(Source C) This policy meant that people of the same race were forced to live together in a particular area and any member of this race not living in this allocated area would be considered to be infringing the law and could be detained indefinitely and eventually be forced to move (Source B).
The race of a person was determined by the Population Registration Act (30 of 1950). Consequently, identities, based on physical appearance, were enforced upon people (Source F). This legislation forced and restrained the population into categories such as ‘White’, ‘Coloured’ or ‘Black’. Ultimately, these identities implied that either your group was ‘allowed’ or ‘denied’ to exist in a specific area. The invention of the ‘Coloured’ category led to great controversy, especially in the Cape provinces. This was however, not black and white. The ‘coloureds’ comprised of mixed races. Those who resembled the ‘Whites’ were often re-categorised and allowed to defy the legislation of the country. For example, ‘coloureds’ that were classified as ‘white’ were able to remain in the group residential areas designated for ‘whites’. However, this meant that family ties were relinquished, as visitation between the different group areas was not permitted (Source …show more content…
Railways, based on the concept of monorails that brought workers to the central business district in Japan, were introduced and would enable non-whites to commute to work from their specific group area. The Group Areas act aimed to ‘purify’ (Source B) the central cities by removing non-white residents and relocated them to group areas. These railway lines ensured that the policies of separate residential areas did not hinder the running of businesses in the city, which relied heavily on non-white