On another level, it is possible that the SA government genuinely felt that they had satisfactorily improved the lives of blacks. They refused to believe that they had politically based problems with such as the Soweto riots.
Therefore, though this statement was probably the general opinion of the white Afrikaner people and the state, in the view of human rights it is not necessarily reliable. The leader of a state may not speak reliably due to their vested interest in the matter.
2. In 1961 Dr. Verwoerd made a speech, in which he said,
“Apartheid is better described as a policy of good neighbours.”
Does this mean that apartheid was a policy of good neighbours?
Explain your answer using Sources A and B and your own knowledge.
These two sources have very different views on apartheid. Vorster’s speech in Source A tries to justify apartheid, as does his predecessor, Verwoerd in his statement. Both are trying to protect the SA government’s policy on apartheid, as it is under attack from the world. There had been increasing pressure on the SA government from the rest of the world, to change as demonstrated by countries surrounding it and to accept racial equality. In Source A, Vorster, like Verwoerd before him tries to get the rest of the world ‘off his back’ by insisting that, ‘South African Blacks are the best paid blacks in Africa.’
The cartoon in Source B, which accompanies the statement made by Verwoerd, obviously disagrees with the proclamation. It shows what was probably the reality of apartheid: a policy of unfair neighbours where the white rulers took advantage of the blacks who they felt were inferior to them. It also shows how the white SA government twisted what they said internationally. One point that the cartoon definitely succeeds in making is that the SA government’s apartheid policies were much more unequal than they made out.
3. Study Sources C and D.
Patrick Wall and R. W. Johnson give different interpretations of Soweto.
Why do you think their interpretations are so different?
Patrick Wall, a British MP and Chairman of the Anglo-South African Parliamentary Group, a group for British settlers in SA, wrote Source C. Although we do not know this politician’s particular views on apartheid, it is likely that, as a right-wing Conservative MP, he agreed with the apartheid policies and wanted to strengthen trade links with SA. He gives the impression that the government had greatly improved living conditions for black people, probably to strengthen his argument against the boycotting of SA goods. He uses words of contrast to distinguish the change between what Soweto was and had been. Illegal is the key word because it shows he has no sympathy for those who are breaking the law.
R. W. Johnson, a writer of many books about the history of SA, wrote Source D. His argument was very scathing of the SA government’s supposed concern for its black people, stating that the lack of improvements to Soweto showed negligence of the peoples’ health and welfare, ‘There is one hospital for what is one of the largest cities in Africa…the majority of children suffer from malnutrition.’ This extract suggests the extent of poverty in a way that appeals to the audience by promoting children’s deprivation and using emotive words.
Both quotes are in the form of factual information, which means that they are more believable to the reader. However, without investigating further into the extracts it is impossible to come to a firm conclusion about the state of Soweto at that time. The two articles do not contradict each other, but make selective use of statistics to give particular impressions.
4. Sources E and F give different accounts of the riots in Soweto in 1976.
Which of these two accounts is more likely to be correct?
Explain your answer using Sources E and F and your own knowledge.
As Source E was a white policeman it is likely that he had racist views. This fits in with his suggestion that black people were unintelligent in their spontaneous demonstrations and that their complaints had no political basis. This shows how naïve his opinions were and how he had no concern about the living of the SA black people. This source was written in hindsight having a dramatic effect on its reliability as it was written ten years after the riots. His memory could have evolved as his way of life changed, causing him to leave out aspects of the situation. His knowledge of what happened as the Soweto riots spread round the country could influence his opinions. In the newspaper he is talking about his remembering it “with a sense of regret.” This regret is not for the ‘tragic’ destruction of people and their protests, but that the police force did not do enough to stop the riots spreading.
A black photographer wrote Source F directly after the Soweto riots occurred, meaning it to be more reliable than Source E. However, there are other factors to consider. As it was a black photographer it is possible that he was biased and that he was exaggerating the incident. This could have been in plea to the rest of the world, hoping to provoke a reaction against the white SA government. However, with the emotive words used it gives the impression that this was the reality that was faced. The incident was already different to other demonstrations because it was vulnerable children who were involved and who were ‘unaware of the danger’ of being shot. This meant that the Soweto riots were unlike any others and the photographer’s account of this would appeal to many people in a poignant way.
By studying the evidence and my own knowledge I have come to the conclusion that, though both are using forms of selective memory, the more reliable of the two sources is Source F.
5. “The Soweto riots of 1976 were the result of an overreaction by the South African police.”
Do you agree or disagree with this interpretation?
Explain you answer using all the Sources and your own knowledge.
The Soweto riots were the results of many long and short term issues. However, some of these were more important than others in the triggering of the Soweto riots.
Blacks had been unhappy with the apartheid regime for a long time. The various aspects of it deliberately restricted their lives and enforced the white’s belief in their superiority. The government enforced the apartheid regime in 1948 by creating a strong security police force that used methods, which included banning, detention without trial, murder and press censorship and harassment. The bannings of certain organisations, such as the ANC, as well as often the inability to demonstrate meant that the black’s protest were often unable to be voiced which built up frustration. The ‘forced removal’ policy where the government moved blacks from the cities by the Group Areas Act was used to destroy ‘black spots’, places in white rural areas where blacks still lived. They were often moved to overcrowded townships like Soweto, which are described in Source D. Blacks were also not able to work where they wanted to, controlled by passes, and many were forced to leave their families to work in mines or factories.
Restricted curriculum for black school children was a major factor. Since apartheid began it had seemed that the white government intended black education to do nothing more than prepare them to be servants or unskilled workers. Even though they were provided with poorly qualified teachers, in decrepit buildings and large classes, they were still expected to pay for this inferior education. The trigger was when the state instructed half of black lessons to be in Afrikaans, the language of their oppressors. In addition to the education issues, the rising black unemployment and the abolishment of urban local authorities and replacement with local boards together combined to cause pupils to protest.
The extract states that “the Soweto riots of 1976 were the result of an overreaction by the SA police” whereas in fact only the tragic killing of children that was due to the overreacting and panicking of the police in charge. There were fundamental reasons for the riots, which culminated to form the outrage shown in the Soweto riots. Source E disagrees with this, but I think that the police themselves played no main part in the initial causing of the riots. The obstruction and killing of innocent children did cause newfound outrage, meaning the spreading of the Soweto riots to other parts of SA and the unbelieving indignation of people in other countries.
