Rainbow Nation: Apartheid Remnants seen in the Housing Sector

In 1994, amidst the collective celebration and lingering animosity, Desmond Tutu called out for a final end against the racial discordiance. For a unifying theme to end country-wide suffering. For a “rainbow nation”.

This idyllic concept was meant to incorporate all races into a unified nation, after the end of the abhorrent system of racism and oppression that had lingered since the end of World War II. There were, however, some stark oversights with this idea.

Transforming an oppressive, racist state into a democratic nation does not happen overnight. When the apartheid regime fell in 1994, Nelson Mandela chose to act courageously and take on one of the biggest problems bred by the systematic inequality of the past: housing. Mandela was an ANC party member, which has been the ruling party since his presidency and has supported housing construction in the form of Reconstruction and Development Program housing (RDPs). The ANC created various programs to create free housing for the previously displaced communities, but their housing production is slowing down and many believe that their politicians are becoming corrupt by using the promises of housing creation for political gains.

This has been seen in the Durban area extensively, particularly in the Kennedy Road settlement, featured in the film Dear Mandela. Many feel the ANC no longer stands for the people and that Mandela’s vision has fallen short. This has prompted many other parties to discuss the possibility of land redistribution. While the ANC has created many houses for individual citizens, the divisions cut by the apartheid government run too deeply for a simple solution.

The housing sector is a problem in many countries around the world, but for South Africa, a country which experienced forced removals and land seizures dictated in law, this problem encompasses many others. During the apartheid era, many non-white racial groups were forcefully evicted from their homes and moved into townships which were essentially glorified informal settlements, to make way for the expanding area zoned “white”. This white zoning comprised the inner cities and surrounding wealthy suburbs. This meant that non-whites were legally not allowed to live in areas with the most economic and social opportunities, such as healthcare, education, and transportation, or be reimbursed for their stolen land.

This problem has been present in the region of South Africa since the Dutch colonizers first touched down in 1652. It took its most tangible, legislative form in 1913 with the Native Lands Act. This act, passed in an election which only allowed roughly ten percent of the population to vote, allocated only seven percent of the arable land in South Africa to individuals of African descent and the best land to the white Afrikaners and British. The issue of land only seemed to worsen after this. After the “Homelands Act” was passed in 1970, non-white citizens were forced into “Bantustans”, which are rural areas far from the central city and its economic opportunities, or into townships which were basically government-created slums. The purpose of these townships was to keep a labor force near the city to complete the jobs deemed “undesirable”; this meant mining in Johannesburg, and sugarcane farming in Durban. In Johannesburg, these townships were clearly zoned by race, promoted by the Group Areas Act of 1950; however, in Durban, I am seeing that quite a different story played out.

Durban lies in a region aptly named Kwazulu-Natal, the former meaning “place of the Zulu”. This region has been home to the largest ethnic group in South African history: the Zulu. The Zulu people are traditionally seen as courageous warriors, which prompts a strong sense of pride. The nation of Zulu was officially united into the Union of South African in 1910, but they maintain a king and a strong presence along this eastern coast. During the apartheid era, the area that most people of Zulu descent inhabited, roughly thirty percent of the Kwazulu region, was labeled as a Bantustan and was “given” to the previous king for distribution. This meant trouble for the post-apartheid land distribution crises.

Now that apartheid has ended and land distribution and “re-zoning” is on the table, those of Zulu descent are becoming anxious. The zoning agreement made during apartheid is known as the Ingonyama Trust. This trust was formed giving ten people the trust ownerships of the historic land. This trust comprises three million hectares of land, which is subdivided and given to Zulu descendants by local chiefs in a hierarchical ordering. This conflicts with the new plans of many political parties in South Africa and their ideas to collectivize all land into government possession and redistribute it equally.

This idea of redistribution is not new and it is primarily desirable due to the fact that ninety percent of the country’s wealth is owned by approximately ten percent of the population: the white population. In 1994 the white South African population also owned approximately eighty percent of the country’s land, which has since dropped to seventy-three percent in 2010. These statistics clearly demonstrate why land distribution must be one of the first steps for this resilient nation to take. Correspondingly, parties such as the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) wish to take a more socialist approach and nationalize land and then distribute equally; this includes the Zulu homeland trust.

In June of this year, a parliament spokesperson and assumed EFF supporter, Khusela Diko, made public comments about disbanding the Ingonyama Trust. The current Zulu king, Goodwill Zwelithini, responded in turn by urging his fellow people of Zulu descent to protect themselves and their land. The newly democratically elected president and ANC party member, Cyril Ramaphosa, was forced to meditate tensions and promise the trust would not be endangered during his term. Predictably, this has not alleviated tensions. Furthermore, by alienating a potential solution, this has made EFF and land-redistribution supporters even more polarized against the ruling party politics.

This is the current state of the housing situation today. Fortunately, it is not the final state. As my eyes are opened to this incredibly complex environment, I can see the problems along with the endless amount of work that politicians, city planners, and social advocates are doing each and every day. For the most part, the population of this nation do want land ownership based on equality and modern development, however, most want the needs of all people to be met efficiently and fairly. I believe that the essential core of the lingering divide is that positions quickly become polarized. This is seen particularly between the ANC and the EFF or, more relevant to my time here in Durban, Abahlali baseMjondolo. Once an individual is labeled as believing certain things and dwelling in a particular camp, they are endowed with preconceived judgements and their views are not heard or respected.

This is not a phenomenon unique to South Africa. In the United States, we can see this each and every day with the astoundingly ineffective polarized political parties. Democrats and Republicans fight simply for the end of fighting and nothing is accomplished. In South Africa, I have seen, there is much more open dialogue surrounding issues that affect all members of society, without the religious diversions and tangents that seem to permeate popular news outlets in the states.

South Africa faces many challenges in some ways synonymous to those posed at other democratic nations worldwide. The main difference here is that this resilient nation is taking active steps to correct and memorialize the inequalities of the past. For example, nearly every major city in South Africa has at least one apartheid museum and several additional memorials. This propagates the memory of this destructive time period, so that even the new generation of “born-frees” will remember their history and legacy of resilience, so that the same atrocities and land distribution inequalities are not repeated. In America, we have painted over an entire time period. Until December of 2017, over one hundred and fifty years after the abolishment of slavery, the very first museum dedicated to education about the horrors of slavery and in memorial to those lost during this abhorrent period and practice was created. For over one hundred and fifty years, and in many southern regions to this day, the pre-civil war era was depicted nostalgically as a rural, old South era full of adventure, southern belles, and genteel culture. This allowed for racism to live on in the population and for unconscious biases to be formed.

I have learned many things during my time in South Africa, and one of the most important is this ideal of education and remembrance. South Africans have cultivated this beautiful, if not challenging to attain, idea of a rainbow nation after the horrible divisions created under the apartheid system. They could have chosen to alienate the oppressive population, or even to remain divided. Instead, they decided to come together to unite all races and classes behind an idea of unity and growth through education, housing and land distribution , and dedication to improvement.

These are some of the many noble ideas that I would like to see more of in the United States. I cannot wait to see what other new, inspiring discoveries that I make in this incredibly durable country!

Best,
Mackenna