Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

muriel_volestrangler

(102,920 posts)
10. But it was the Afrikaaner-based National Party that won power in 1948 that introduced apartheid
Sun Jan 12, 2025, 08:52 AM
Jan 12
J.B.M. Hertzog founded the National Party in 1914 in order to rally Afrikaners against what he considered the Anglicizing policies of the government of Louis Botha and Jan Christian Smuts. In 1924, after mild attempts to relax the colour bar, the Smuts government was defeated by a Nationalist-Labour coalition led by Hertzog, who in two terms sought to further emancipate South Africa from British imperial control and to provide greater “protection” for the whites from the Black Africans and for the Afrikaners from the British. From 1933 to 1939 Hertzog and Smuts joined a coalition government and fused their respective followings into the United Party. Some Nationalists, led by Daniel F. Malan, however, held out and kept the National Party alive and, in 1939, reaccepted Hertzog as their leader in a reorganized opposition party known as the Re-united National Party, or People’s Party (Herenigde Nasionale Party, or Volksparty). The new party was weakened by wartime factionalism; and Hertzog and others with Nazi sympathies eventually walked out and formed the Afrikaner Party (1941).

The Re-united National Party returned victoriously in the 1948 elections and subsequently enacted a mass of racial legislation that was designed to preserve white supremacy in South Africa; the National Party named its policy “apartheid.” The party went on to consolidate its power, absorbing the Afrikaner Party in 1951. It renamed itself the National Party of South Africa (1951) and gradually augmented its control of the House of Assembly—from 73 seats in 1948 to 134 seats (81 percent) in 1977. The party was led successively by Daniel F. Malan (1948–54), Johannes Gerhardus Strijdom (1954–58), Hendrik Frensch Verwoerd (1958–66), John Vorster (1966–78), P.W. Botha (1978–89), F.W. de Klerk (1989–97), and Marthinus van Schalkwyk (1997–2005). The National Party also broke South Africa away from the Commonwealth, making it a republic in 1961. From the premiership of Vorster on, the National Party attempted what it termed an “enlightened” (verligte) policy on the race question; but this meant hardly more than speeding up the formation of Black “homelands” and alleviating—selectively—some of the apartheid policies found inconvenient to general economic and cultural development.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/National-Party-political-party-South-Africa

The formal racism was very much based in the Afrikaaner community, while the English community was more liberal.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

He's Afrikaner. They are evil AND nuts. ratchiweenie Jan 12 #1
Afrikaaners reversed Apartheid. Throwing blanket prejudicial condemnations over ethnic groups is Bernardo de La Paz Jan 12 #6
Sorry but while they changed their laws it would not appear ratchiweenie Jan 12 #7
You seem to miss that it is the prejudice expressed by your automatic condemnation of people Bernardo de La Paz Jan 12 #9
But it was the Afrikaaner-based National Party that won power in 1948 that introduced apartheid muriel_volestrangler Jan 12 #10
Yes. We both object strenuously to Apartheid. But positing "if A then automatically B" is pre-judging Bernardo de La Paz Jan 12 #11
They seem to have more than their share of nuts. So do we. paleotn Jan 12 #23
Our rich white male overloads are batshit crazy. Irish_Dem Jan 12 #2
Steve Bannon: "Peter Thiel, David Sacks, Elon Musk, are all white South Africans." sop Jan 12 #3
Steve Bannon as anti racist? Who knew? wnylib Jan 12 #12
Bannon will argue he's not a racist, he's just virulently anti-H-1B. sop Jan 12 #14
He insists that's an econimic issue having to do with employing Americans over H1B visa holders. I think there may be ratchiweenie Jan 12 #16
He may actually be telling the truth regarding whathehell Jan 12 #24
Yet another example of why we must stop valuing money over decency. Think. Again. Jan 12 #4
Reconciliation is not congruent to capitulation. . . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jan 12 #5
will you believe any "truth" that comes out of a trump commission? rampartd Jan 12 #8
Thiel is the leading edge of libertarian tech bro culture Renew Deal Jan 12 #13
Thiel is "likely more sophisticated in his thought process." dchill Jan 12 #22
Thread about this two days ago: highplainsdem Jan 12 #15
Thiel and his royalists Beck23 Jan 12 #17
And lest we forget, Theil is JD Vance's sugardaddy. bluesbassman Jan 12 #18
Yes. Thiel and his cronies bought this presidency. yardwork Jan 12 #20
What they hell is wrong with Afrikaners? paleotn Jan 12 #19
Peter Thiel, the master of ponderous pretentiousness. Borogove Jan 12 #21
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Trump Ally Peter Thiel's ...»Reply #10