The copyright of this thesis vests in the author. No quotation from it or information derived from it is to be published without full acknowledgementTown of the source. The thesis is to be used for private study or non- commercial research purposes only. Cape Published by the University ofof Cape Town (UCT) in terms of the non-exclusive license granted to UCT by the author. University The Holocaust and Apartheid :Similarities and Differences A Comparative Study Juliette Peires (FSHJUL002) A dissertation submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Arts in Jewish Studies Faculty of the Humanities University of Cape Town Town 2004 Cape of COMPULSORY DECLARATION This work has not been previously submitted in whole or in part, for the award of any degree. It is my own work. Each significant contribution to, and quotation in, this dissertation from the work, or works, of other people has been attributed to, and has been cited and referenced / ;' I J ,;' Signature University Date 12 February 2004 Juliette Peires THE HOLOCAUST AND APARTHEID: SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES A COMPARATIVE STUDY CONTENTS Abstract Acknowledgements iv Chapter 1 The idea of race: Nazi Germany and South Africa 1 Chapter 2 Excluding Populations 12 Defining the populations to be excluded 12 Racial Purity 17 Citizenship 19 Keeping Culture Pure 24 Chapter 3 Social Control 29 Residential Segregation and Freedom of Movement 29 Churches 37 Employment and Economic Opportunities Town 41 Education and Social Services 53 Local Government 63 Media 74 Cape Chapter 4 Destruction vs Exploitation 79 Medical and Chemical Experimentsof 79 Business 86 Beyond the Borders-Murder 100 Patterns of Torture 104 Patterns of Death 110 Chapter 5 ConclusionUniversity 143 Appendixes 153 References 170 ABSTRACT THE HOLOCAUST AND APARTHEID: SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES A COMPARATIVE STUDY In recent years it has become fairly commonplace to make comparisons between the Holocaust and Apartheid. This dissertation explores similarities and differences. It acknowledges that both systems were rooted in ideas of race, but while the tools used by the Nazis in Germany and the apartheid government in South Africa are superficially similar, their very different objectives brought about radically different outcomes once their policies were enforced. The dissertation opens with a discussion of the methods used by each of the different systems to define the victim races, and justify their inferior status. In Germany the reasons given were the desire to preserve the pure Aryan volk and protect the volkisch culture. In South Africa the stated premise was that eachTown 'ethnic' group would best realise its full potential if it was encouraged to ;Jreserve its integrity and promote its own culture. In both countries separation was followed by deprivation of citizenship. Under German rule Jews were rendered statelessCape and expelled as far as possible from the Reich. In South Africa 'blacks' were madeof citizens of 'ethnic homelands'. Unlike the German Jews, South African 'blacks' had at least some kind of nominal right to equality in their designated 'homelands'. Freedom of movement was restricted and residential segregation enforced in both countries. Jews, previously prominent in the cultural, academic and economic life of Germany, wereUniversity impoverished and dehumanized. 'Blacks' in South Africa were locked into their role of unskilled, manual labourers, a position that they had occupied since the beginning of 'white' settlement in the Cape. ii Initially Jews were confined to ghettos, eventually to labour and death camps. In South Africa people of colour were forcibly removed to rural 'homelands'. However the demand for cheap labour eventually necessitated their admission to the urban industrial areas, and although they were restricted to living in 'townships' their exclusion was never total and their physical destruction was never contemplated. In both countries government controlled local authorities kept tight reign on the administration of the residential areas that were demarcated for the disadvantaged. In Nazi Germany the SS appointed Judenrate (Jewish CounCils) to administer the ghettos. These councils were used to secure the peaceful acquiescence of Jews en route to the death camps. Eventually the councilors were killed together with the people they were supposed to govern. In South Africa town councils wereTown established for local government in the townships, but these councils were unsuccessful because they were government controlled and illegitimate. Their purpose was to administer the separate development areas, not to pave the way for eventualCape extermination of their inhabitants. In neither Germany nor South Africaof did churches play an active role in preventing discrimination and injustice. In Germany this was simply a continuation of the traditional attitude of anti-Judaism nurtured by the refusal of Jews to convert to Christianity. In South Africa missionaries worked hard to convert 'blacks' to Christianity, but Dutch Reformed Church ministers believed that it was God's will that 'black' and 'white' should be keptUniversity separate, church services were strictly segregated, and this was in keeping with the apartheid ideal. With regard to the media, both Nazi Germany and the apartheid regime backed those sectors of the media that promoted negative images of Jews and 'blacks', while censoring those that were more liberally inclined. iii The fundamental differences between the Holocaust and apartheid became most apparent in their terminal stages. Whereas Nazism led to genocide, the leitmotif of apartheid was cheap labour, not planned extermination. The Nazis created death camps and designed advanced technology especially for the purpose of speeding up mass murder and body disposal. Apartheid killings in South Africa were carried out by traditional means on an individual basis and not by large-scale extermination techniques. The killings in South Africa were directed only at opponents of the regime and not for the purpose of exterminating a specific ethnic group. This dissertation presents two case studies of racist ideology which promoted discrimination and the elevation of a 'superior' race at the expense of the disadvantaged. In Germany this resulted in a programme of genocide whereas the apartheid system in South Africa, though intended to service the material interestsTown of the ruling group, nevertheless proved dysfunctional and sowed the seeds of its own demise, Cape of University iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS For some time I have felt the need for a systematic approach to a comparison between the Holocaust and apartheid. This work is the result of the encouragement, support and constructive assistance that I was privileged to receive and without which this project would never have been undertaken. My grateful thanks go to my supervisor. Professor Milton Shain. His incredible knowledge of the relevant literature coupled with his guidance and advice enabled me to pursue the research essential for the task. I was fortunate indeed to be able to learn from his command of language and attention to detail, accuracy and style. I only wish that I had the talent to do justice to his excellent tuition. I am grateful to Jeff Peires for his encouragement and support. My thanks are also due to the librarians whom I consulted. Veronica Belling of the Jewish Studies library at the university of Cape Town (UCT), the librarians at the UCT main library particularly those in the Government Publications and African Studies sections. Ute Ben Yosef of the Gitlin library and Yvonne Verblun, formerly of the Gitlin Library were most helpful. I appreciate the patience with which the members of theTown UCT IT section and the tutors at Knowledge Commons helped me through my computer difficulties. Thanks are also due to Janine Blumberg of the Kaplan Centre for her never failing assistance and co-operation. Cape I thank my husband for his tolerance and understanding while I was occupied with this study. His assistance with theof task of reading the drafts to check for typographical, grammatical and spelling errors was invaluable. In conclusion I would like to thank the Isaac and Jessie Kaplan Centre for Jewish Studies and Research at the University of Cape Town and the Max and Rose Leiserowitz Scholarship for the financial assistance that I received. Juliette Peires University February, 2004 THE HOLOCAUST AND APARTHEID: SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES A COMPARATIVE STUDY CHAPTER 1 THE IDEA OF RACE: NAZI GERMANY AND SOUTH AFRICA At the Annual General Meeting of the Cape Town Branch of the Union of Jewish Women on 25 May 2000 guest speaker Patricia de Lille, then a Pan African Congress (PAC) member of parliament, told the assembled gathering that "South Africans had been suffering for 300 years. We can compare the suffering of the people in South Africa to the Holocaust,,1 In South Africa politicians have frequently expressed similar analogies, often publicly. But this statement drew an angry response from some members of the audience who felt that the magnitude of the HolocaustTown which destroyed nearly six million European Jews is often not taken seriously enough. Nonetheless, writes Colin Tatz, Nazi Germany and South Africa were both the yardsticks and bogeymen of twentieth century racism and its consequencesCape 2 This study is an attempt to give perspective to the similarities and differencesof between the two phenomena. In both Nazi Germany and apartheid South Africa