AFRIKANER IDENTITY AFTER NATIONALISM Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW The history of Afrikaner nationalism elicits a particular curiosity. A near ideal-typical nationalist movement achieved overwhelming dominance over a vast territory at the southern tip of the African continent and its diverse peoples against strong countervailing powers. After this triumph, political power painstakingly conquered was surrendered without the bloodshed many foresaw at the time. Dire predictions of a protracted civil war were based on a view of Afrikaner ethno-nationalism as a ‘hard’ nationalism, marshalling all oppressive forces necessary to maintain dominance. After the slow but enduring construction of an ethno-nationalist movement, Afrikaner nationalists seized state power and consolidated their dominance over the years. Riding on a wave of ethnic mobilization, the National Party (NP), the main agent of Afrikaner ethno-nationalism until the 1970s, gained political power in South Africa after World War Two. Under nationalist leadership, Afrikaners advanced economically and socially through state patronage. Afrikaner nationalism had grown into a pervasive political, social, economic and cultural force. As a national minority, Afrikaners dominated a diverse society. However, towards the end of the twentieth century, nationalism ceased to be mobilizing force. Some analysts even argued that Afrikaner nationalism was now dead for good. Based on the success and decline of Afrikaner nationalism, the central question that this thesis addresses is why Afrikaners deserted nationalism? The larger theoretical problem stemming from this question is why do people become national and why do they desert nationalism? This line of questioning invites us to analyze the formation and dissolution of identities in late modernity. What shaped Afrikaner identities in the past and what is shaping them in the present? This thesis investigates the formation, dissolution and re-configuration of Afrikaner identities in order to understand processes of social and political change. While the study of Afrikaner nationalism based on a modernist conception of nationalism emphasized the 1 role of the state in shaping identities, such a state-centered approach struggles to explain how identities change. With the modernist focus on institutions and state structures in the formation of identities, the subjective dimension of identity formation has not received systematic attention. I intend to probe how subjective aspects of identity formation, as encountered in narratives of the self, can help us to understand social and political change, clearly apparent in the decline of Afrikaner nationalism. In this decline of a once powerful ethno-nationalist movement, the emergence of new subjectivities in our epoch of late modernity is of particular importance. Identities understood as multiple, contradictory and relational may have developed that were well beyond the narrow frame set by ethnic and nationalist ideology and mobilization. The study of Afrikaner nationalism is significant because it allows us to analyze the decline of nationalism and ethnic mobilization. Up to now, the lessons for theories of nationalism from the decline of nationalism and ethnicity have not been studied in full. While Ernst B. Haas (1997) offers a complete theory for the decline of nationalism and the nation-state, he does so within a very restrained, functionalist modernization framework. The decline of Afrikaner nationalism offers an opportunity to study how individuals create meaning, how life-worlds and the social imaginary shape identities and relationships with the nation-state, nationalism and ethnicity. Addressing the problem of contemporary Afrikaner identities leads us to consider the problem of “white” 1 identities or whiteness.2 Whiteness in South Africa is often described as a monolithic essence with little room for change (Steyn, 2001). I intend to give a more nuanced portrait of whiteness which leads to an understanding of the possibilities for changing “white” identities. Often, Afrikaners (and South Africa’s “white” citizens) are described as a group of people with little inclination for change, 1 “White”, as well as “black” and “white” are written in quotation marks (unless it is a citation) to indicate that it is primarily a social construct to which many stereotypes are attached and in this sense, “race (s)” do not exist, beyond the existence of physical characteristics and appearance. 2 Ruth Frankenberg defines whiteness through “a set of linked dimensions. First, whiteness is a location of structural advantage, of race privilege. Second, it is a “standpoint”, a place from which white people look at ourselves, at others, and at society. Third, “whiteness” refers to a set of cultural practices that are usually unmarked and unnamed (1993, 1).” 2 reveling in self-pity, continuing with their old ways and by and large dropping out of an engagement with larger society. My research suggests that this perspective may only reflect the attitudes of one segment of the “white” population. In the face of the often encountered “white” recalcitrance to accept the need for redress, making amends and leaving “racial” exclusiveness behind, analysts regret such an attitude yet fail to offer deeper insights into the social dynamics of evolving “racial” identities. After having outlined the major problems addressed in this study, let me now proceed with an overview of the chapters. In chapter two, I analyze how nationalism in general and particularly Afrikaner nationalism have been studied. This initial analysis of theories of nationalism and ethnicity sets the tone for the reminder of the thesis. In a advancing my theoretical argument built on previous theory, I intend to contribute to the study of nationalism with the aspiration to suggest further directions in the study of nationalism and ethnicity. In this chapter, I do not offer a complete overview over theories of nationalism and ethnicity. Given the vast body of theoretical and empirical works published on nationalism every year, to take stock of this entire literature is beyond the scope of this thesis. Rather, I have selected the key works that deal with the problems of ethnic and nationalist mobilization. From my review of the literature, I want to suggest that the lessons from the demise and the dissolution of nationalism and ethnicity do not receive sufficient attention. I will demonstrate in this thesis that meaningful insights about national and ethnic identity can be derived from studying the decline of nationalist and ethnic movements. Since the concept ‘nationalism’ is complex, I agree with the cautious approach that does not attempt to come up with one single definition. Rather, there is a whole field of nationalism studies that incorporates such concepts as identity, ethnicity, culture, “race”3, 3 “Race”, as well as “ is written in quotation marks (unless it is a citation) to indicate that it is primarily a social construct to which many stereotypes are attached and in this sense, “race” does not exist, beyond phenotype or appearance. 3 community, civic virtue, language, solidarity, citizenship and so on. Ethnicity and nationalism are phenomena that are located on a continuum and not in watertight containers. Moving on from defining nationalism, I analyze how nationalism has been studied as a consequence of modernity. The relationship between nationalism and modernity is arguably the most contentious issue in the study of nationalism and I argue that Afrikaner nationalism is a good case to support the modernist perspective that state makes nation. But besides the modernist focus on a political movement, socio-economic, historical and institutional factors, I also want to suggest that ideology and discourse, and more importantly, narrative deserve our attention. For it seems to me that from studying narratives of the self we gain a better understanding how identities change and how people develop attitudes that inform choices. I then proceed in chapter two with studying three approaches to the study of nationalism (and Afrikaner nationalism): primordialism, instrumentalism and constructivism. Firmly within a primordial paradigm, early approaches to Afrikaner nationalism saw nationalism as the expression of the inner selves of Afrikaners. A cultural canon of traditions and language was seen as the expression of a single and dominant Afrikaner identity. In its most radical form, primordialism essentializes culture and identity. In trying to answer why people become national and why they desert it, primordialism is not very helpful. Instead of considering change, primordialism focuses on stability and continuity. A further consequence of the primordialist perspective is that it serves to justify ethnic belonging. People may have strong feelings about their language, culture and so on, but how is this manifested? Or put it differently, should we not rather ask under what circumstances does ethnic belonging matter and when does it cease to do so? To take for granted the support, adherence to or adoration of ethnicity creates uncritical certainties rather than prompting a search for explanations. In the political realm, the primordial perspective serves to emphasize ‘natural’ and existential differences between peoples and hence supports claims that different ethnicities cannot coexist. Related to such a primordial approach is a focus on belief systems, such as the role of a civil religion in the formation of an Afrikaner national