A Dying Ideal: Non-racialism and Political Parties in Post-Apartheid South Africa
Dr Fiona Anciano
(Political Studies, University of the Western Cape)[1]
Non-racialism as a concept has a rich and contentious history in South African politics.’ For many it was a core feature of the struggle against apartheid, uniting a range of forces fighting for a society free from racial discrimination. Indeed it is a central tenant in South Africa’s Constitution, forming a core part of the ‘Founding Provisions’ of the country. However, there is widespread contestation over what the concept entails, both theoretically and in practical terms. This article examines the concept of non-racialism primarily through the lens of South Africa’s largest political opposition party, the Democratic Alliance (DA), but relates its approach to that of the African National Congress (ANC). How has the DA conceptualised and instrumentalised the vision of non-racialism, historically and in post-apartheid South Africa? This paper argues that neither the DA (nor the ANC)has been able to do so coherently; the ideal of non-racialism is a fracture that deeply divides both parties and that this is a division that originated historically, during apartheid, in both parties. The paper concludes that there is a clear shift inhow the DA envisioned non-racialism during apartheid and how the party instrumentalises the concept today; this change echoes to some extent the experiences of the ANC. Both parties now equate non-racialism to multi-racialism, one the one hand, and a (interim) racialisation of politics on the other. This begs the question of whether non-racialism, as conceived in the early days of the Congress alliance, is a dying ideal.
Understanding Non-racialism: The Definition of a Contested Concept
Race is a central fissure that runs through the core of South African political society. Although there are many concepts one can use to interrogate the importance of race and its place in South African history, the idea of non-racialism is perhaps primary among these. For many anti-apartheid activists, such as Ahmed Kathrada, the concept of non-racialism sat at the heart of the ANC’s anti-apartheid struggle.[2] Non-racialismbecame a central feature of the ANC after the adoption of the 1955 Freedom Charter, which stated that ‘South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white’.[3] The history of non-racialism, however, has a longer past, rooted in the relations between different (race based) anti-apartheid Congresses formed between 1894 and 1938, all of which worked together over decades to overcome apartheid and, in doing so, fostered ‘non-racial’ relations. Today non-racialism in enshrined in South Africa’s Constitution as one of the key values on which the state is founded.[4]
The concept of non-racialism however, has no fixed meaning, although attempts have been made to explain how the idea is defined and applied in South Africa.[5]For some the concept has lost meaning, ideologically and practically, it is ‘blurrily aspirational’ but has no socio-political or economic project driving it.[6] For others non-racialism is seen as still contributing to an emancipatory project. Non-racialism relates to the essentialisation of race (as race has a profound presence in history and current social relations), which is necessary in order to achieve a state of being where race does not exist.[7]This state of being is ontologically related to the idea that within the strict meaning of non-racialism, there are no such things as biologically or genetically-determined, and objectively verifiable, meaningful categories called races. In other words races are products of social construction and as such we can overcome these social constructions.[8]From this perspective non-racialism is (whether today or in the long term)about rejecting race thinking and racialism. Race is a social construct; ‘biologically it is absolute nonsense but you have to get to the point where it is socially nonsense as well’[9].This does not mean however, that one must deny the effects of racism. Here ‘racialism’ refers to the idea that ‘there are heritable characteristics, possessed by members of our species, which allow us to divide them into small sets of races’.[10]
For most South Africans it is common reality that race relations are embedded in everyday thinking and experience. Another interpretation of non-racialism, then, refers to the idea of non-racialisation, where racialisation is the interpretation of events, discourses and motivations in terms of race.[11]You can support the idea of non-racialism and still hold onto the importance of accepting and embracing multiple identities. This bondsthe idea of non-racialism to that of multiracialism. There are different interpretations of multiracialism[12]but in the South African context multiracialism is equated by Maréto a society of more than one race where it is perceived that there are essential differences between these race groups.[13] Although differences are recognisable through racial appearance, multiracialism does not embrace the idea that one race is superior to another. Those South Africans who support the idea of multiracialism implicitly embrace the idea of socially constructed racial categories, however, in some cases they see this as a step towards achieving a society that looks beyond race.[14]This paper will address how the DA relates to these approaches to non-racialism: are they non-essentialist, seeing race as a social construct, multi-racial or a combination of both, and how does this related to the original flag holders of non-racialism, the ANC?
The Democratic Alliance and Race: Historical Roots
The DA, through its predecessors the Progressive Party (PP), Progressive Reform Party, Progressive Federal Party and Democratic Party (DP) has deep and somewhat controversial roots in South African political society. Early incantations of the party operated under the apartheid regime, while opposing apartheid laws. This created a 'white' opposition towards apartheid that manifested into a more conventional liberal opposition to the ANC after the transition to a constitutional democracy. The party continued to evolve through its electoral battles and through building relationships with other political entities. The figure below shows the evolution of the DA from apartheid roots to its contemporary formation.
Figure 1: The evolution of the Democratic Alliance
The parties historically did not expressly refer to the concept of non-racialism and so their approach to the idea will largely be teased out through interrogating their political and economic policies. Through the multiple twists and turns in the historical development of the DA, there is one clear strand however: all the parties broadly supported the ideology of liberalism. Understanding how the precursors to the DA interpreted and applied liberal ideology is essential to understanding their relationship to the idea of non-racialism.
Non-racialism as Universal Equality
One of the earliest ways in which the Progressive Party (PP) addressed the concept of non-racialism was through its approach to constitutionalism and a Bill of Rights. In keeping with core classical liberal values the party was the first in the apartheid parliament to produce a new comprehensive constitutional model under the guidance of the 1960’s Molteno Commission. The Commission believed enforced separation (and enforced integration) between races was undesirable and that ‘free individual choice in all matters of social intercourse’ should be encouraged.[15] An important aspect of the Commission relating to non-racialism was its support for a Bill of Rights[16]. After the Motleno Commission ‘a Bill of Rights became the political darling of the liberal cause’[17]. In this reading the PP and DP clearly rejected discrimination towards non-whites that would impact on their individual human rights.
The liberal idea that non-racialism is about rejecting racialism resonates to a large extent with one way in which the ANC historically conceptualised non-racialism; that of transcending ascribed racial differences. Here the concept is generally depicted as part of a unifying and nation-building project. Early statements and speeches of Luthuli recurrently calling for a ‘common society’ support the idea that the ANC viewed non-racialism as central to a universalised, generic humanism[18]. As the head of a national liberation movement the ANC was, according to Pallo Jordan an advocate of an inclusive South African nationhood, rooted in the ‘universalistic, liberatory outlook of modernity’ and the realities and imperatives of accommodation of all South African races, given they shared a common territory.[19]In this line of thinking, it is argued non-racialism was the ‘unbreakable thread’ between the ANC and other alliance members and that the demand for a non-racial South Africa was the common ground that united a wide range of forces for change, including the ANC and its alliance partners. The goal of the struggle was a democratic, restructured society where people are not differentiated according to racial criteria.[20]
Documents such as the 1991 Constitutional Principles for a Democratic South Africa reflect the values attributed to non-racialism of unity, equality and non-essentialisation of race, where it argues that, ‘A non-racial South Africa means a South Africa in which all the artificial barriers and assumptions which kept people apart and maintained domination, are removed. In its negative sense, non-racial means the elimination of all colour bars. In positive terms it means the affirmation of equal rights for all’.[21]Thus, in one reading, ANC anti-apartheid politics was characterised by a universalist orientation which focussed on equal dignity for all individuals, regardless of real or imagined differences.[22] These values attributed to non-racialism indicated an aspiration by the ANC to transcend recognised and ascribed racial differences. Indeed MacDonald argues that the ANC’s non-racialism‘affirms liberal democratic values…and rejects the right of the state to impose group identities on citizens’.[23]
Returning to the PP, its support for universalised non-racialismin a Bill of Rights was, however, not uncontested as the Molteno Commission called for a system of qualified franchiserather than universal franchise. The franchise policy proposed giving the vote to all South Africans over the age of 21 provided they met minimum educational, income or property qualifications. A supplementary voters’ role would be in place for those who did not qualify but who could pass a literacy test in one of the official languages[24] (being the predominantly white mother tongue languages of English or Afrikaans). The majority of Commissioners were primarily concerned with the threat of African nationalism.[25]They agreed that all ‘politically conscious’ black South Africans demanded adult suffrage, but argued that this was not because they supported the values of ‘personal freedom’, ‘the rule of law’ and ‘ordered progress’ that ‘Western democracy was conceived in’, but rather because they were inspired by ‘non-white nationalism’ which would ultimately be ‘totalitarian in its logical outcome’[26]. In supporting a limited franchise that effectively allowed almost all whites, but only selected non-whites to vote, the party yielded to a fear of African nationalism and arguably promoted the idea that some races are inherently inferior to others. Although the policy did demonstrate a partial rejection of apartheid ideology the idea of a qualified franchise was an anathema to black political movements and it was roundly rejected by them[27]. Indeed, according to one commentator:
The constitutional and franchise proposals adopted by the party in 1960 and 1962 were conservative and racist. Little notice was taken of the dissenting opinions of the black Commission members…The party was concerned with making the minimum concessions to buy off black protests and defuse the nationalist struggle while appeasing white prejudice.[28]
By 1978, following the advent of the PFP, the party changed its stance to support universal adult franchise. The PFP explained that political rights must be shared by all South African citizens and those systems that ‘could lead to racial domination are rejected’. It clearly stated that statutory or administrative discrimination on the grounds of race was unacceptable. In particular PFP leader, Van Zyl Slabbert described how the party was ‘fundamentally opposed’ to legal measures that prevented different race groups from voluntarily associating together.[29]The party saw the need for a break with the ideologies of the past, both liberal individualist and racist, and the adoption of new ideological forms.[30]
This stance begs the question, however, of why the parties continued to operate within a racially unequal legislative system. In its early formation the PP declared parliament as the main arena for its struggle. This choice by the PP led to many challenges and inconsistencies for the party as it had to adapt its programmes to suit the wishes of at least a portion of the white electorate.[31] In answering the question of whether participation in the apartheid political system, specifically parliament, conferred legitimacy on apartheid, liberal historian David Welsh argues that parliament ‘provided a platform, and media coverage ensured that both the critique of apartheid and the prospect of a more democratic and open society were kept before the public’, and that ultimately fundamental change to the system did eventually come through Parliament, (which he clarifies in no way diminishes the role played by extra-parliamentary movements).[32] Regardless of justifications, working within parliament could be seen to legitimise systemic racism, and certainly challenged a universalised interpretation of non-racialism.
Indeed because of their role in the political system the party was unable to maintain the multi-racial party membership it had initially supported.[33] In 1968 the Prohibition of Political Interference Act precluded different racial groups from being part of the same organisation.[34] The PP decided to remain politically functional as a whites-only party, however in 1978 the PFP explained that once the Act was repealed any non-white person who had previously been a member wouldautomatically regain full membership of the party. In theory then, the PFP supported non-racial membership, but this was never tested in practice until after the party became the DP.[35] If, as the Liberal Party did, it felt multi-racial membership was non-negotiable it would have to have left formal parliamentary politics, which the party chose not to do. At this stage then, non-racialism was, at best, a theoretical aspiration of the PFP while racism was, in reality, practiced by the party.
Economic redress and non-racialism
A key area to address when unpacking the PP, PFP and DP’s approach to non-racialism is their economic policy, as this points to the substantive way in which the parties’ intended to address the racially framed economic policies of apartheid. The PP, PFP and DP had a close association with big business[36] with critics claiming it was concerned about preserving white economic privilege.[37] The PFP supported liberal values of state neutrality and separation from capital. Capitalism and the free market should be allowed to flourish, and this would lead to the evolution of equal opportunity for all races. The party believed that the role of government is to distribute wealth, not to create it, as this was the role of business, but that all citizens have the right to an equal opportunity to share in the system of free economic enterprise.[38]By the 1980s the PFP may have been a party committed to non-racial values but it did not focus on a need for redistributive economic policies. From this perspective it could be argued that the party’s economic policies supported a universalised,non-racialisation understanding of non-racialism, in that they disregarded racial categories, seeing only individuals in a capitalist economy. However, their economic polices provided little sense of how to ‘level the playing field’ in order to create equal economic opportunities for all races. The party’s economic stance did not directly address structural racism in South Africa.Indeed, this points to future challenges the DA would face in its approach to race and economic redress.
This view is in in direct contrast to a second way in which the ANC conceptualised non-racialism during apartheid: a class-based perspective, which argued that achieving non-racialism required the racialisation of economic policy. For the ANC, non-racialism developed in tandem with policies dealing with the national question[39] and strategies such as the National Democratic Revolution (NDR) and a growing class analysis of apartheid. Jordan explains that the ANC has always maintained that democracy, national liberation and non-racialism are inseparable; however, if democracy is to advance national liberation it necessitates the empowerment of the most historically oppressed, being Africans, Coloureds and Indians.[40] In essence the NDR entails the ‘liberation of Africans in particular and black people in general from political and economic bondage’.[41] Alongside political change it was recognized that economic equality must be addressed in order to facilitate social transformation. There was a perceived need to go beyond legal equality to give non-racialism real meaning and an understanding that achieving racial equality (in the path to non-racialism) required fundamental structural social change.[42] For some ANC thinkers there was recognition that both attitudinal and institutional racism are functions of the development of South African capitalism in a colonial setting, which then found resonance within society at large.[43] An institutionalised racial hierarchy was a consequence of productive relations structured and determined by ‘colonialism of a special type’. To overcome this institutional racism empowerment of blacks in general and Africans in particular required the ‘radical restructuring of key aspects of the economy so as to destroy the material basis of the White racist power structure’. Cachalia alludes to this thinking during the liberation struggle as ‘anti-racist racism’ - as a path that can lead to the elimination of racial difference.[44]This relates directly to the understanding of non-racialism as an emancipatory project.