221 CHRONICLESnpractically disappeared. (To all intents and purposes, thoughnnot yet legally and politically, the Blacks in social mattersnenjoy the same status as the “Colored” in the UnitednStates.) Any Black who has the necessary gray matter andnthe will to work hard can “make it,” and many of them do.nIn 1987 a new law provided equal pay for equal work. InnJohannesburg, Durban, or Capetown there are five-starnhotels where you can see a Black (and not just a Colored ornIndian) clientele eating sumptuous dinners attended bynwhite waiters. There is a South African Indian ambassadornat the European Community, a Colored ambassador fromnSouth Africa at the Hague, and Black hostesses in the SouthnAfrican Aidine.nThe creation of a Black middle (if not upper) class irksnthe Communist dominated African National Congresn(ANC) extraordinarily; they call affluent, literate, intelligentnBlacks “props of a White bourgeoisie” because the ANC’snaim is, after all, a race-class revolution — a collectivist revoltnof the “masses” driven by hate-nurtured envies. The Blacknwho has property and hope for a materially secure future,nwho, in addition, realizes that he has a genuine stake in freenenterprise (which the Bolsheviks of the ANC would destroy)nnaturally does not follow the call for an upheaval thatnwould deprive him of everything he has built up. It isnheartening to see how, with the vanishing of the purelyntribal spirit, the Blacks in the urban areas show a surprisingnaptitude for small business. The same is true of the Colored.n(During my last stay in South Africa, I had lunch with thenColored boss of an architectural firm with 18 employees,nthree of them White).nSegregationism did, however, inspire the creation ofn”Bantu Homelands.” (Recently, the ethnologically correctnterm “Bantu” has been dropped in favor of “Black.”) Butnthe yellowish Paleo-Africans are not Black and have nonsemi-autonomous “homelands,” which some journalistsnnamed “Bantustans” as if they were Iranian provinces. Inn1970 I visited two of them. The self-government of thesenhomelands does not always work to the satisfaction ofneverybody concerned (although they have cost an immensenamount of tax money since the original White and Indiannowners of land had to be bought off for considerable sums.)nYet the “homelands” were never by any means barrennstretches (like so many Indian reservations in the USA) butnmainly fertile areas.nWe have to distinguish between homelands like thenrather successful Kwazulu (“Land of the Zulu”) or Qwaqwa,nand independent states like Ciskei, Transkei, Venda,nand Bophuthatswana. Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi, thenleader of the Zulus (a warrior tribe emphatically free ofninferiority complexes) and also of the predominantiy Zulun”Inkatha Party” (“Inkatha” is Zulu for the contraption thatnwomen use to carry burdens on their heads) is engaged innthe “Indaba” (Dialogue) movement with the leaders of thenProvince of Natal. All sides of the “Indaba” are looking for anspecial political and economic arrangement to bring thenfour races (and several languages) of Natal and Kwazuluntogether. New constitutional forms are discussed, removednfrom all minority-majority thinking which often so fatefullyncolors democracy. A frightening example which I know wellnis Northern Ireland. There the Catholics cannot achievenpolitical power because they are a minority. Their answer isnnnterrorism which provokes an equally brutal counterterrorism.nA one-man, one-vote South Africa would become anmulticolored and much more murderous Northern Ireland.nCiskei and Transkei, for their part, are not Zulu homelandsnbut independent Xhosa states that had to be creatednseparately since the inhabitants, two different Xhosa tribesnwith few mutual sympathies, could not be brought under ancommon roof (A narrow “white” strip separates them.)nCiskei and Transkei, therefore, have different laws, governments,nand traditions. A French university lecturer,nAntonini, became involved in a terrorist conspiracy withnTranskei connections. He refused to testify before the courtnbecause this would lead to ostracism by his friends innFrance. As a result he received a four-year prison term.nThereupon a mob devastated the South African embassy innParis since France (as a loyal UN member) does notnrecognize Ciskei, and no Ciskei representation can be foundnon the Seine. The French government therefore had to payndamages to South Africa. Idiocy rules the world.nBophuthatswana (peoples by the Tswana) is probably thenmost successful of these new nations. It is a highly streamlinedncountry with a super-modern capital, Mmabatho.nThere, as in the other new nations, no racial barriers and nonremnants of apartheid exist whatsoever. I had a wonderfulntime in Mmabatho with elegant hotels and racially mixednswimming pools. Unfortunately, it should also be mentionednthat the four new states are not recognized by thenUN and its hapless members — out of sheer spite andnvenom. According to the “majority” UN view of thesenSouthern African free states, their freedom and independencenhave been “donated” to them by the Republic ofnSouth Africa, which, as we are ceaselessly told, is the Devil’snden.nAt present, there are no additional plans for either morenhomelands or independent states. Rather, the idea is to keepnSouth Africa together — above all as an economic giant.n(Chief Buthelezi and the king of Kwazulu rejected the ideanof total independence!) There is a king of Zululand with thennice name of Goodwill Zwelitini. He is highly revered bynthe Zulus. Chief Buthelezi is something like his primenminister.nSwaziland and Lesotho, both entirely independent, alsonhave kings. Although these new states, former Britishncolonies, provide the Blacks with an opportunity of learningnto govern themselves, within the Republic of South Africanitself they have to make efforts to become increasinglynWesternized. This, indeed, is most often also their own aim.nWhat is the basic South African problem? Not sonsurprisingly, its root lies in the still continuing worldwidenmental fixation with democracy — seen as political equalitynand majority rule. Let us imagine South Africa as anhereditary, absolute monarchy like Brazil in 1830, with anlarge black and brown minority, but no real race problem. Inwould not maintain, however, having visited Brazil sixntimes, that in Brazil color meant or means nothing at all.nWhen the Austrian Consul in Bahia invited me to a dinnernin the Yacht Club and I asked him whether it had blacknmembers, he denied it very much. But at the club therenwere a large number of dark gentlemen and ladies, and Inexpressed my astonishment. “They are not members,” henexplained, “but friends of members.”n