This is an edited version of Complexities of the Four Nation Thesis: The Contested Renaming of the South African Airports by Dr Luvuyo Mthimkhulu Dondolo.
The Department of Transport and the Airports Company South Africa (Acsa) has been holding public meetings over changing the airport’s name.
The incident witnessed on June 5, 2018 at the Cape Town International Airport, when tempers flared between the members of the EFF - who want it to be named after Winnie Madikizela Mandela - and the ethnically framed members of the Gatvol Capetonians - who hold a contrary view and cited that she had never been part of the province - during the name change consultation process, was an unfortunate and a sad moment.
In the main it reflected the lasting effects of apartheid hegemony that separated us based on colour lines and promoted divide and rule strategy with its long history, setting us against each other
DISREMEMBERED: Winnie Mandela. Picture: Alf Kumalo
Memorial complexes (including name change), as argued in the article, by their nature have historical specificity and are used for social and political agenda - social cohesion, nation building, reconciliation and production of national identity. The use of memorial complexes and other aspects of public culture for nation building and the notion of a rainbow nation in South Africa, is arguably a kind of "cultural homogenisation order from above which has been the rule in many countries all over the world" (Palmberg, 1999:8).
In new nations like the post-apartheid South Africa, the history of the resistance against colonialism and the struggle against apartheid have become a focal point of reference in building the nation.
It provides symbols and responsiveness of what it means to be a national, a member of one nation, and gives an account of how the collective, the new nation, has through its efforts moved from one phase of its historical evolution into another. It details the transition from the majority of people being oppressed, segregated and subjugated to their becoming citizens with democratic rights.
Further, the post-apartheid memorial complexes present struggles of domination, power and control over what history has to tell, what history is to become dominant, who is to be glorified or what historical event is to be glorified and overvalued, and who is to be vilified. Thus, the post-apartheid memorial complexes present a monolithic historical and hegemonic master historical narrative.
In recent past, the human experiences in South African have been framed by the notion and concept of the four nation thesis. It would seem to me that the four nation theory continues to live with us in the present in how we interact, view each other, engage with the past and negotiate the manner of remembering the past in the present. The incident of the airport name change in held in Cape Town is just one example.
The concept of the four nation thesis first presented by the ANCYL in its 1948 manifesto which highlighted the key nationalities/nations - whites, blacks, coloureds and Indians - with three being the victims of oppression in South Africa. This theory had its own shortfalls that relates to the systematic oppression under apartheid, among others.
Once viewed as one way to amplify the oppression in apartheid South Africa and conceptualising of the post-apartheid state by some, was later adopted by the ANC.
However, with the adoption of the Freedom Charter in 1955, the four nation thesis became replaced by the concept of multiracialism in the spirit of the Congress Alliance.
The concept of the four nation theory has its own history and sociology. In South African historiography and among the politicians, there has been a long debate about the philosophical understanding and comprehension of the concept of the four nation thesis.
Any name change with historical framework is emotional and contested in South Africa. This is the case because naming of places is linked to a particular nation or group of people’s socio-cultural, historical and political identities. This can be better understood in the context of heritage as a social construct than inheritance.
Besides the colonial and apartheid race conflict legacy, the other contributing factor to the present contestation is the monolithic and hegemonic historical master narrative peddled by the ruling party and its administration and state agencies. This discourse, which is based on great man approach, mythological national consciousness and the Mandela mythology - Mandelasation of the South African struggle against apartheid - and presentation of Mandela as the father of the democratic nation, and excludes the unwanted and unwelcome historical facts in the populace’s subconscious mind for sustainability of the Mandela mythology, as the latter challenge the former.
Victor-loser complex also characterises the production of the post-apartheid memorial landscapes. This is the case as in South Africa the party that wins the national elections controls the production of knowledge and memorialisation directly or indirectly for politics of transition and consolidation of power. This phenomenon has a particular history in South Africa which can be observed from the turn of the 20th century through to the present.
Furthermore, since the birth of democracy in South Africa, there has been a proliferation of the state-driven memorialisation. The process of inscribing the national public memories through the craft of curating the nation by the state, invites more contestation than convergence of views.
The art of curating the nation by the state is also trapped in gender politics as is based on gendered approach that excludes women in the marathon of memorialisation.
Thus individuals such as Winnie Mandela have been sidelined and disremembered in the national remembering discourse. The production of the post-apartheid memorial complexes in the country is trapped in politics of masculinity. Consequently, gender politics surfaces.
RECOATED: Saartjie Baartman
THE PAST: Portrait of Krotoa. Picture: Robben Island Museum
This phenomenon gives a misleading impression at two levels. Firstly, that it was only males who were involved in the Struggle, which was not the case. Secondly, the authors of history are and have been men. In instances where there are women initiatives, as Samuelson (2007) argued, are presented through the domesticity and motherhood narrative. She explored this discourse by examining the manner in which Krotoa-Eva, Nongqawuse and Sarah Baartman have been recoated through an analytic framework for reading the past and presenting it in the post-apartheid era as part of the nation building, reconciliation and rainbow nation projects. For her, these three women "have been mediated through the mists of time to take their symbolic place as mythic figures in our present". (Samuelson, 2007:3.)
The remembering of the nation in the post-apartheid era "disremember" women. This transitional cultural moment is a political window that provides a political, historical and cultural window between the past and present, and offers a moment to rethink ideologies of political identities, nation building and reconciliation in South Africa. Through the gendered approach of remembering the nation, the inscription of public memories on the memorial landscapes does not recover voices of the women.
The approach does not move beyond the domesticity narrative of women and it compromises history and knowledge production.
In this disjointed national discourse there is a hierarchy of representation and inclusion. But also even within the ANC among its leaders, as there are some who do not feature much in the marathon of the theoretical drama of memorialisation in post-apartheid South Africa.
South Africa needs to dismantle the masters historical narrative splashed in the present and move toward a comprehensive and a "historical inclusive discourse" (Therborn in Alexandra (1986:70).
I would like the Cape Town International Airport to be named after Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe or Winnie Madikizela Mandela - who are both excluded and marginalised in the post-apartheid memorial landscapes in South Africa; for inclusivity and representation, I submit that the Cape Town International Airport be named after one of the Koi and San people such as Otomatso, among others.
I am certain that if Professor Sobukwe was still alive, based on his understanding of African history, historical consciousness, his collective approach and philosophy, servant leader, and his comprehension of African nationalism and the African cause, he would not object to my submission.
I further submit that the Port Elizabeth Airport be named after Stuurman of the Koi and San people; the Kimberly Airport be named after Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe and the East London Airport after Winnie Madikizela-Mandela.
References
:
Alexandre A, (1986), Approaches to National Question in South Africa, in Transformation No 1, Michingen State University, USA, pp63-95. Palmberg M, (1999), National Identity and Democracy in Africa, Human Sciences Research Council and Mayibuye Centre of the University of the Western Cape, Cape Town. Samuelson M, (2007), Remembering the Nation, Disremembering Women?: Story of the South African Transition, University of KwaZulu Natal Press, Pietermaritzburg.
The "four nation" thesis, www.sahistory.org.za, retrieved on June 11, 2017.
* Dr Luvuyo Mthimkhulu Dondolo is a historian, heritage studies specialist, museologist, former Rockefeller Scholarship holder at Emory University (USA) and a Fulbright Scholar at Cheyney University (USA). He is the director and head of the Centre for Transdisciplinary Studies at the University of Fort Hare. He is writing in his personal capacity.
** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media
Cape Argus