An AfriForum or even a Broederbond for black South Africans? (My monthly Moneyweb column) Black South Africans need their own AfriForum, UCT professor and prominent public intellectual Xolela Mangcu wrote in City Press on Sunday. I would add: and perhaps they need a Broederbond, a Reddingsdaadbond, a Helpmekaarfonds and a Federale Volksbeleggings. Perhaps they need a modern version of what Afrikaner nationalists practiced during the days they felt they needed economic liberation: volkskapitalisme (people’s capitalism). Mangcu rages against what he calls a “wholesale culture of dependence that has defined black politics over the past 20 years” and calls for a “community revival”. He says: “A Constitution is as good as you are able to interpret it for your own interests. And for that you need smart, capable individuals and organisations – not ‘amandla functionaries’ with no qualifications other than to steal public funds.” I know very well I’m on very thin ice right now: a middle-aged white Afrikaner male trying to give advice to black people. In our re-racialised society we’re almost back to the paradigm of “own affairs” and “general affairs” that we had during the Tricameral Parliament period (1984 – 1994) of our apartheid history. So let me tread carefully and respectfully and put on the hat of historian - and not ignore the vast differences between the political realities of the 1940s and 1950s compared to todays. I recently did deep research into the Afrikaner Broederbond and its economic emancipation initiatives for a new chapter to the recently re-published 1978 exposé by Ivor Wilkens and Hans Strydom, The Super-Afrikaners. And let me hasten to add: I am not and have never been an Afrikaner nationalist. I opposed the role the Broederbond as a secret male society played during my lifetime. The organisation was also the bulwark of ethnic chauvinism and the apartheid ideology. Politically speaking, there is little in the Broederbond that should be admired. Having said that, let’s ponder whether there are any lessons and tips from the early Broederbond model for the economic emancipation of black South Africans today. Lessons to be learnt The Broederbond was founded in 1918 with noble ideas. It was a mere 16 years after the end of the South African War that devastated and traumatised the Afrikaner community, especially in the old Free State and Transvaal. The scorched earth policies of the British Empire forced large numbers of Afrikaners to the cities where they were completely out of their depth. They were badly educated and had few skills apart from being good farmers. On top of that, the world and South Africa were trapped in a deep economic depression after World War I. The Broederbond set out to help Afrikaners adapt and make it in the city. Professor Pieter de Lange, Broederbond chairman after 1983, insisted in a recent conversation with me that the Broederbond’s main aim during the early years was “to make the Afrikaner a modern urban person while remaining an Afrikaner”. The enemy in those early days was Britain and English-speaking South Africans, not black South Africans: the ‘Engelse Gevaar’ (English threat) rather than the Swart Gevaar (black threat), which came later. The cry was, “Why are we the underclass in the land of our birth? Why are the English and the Jews controlling our economy while we do the work? We need economic liberation!” After the revival of Afrikaner nationalism during the 1938 symbolic re-enactment of the Great Trek, the Broederbond arranged the Ekonomiese Volkskongres (Economic People’s Congress) in Bloemfontein in 1939 to deal with the problem of more than 300 000 Afrikaners classified as “poor whites”. To quote Wilkens and Strydom: “It was at this conference that the Afrikaner discovered the key to success for his own economic upliftment: pool Afrikaner money, establish Afrikaner concerns, support Afrikaner concerns. They were told that if every Afrikaans family contributed 25 cents, mighty financial power could be unleashed.” The congress gave birth to the Reddingsdaadbond. Within a decade, this organisation mobilised millions for Afrikaner business enterprises and established a cooperative movement on the platteland (countryside). The number of Afrikaner-owned businesses grew by more than 300% in ten years. Out of this movement grew Federale Volksbeleggings (Federal People’s Investments) and its offshoot Federale Mynbou, which later became Gencor, a mining giant; Volkskas, which became a major banking group; and Saambou, a building society and bank. Santam and Sanlam were established before 1939, but grew dramatically after the involvement of Federale Volksbeleggings. By the 1970s, Afrikaners owned a substantial chunk of the South African economy with successful companies like Sanlam, General Mining, Rembrandt, Perskor and Nasionale Pers, all dominated by Broeders. The civil service (and the SABC) was run and staffed mostly by Afrikaners and the South African Railways was used to provide employment to unskilled and uneducated Afrikaners. By the 1980s, Afrikaner capital was dominant and the overwhelming majority of their number were members of the comfortable middle class. The Broederbond also had a direct hand in establishing the Rand Afrikaans University (now UJ), the Goudstad Teachers’ Training College and the University of Port Elizabeth (now NMMU). Tens of thousands of young Afrikaners went to universities with the help of the Helpmekaarfonds. Wilkens and Strydom write of the Broederbond of that period that it was “an organisation unique in today’s world, with superb secret organization, strict discipline and a determination seldom seen in any other organization in history”. Pieter de Lange tells me he was even asked some years ago by senior Frelimo leaders in Mozambique to advise them how to do for their people what the Broederbond had done for Afrikaners. There are clearly parallels between the Broederbond strategies to enrich themselves and give jobs and tenders to their pals and the ANC policies of black economic empowerment, crony capitalism and cadre deployment. One big difference is that the Broederbond invested heavily in education, training, conferences and workshops to enhance skills in order to prepare their “deployees” to do their jobs properly. “Superb organisation, strict discipline and determination” were key. But perhaps the biggest difference is that volkskapitalisme had a genuine aim to benefit more than just the few that got very rich. Unlike BEE, it spread the wealth a little. So perhaps there are a few tricks to be learnt after all, despite the huge difference that we have an open democracy now.
Posted on: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 15:31:02 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015