{"title":"South Africa: Inventing the Nation","authors":"Kenneth W. Grundy","doi":"10.5860/choice.188314","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"South Africa: Inventing the Nation. By Alexander Johnston. London: Bloomsbury, 2014. Pp. 354; map, notes, bibliography. $29.95 paper.It takes a courageous scholar to accept the assignment to try to understand the complex and unending process of building a South African nation out of the disparate parts of that land and its peoples. During most of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries South Africa was governed by regimes that sought to emphasize the differences among its peoples. How can we expect that a mere quarter century of effort, even a harmonized effort, to unify such peoples can overcome the entrenched legacies of division and control? In short, there are more questions than answers about the state of nation-building in South Africa. The ongoing dilemma faced by national leaders is that \"South Africa could not become a nation unless it was democratic and it could not democratize unless it was (or at least could pretend to be) a nation\" (p. 1).What is more, there is hardly agreement on what sort of nation ought to be built and how best to fuse it together. Three forms of nation vie for attention in the current order: \"an Afrikaner nation, which had to die in order that a democratic South African nation could be born; a civic nation, hastily improvised to provide a platform of legitimacy for constitutional democracy during the negotiations which brought apartheid to an end; and an African nation which is glimpsed but not fully articulated in the ideology of African nationalism ...\" (p. 3). A running debate centers on grand issues-what does it mean to be African? Who qualifies as South African today? Is it possible to go beyond racial reconciliation and toward social cohesion? The optimism of Mandela's \"rainbow nation\" has long since passed, but a widely acceptable substitute for that vague design has eluded national leaders.To his credit, Alexander Johnston has plunged into the morass that is South African politics and he has left nothing outside his field of vision. His first part is a thorough examination of the demographic, spatial, socioeconomic, linguistic, and ethnic features that combine to make a profile of South Africa's peoples. During the Constitution drafting stages in the 1990s that diversity was recognized and encouraged. But there is a dark side to this diversity. South Africa must find a way of dealing with vertical (ethnic, religious, racial) divisions as well as horizontal (e.g., economic) ones. So what passes for a South African nation is an improvised one. Practically every issue of public policy poses a stress test for these obvious differences and disparities.Emerging from the crucible of the early 1990s were the making of a finessed constitution and a general agreement on the composition of the new state. In a way it was much like the U.S. Constitution in that there were as many unanswered questions and illdefined compromises as there were settled issues. It became the task of the African National Congress, clearly the most popular political party, to add meat to the bones of the state. …","PeriodicalId":45676,"journal":{"name":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AFRICAN HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF AFRICAN HISTORICAL STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.188314","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Abstract
South Africa: Inventing the Nation. By Alexander Johnston. London: Bloomsbury, 2014. Pp. 354; map, notes, bibliography. $29.95 paper.It takes a courageous scholar to accept the assignment to try to understand the complex and unending process of building a South African nation out of the disparate parts of that land and its peoples. During most of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries South Africa was governed by regimes that sought to emphasize the differences among its peoples. How can we expect that a mere quarter century of effort, even a harmonized effort, to unify such peoples can overcome the entrenched legacies of division and control? In short, there are more questions than answers about the state of nation-building in South Africa. The ongoing dilemma faced by national leaders is that "South Africa could not become a nation unless it was democratic and it could not democratize unless it was (or at least could pretend to be) a nation" (p. 1).What is more, there is hardly agreement on what sort of nation ought to be built and how best to fuse it together. Three forms of nation vie for attention in the current order: "an Afrikaner nation, which had to die in order that a democratic South African nation could be born; a civic nation, hastily improvised to provide a platform of legitimacy for constitutional democracy during the negotiations which brought apartheid to an end; and an African nation which is glimpsed but not fully articulated in the ideology of African nationalism ..." (p. 3). A running debate centers on grand issues-what does it mean to be African? Who qualifies as South African today? Is it possible to go beyond racial reconciliation and toward social cohesion? The optimism of Mandela's "rainbow nation" has long since passed, but a widely acceptable substitute for that vague design has eluded national leaders.To his credit, Alexander Johnston has plunged into the morass that is South African politics and he has left nothing outside his field of vision. His first part is a thorough examination of the demographic, spatial, socioeconomic, linguistic, and ethnic features that combine to make a profile of South Africa's peoples. During the Constitution drafting stages in the 1990s that diversity was recognized and encouraged. But there is a dark side to this diversity. South Africa must find a way of dealing with vertical (ethnic, religious, racial) divisions as well as horizontal (e.g., economic) ones. So what passes for a South African nation is an improvised one. Practically every issue of public policy poses a stress test for these obvious differences and disparities.Emerging from the crucible of the early 1990s were the making of a finessed constitution and a general agreement on the composition of the new state. In a way it was much like the U.S. Constitution in that there were as many unanswered questions and illdefined compromises as there were settled issues. It became the task of the African National Congress, clearly the most popular political party, to add meat to the bones of the state. …
《南非:创造国家》亚历山大·约翰斯顿著。伦敦:Bloomsbury出版社,2014。页。354;地图、注释、参考书目。29.95美元。只有勇敢的学者才能接受这样的任务,试图理解在这片土地的不同部分及其人民中建立一个南非国家的复杂而无休止的过程。在19世纪和20世纪的大部分时间里,南非由试图强调其人民之间差异的政权统治。我们怎么能指望仅仅经过四分之一个世纪的努力,甚至是协调一致的努力,就能使这些民族团结起来,克服分裂和控制的根深蒂固的遗留问题呢?简而言之,关于南非的国家建设状况,问题多于答案。国家领导人面临的持续困境是,“除非南非是民主的,否则它不能成为一个国家,除非它是(或至少可以假装是)一个国家,否则它不能民主化”(第1页)。此外,对于应该建立什么样的国家以及如何最好地将其融合在一起,几乎没有达成一致意见。在目前的秩序中,有三种形式的民族争夺着人们的注意力:“一个阿非利卡民族,为了一个民主的南非国家的诞生,它必须死去;一个公民国家,在结束种族隔离的谈判期间仓促建立,为宪政民主提供合法性的平台;一个非洲国家,在非洲民族主义的意识形态中被瞥见,但没有完全表达出来……”一场持续的辩论围绕着一些重大问题展开——作为非洲人意味着什么?今天谁有资格成为南非人?是否有可能超越种族和解,走向社会团结?曼德拉“彩虹之国”的乐观主义早已成为过去,但一个被广泛接受的替代方案却避开了各国领导人。值得赞扬的是,亚历山大·约翰斯顿(Alexander Johnston)已经陷入了南非政治的泥潭,他没有留下任何超出他视野的东西。他的第一部分是对人口、空间、社会经济、语言和种族特征的全面考察,这些特征结合起来构成了南非人民的概况。在20世纪90年代的宪法起草阶段,这种多样性得到了承认和鼓励。但这种多样性也有不好的一面。南非必须找到一种方法来处理纵向的(民族、宗教、种族)分裂以及横向的(例如经济)分裂。因此,所谓的南非国家其实是临时拼凑起来的。实际上,每一个公共政策问题都对这些明显的差异和差距进行了压力测试。在20世纪90年代初的严峻考验下,制定了一部精巧的宪法,并就新国家的组成达成了普遍共识。在某种程度上,它很像美国宪法,因为有许多悬而未决的问题和不明确的妥协,因为有解决的问题。非洲人国民大会(African National Congress)显然是最受欢迎的政党,它的任务是给国家的骨头添肉。…
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of African Historical Studies (IJAHS) is devoted to the study of the African past. Norman Bennett was the founder and guiding force behind the journal’s growth from its first incarnation at Boston University as African Historical Studies in 1968. He remained its editor for more than thirty years. The title was expanded to the International Journal of African Historical Studies in 1972, when Africana Publishers Holmes and Meier took over publication and distribution for the next decade. Beginning in 1982, the African Studies Center once again assumed full responsibility for production and distribution. Jean Hay served as the journal’s production editor from 1979 to 1995, and editor from 1998 to her retirement in 2005. Michael DiBlasi is the current editor, and James McCann and Diana Wylie are associate editors of the journal. Members of the editorial board include: Emmanuel Akyeampong, Peter Alegi, Misty Bastian, Sara Berry, Barbara Cooper, Marc Epprecht, Lidwien Kapteijns, Meredith McKittrick, Pashington Obang, David Schoenbrun, Heather Sharkey, Ann B. Stahl, John Thornton, and Rudolph Ware III. The journal publishes three issues each year (April, August, and December). Articles, notes, and documents submitted to the journal should be based on original research and framed in terms of historical analysis. Contributions in archaeology, history, anthropology, historical ecology, political science, political ecology, and economic history are welcome. Articles that highlight European administrators, settlers, or colonial policies should be submitted elsewhere, unless they deal substantially with interactions with (or the affects on) African societies.