Conclusion

This chapter has stressed that ethnicity has not grown out of the old values and symbols associated with the chiefdom or out of an inadequate modernization. The façade of traditionalism that is presented by the chiefs is interpreted by modernization theorists as an index of the degree to which primordial ethnicity has withstood the pressures of capitalist development. Ethnicity is viewed in residual or at best transitional terms: as a phenomenon that will disappear as the development of a modern economic infrastructure allows the dominant culture associated with capitalism to penetrate and transform provincial cultures. The Afrikaner National Party holds a more static pluralist view of South Africa as a land inhabited by different peoples, each with its own ethnos . These views of

ethnic identity as a natural order, as a remnant or atavistic manifestation of a historically concrete social unit, result at the ideological level in federal and Bantustan political policies.

Ethnicity is a central concept in South African politics. It is used by the South African government to divide the African population and by some Bantustan politicians, such as Ntsanwisi and Buthelezi, to mobilize opposition to homeland independence. Within the national liberation movement one wing calls for the denial and suppression of ethnic differences in the cause of national unity.^[122] The other wing recognizes the power of ethnicity as an instrument for political mobilization at the regional level. The Freedom Charter which is adhered to by the major part of the national liberation movement, holds that:

While we do not encourage 'tribal pride'—in fact we denounce it—we are far from being indifferent to traditions, languages and cultures of individual ethnic groups; we do not propagate ethnic nihilism . . . our reality is a multi-ethnic society. We respect and strive to develop all local languages and cultures and this helps us to combat all forms of reactionary nationalism, chauvinism and ethno-centricity; it also helps us to improve inter-ethnic relations thus facilitating the drive towards national and social emancipation.^[123]

I have argued that ethnicity should be seen in processual terms as the historical product of internal colonialism. But it has been stressed that ethnicity should not be seen in simple terms as the response, within one region, of a uniform class with identical interests to a situation of core-periphery exploitation and underdevelopment. Ethnicity has emerged out of the acceptance and propagation by various classes of cultural symbols that cut across class barriers and distinguish and unite people as 'Tsonga'. Ethnicity is thus a fluctuating, situational expression of group identity aimed at the achievement of specific political ends. The expression of an ethnic consciousness does not eradicate narrower loyalties to chief and clan; these can coexist with other feelings of class, national or religious consciousness. The individual will adopt, in response to a specific situation, any one of these identities for the purpose of group mobilization. Nor is ethnicity merely a product of Bantustan politics, and it is unlikely that the abandonment of apartheid and the Bantustan system will end the regional underdevelopment which, through the politicization of cultural differences, is one of the major causes of ethnic exclusivism.