responsible for apartheid and there can be no freedom for our brothers and sisters in South Africa until their dire economic plight is ameliorated by a hefty dose of positive discrimination.

De Klerk is no fool and he is willing to do away with all the petty annoyances of apartheid, knowing full well that his kith and kin in the West who is any case have never been convinced about the moral depravity of apartheid would seize the opportunity offered by his cosmetic reforms to give him their unalloyed support. It is not in the interest of Western capital that the blacks in South Africa are truly free as this will lead to a domination of the enormous profits generated for them by the unpaid labor of the blacks in bondage.

There is no denying the fact that some changes are going on in South Africa, but those changes are no more than skin-deep. It seems that the more things seem to change, the more they remain the same and there is now very little cause to rejoice or even contemplate the future with any degree of optimism. When other countries in Africa became independent, the colonialists went home leaving the natives to their own devices. In many countries, the departure of the white was a signal for extremely violent maneuvering for power and position as was most tragically the case in Congo and even Nigeria.  As for South African, the colonialists are going nowhere, as indeed they have nowhere to go and so apart from the squabbles between the blacks, there will be totally selfish interventions from the former colonialists.  The mixture concocted is thus far too rich for it not to be dangerously explosive.

Today, 30 years after Macmillan’s speech in Cape Town, another wind of change is blowing through our mighty continent. All over Africa, people are getting up, girding their loins, and demanding real freedom from despotism, one-party rule, neo-colonialism, and those other conditions which have made a mockery of their independent status. It is now quite clear to Africans that the independence that they celebrated with such pomp and pageantry those 30 years ago was a sham, a disgraceful pretense, not worth the flag or the anthem which are its symbols. It is hoped that with the coming of democracy to Africa, we would, at last, be able to make real progress on the economic front.

Africa is poor today because her independence up to now has not included economic freedom. This is the kind of independence that de Klerk is offering to the blacks. True, we may soon see black legislators in Cape Town but you can be sure that real power will continue to be in the hands of the whites. South Africa now appears to be a rich country, but in real terms, she is not richer than Nigeria. Angola, Mozambique, and many other African countries. South Africa appears to be rich only because the blacks and colored populations are forcibly excluded from sharing in the wealth of the land. If this anomalous situation is ever redressed, we are sure to find that South Africa is truly a Third World country with a Third World economy.

De Klerk may be as courageous as he is touted but he is hardly a fool and he knows that his political career will cease the moment his white constituents perceive that he is making real changes. Even the white extremist who appears to be opposed to de Klerk are performing a vital function.  They are giving the impression that changes are going on, but I won’t be surprised if, in fact, they are under orders from the same authorizers supporting de Klerk’s so-called reforms.

Some Africans may already be booking their flight to South Africa to cavort in the swimming pools which I hear are part of every house in suburban Johannesburg. But they must be careful. For in South Africa, it is not yet Uhuru!

QUESTIONS FROM THE PASSAGE

Identify from the list below those sentences that state facts and those which offer an opinion. Indicate the level of acceptance of the facts – are they generally accepted to be true or are they based on incomplete information (hearsay)?  Assess the validity of the opinions. How complete is the information upon which it is based? How logical is the argument from which it is derived?

1.     The blacks of South Africa is a colonized people.

2.     They have no voice in the affairs of their country.

3.     They are not recognized as people in the land of their birth.

4.     Their labor in the mines and factories and farms is appropriated by the minority whites.

5.     Minority whites enjoy a fantastic standard of living as a result.

6.     Swimming pools are part of every home in suburban Johannesburg.

7.     The colonialists are going nowhere.

8.     They have nowhere to go.

9.     Black people are still well and truly under the lash.

10.                        It is this economic domination which is in fact responsible for apartheid.

11.                        Africa is poor today because her independence up to now has not included economic freedom.

12.                        Real power will continue to be in the hands of the whites.

13.                        De Klerk is no fool.

14.                        Even the white extremists who appear to be opposed to de Klerk are performing a vital function.

15.                        I won’t be surprised if they are under orders from the same authorities supporting de Klerk’s so-called reforms.

By

Eguriase S. M. Okaka.