Between Acknowledgement and Ignorance:
How white South Africans have dealt with the apartheid pastby Gunnar Theissen
Summary
Challenging the Apartheid Mind
As South Africa emerges from apartheid, white South Africans' attitudes to the past and to the new democracy can be expected to undergo radical changes. This report attempted to understand the nature of these changes with reference to similar changes in post-World War II Germany, a review of recent opinion surveys conducted among white South Africans, and new findings from a survey conducted by the Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR).
In a pluralistic society attitudes towards the past and opinions about contemporary political problems do differ, but despite this there is still a need for a basic acceptance of important democratic values and institutions, to make the dream of a "rainbow nation" a reality. A certain common understanding of the apartheid past and its human rights violations is very significant for the interaction of people from different cultural groups in everyday life. How can interpersonal trust increase across former conflict lines, if one side ignores the fate of the other? And how can reconciliation take place, if past discrimination is not accepted as principally wrong and evil?
In West Germany the adjustment of the political culture to democratic values and a critical understanding of the National Socialist (NS) past took time. The American dream of re-educating Germany was only partly successful. Only twenty years after the end of World War II, most Germans accepted that their country had been responsible for the outbreak of the war. During the first decades of the Federal Republic many Germans still believed that "National Socialism was a good idea, badly carried out". While many former war criminals and NS officials were re-integrated into the West-German society with the consent of most Germans during the 1950s, a lack of empathy and support for the victims of the NS regime and the holocaust prevailed. Although the German political culture of today has dramatically changed, especially with the rise of new political generations, problematic historical perceptions are still encountered. These revisionist positions are closely linked with a secondary anti-Semitism. Jews are hated by certain sections of the society because they remind them about the NS past, a past which many people want to forget. The German experience shows that the desire to lay the past to rest is often linked to the glorification of the past authoritarian order and deep racial prejudice.
The apartheid regime was not only repeatedly supported by most white South Africans at the polls, but survey research during the 1980s confirms that the former government could rely on the consent of most white South Africans for their racial policies. White South Africans did not only turn a blind eye to the ongoing human rights violations, most of them even openly supported the way the security forces dealt with black opposition. Apartheid was not only a product of some 'mindless thinking' NP politicians, it was deeply entrenched in the mind of many ordinary white South Africans as well. The political responsibility for the apartheid past is broader than most white South Africans believe today. The view that most white South Africans have always been against apartheid is nothing but a myth.
While South Africa has adopted many challenging institutional changes to deal with the legacy of apartheid, the new democracy and its values still require more support by its citizens. The civil rights of the new constitution will only be safeguarded if they are accompanied by a growing human rights culture. The CSVR survey confirmed that many white South Africans have still to break mentally with the apartheid past. Although they have accepted some of the outer manifestations of the new South African patriotism, such as the new flag, they are on the whole not happy with the new political system, give primacy to ethnic and cultural over national concerns, oppose various measures aimed at bringing about greater socio-economic justice, continue to endorse a variety of racist sentiments, and show low human rights awareness. The danger persists that human rights violations are still tolerated by many South Africans as long as they are used for some superficial reasons like "combating crime".
Even if support for a "white" Volksstaat has dropped since 1993 and very few whites openly admit that they would like to reinstall apartheid, only 56% of all respondents conceded that the former political system was unjust. Many white South Africans still believe that Apartheid was merely a good idea, badly carried out, and every third respondent held the view that apartheid has done more good than harm to South Africa. Eighty-one percent claimed that there is no moral difference between an act committed in defence of the apartheid system and an act committed as part of the liberation struggle.
While other surveys indicated widespread support for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), especially from black South Africans, most white South Africans have a rather ambivalent or negative perception of it. Only younger white South Africans seem to be more open towards the TRC. Nearly every second respondent supported the view that "the TRC is an ANC-inspired witch hunt to discredit its enemies". Many white South Africans doubt the evidence broad before the commission.
Only few white South Africans feel that those people who supported the National Party in the past, have at least, to a certain degree, been responsible for the repression of black communities. Instead of reflecting their own participation in the former political system, the responsibility for the atrocities is mainly placed on the doorsteps of anti-apartheid activists and 'troublemakers' in black communities and to a lesser degree on the security forces and former NP governments.
Over fifty percent of all respondents rejected compensations for relatives and survivors of gross human rights violations and two out of three feel that it is better to forget about the past. Even if respondents claim, we should better concentrate on the future, this sentiment is unfortunately not supported by a stronger commitment to undo the past injustice in socio-economic terms.
On the other hand the survey confirmed a strong relationship between low human rights awareness, racism, denial of the past and negative attitudes towards the new democracy. Therefore there is good reason to believe that a certain section of the white South African population is locked up in a set of selfenforcing attitudes incompatible with the new democratic ethos. I have labelled this symptom a post-apartheid syndrome, as it is not easy to change a self-serving system of attitudes.
If it is accepted that a 'post-apartheid syndrome' exists among some white South Africans, several consequences follow. Firstly, the syndrome can be expected to contribute to the perpetuation of racism and a refusal to undo the legacy of apartheid. This is similar to what occurred in West Germany, where post-war anti-Semitism and a denial of the past, contributed to the rejection of compensation for the victims of Nazism. Instead of accepting the legacy of the past some persons engage in racist (or anti-Semitic) counterclaims, attribute guilt to the victims and white-wash their own role as ordinary citizens under the past regime. This can result in new racist prejudices being added to old ones. For example, blacks are portrayed as non reconciliatory, vengeful, and as using past suffering to excuse their current excesses.
The second consequence of the 'post-apartheid syndrome' is that those affected are unlikely to develop a stronger regard for human rights and democratic values. The message that people will be held accountable for human rights violations will not be heard by such people. While the TRC will probably contribute to the moral reconstruction of those who do not clearly reject it, it will probably fail to do so for people who can be said to have a 'post-apartheid syndrome'.
Thirdly, the post-apartheid syndrome can be expected to lead to a denial of the right to compensation and rehabilitation for the victims of apartheid. The payment of reparations will be seen as a misuse of government money and policies to combat socio-economic injustice will be rejected, as people who do not admit to the evil of the past, will not see the need for corrective action.
Finally, we may see the rise of an extensive revisionist historiography playing down the horrors of apartheid, denying its atrocities, and minimising the extent to which it was supported by white South Africans. It is hoped that the material collected together in this report will help to counteract this possibility. Having said this, there is still some hope for the future. Generally, respondents under the age of 30 were more receptive to the TRC, less inclined to denial, and less willing to lay the past to rest. We might therefore encounter a 'rainbow generation', a new generation of young white South Africans, who are less tempted to glorify the apartheid past and are willing to support non-racialism and democracy. It is the daughters and sons of the masters of the past, who hold the key to challenging and undoing the slavery of the apartheid mind.
