Discussions of the future of apartheid generally assume that South Africa must remain a homogenous “unitary state.” This assumption not only presents a paralyzing dilemma (either democracy or apartheid), but also a prescription for continued social turmoil, if not outright civil war. A unitary state is a “winner take all” state—if there are indeed only two alternatives, then there is simply no hope for a just and stable settlement. Almost no one defends the injustices of apartheid; on the other hand, as if any additional evidence were needed, the degeneration of the Philippines should be sufficient argument against crusading democracy.
In After Apartheid, libertarian authors Kendall and Louw dispense with the “unitary state” presumption. In place of “one man, one vote” they suggest a system that would enable citizens to express their political will at several different levels: in short, “one man, many votes.” On the economic front, the authors advocate deregulation, removal of prohibitive standards requirements, and a general “devolution” of decision-making to the private sector. Finally, they insist that all apartheid laws must be repealed immediately.
After sketching the history of apartheid, as well as outlining South Africa’s current political and economic landscape, Kendall and Louw propose a canton system of decentralized and depoliticized administration, following a Swiss model. Under this system, the federal government would be strictly limited and constitutionally defined, leaving education, transportation, judiciary, regulation, etc. at commune level—with the cantons. Each canton would have its own legislative body, and perhaps even its own constitution. The residents of each canton would determine their own social and legal arrangements; everything from communism to pure free enterprise to racial domination would be permitted within the cantons, but none would be federally imposed. Freedom of movement would be guaranteed by the constitution and enforced by the federal government, so that no one would be made to live under an offensive system.
This is a remarkably fresh and hopeful book because it not only explodes the widespread mythology about South Africa (e.g., that apartheid is an aberration of capitalism), but also proposes a solution that has a genuine chance of success. One indication of the potential of the canton proposal may be gleaned from the book’s dust jacket, which carries endorsements from South African leaders including Winnie Mandela, Zulu Chief Buthelezi, and the late Alan Paton.
The authors’ analysis, however, is flawed in several respects. While admitting the reality of the Marxist threat and of Communist influence in several of the black political parties, Kendall and Louw tend to underestimate the role of Communism in, for example, the ANC. Since the authors are proposing a solution for the internal strife of South Africa, and not looking at the situation in geopolitical terms, this oversight, though significant, is not fatal.
Also, except for a few passing references, the authors ignore the role of the Christian Church in South African politics and society. In a nation as Christian as South Africa, religious institutions must play a central role in any effort to dismantle apartheid. Unless there are profound changes in Christian attitudes on race issues (and these changes have been taking place), any political or economic reform, no matter how sensible in itself, is just so much tinkering with the machinery. On the other hand, if the churches can provide moral and theological moorings for the canton proposal (as they have in the past for apartheid), and if they can avoid the perilous extremes of intransigent traditionalism and revolutionary liberationism, there may yet be hope for this troubled nation.
[After Apartheid: The Solution for South Africa, by Frances Kendall and Leon Louw (San Francisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies) 253 pp., $17.95]
Leave a Reply