South Africa In The Late 19th And Early 20th Century

Response Assignment #1
South Africa in the late 19th and early 20th century was comparable to a fresh piece of metal: a malleable entity. As a country exposed to various global influences, South Africa has been vulnerable to various political, ideological and cultural movements and thus molded to fit such philosophies. Some of the main influencers included leaders such as Marcus Garvey and various visitors from the US. Although African Americans and Garvey had mostly positive impacts with their influence, Garvey most noticeably had an impact through his controversial idea of racial nationalism.
Most notably in the late 1800’s, African Americans started to become role models to Africans with their journeys to South Africa, presenting
entertainment that embodied the “up from slavery” narrative. Representing “emancipationist activities” , the Fisk and Virginia Jubilee Singers spread the “liberation message of emancipation in word and song” (Vinson 14).
The Fisk singers amazed their audiences with oratories and songs filled with religious symbolism that originated from the coded language of American slavery. The Virginia Jubilee singers also carried this narrative, with songs like “Swing Low, Sweet Chariot” representing “God’s chariot of fire [sweeping] the prophet Elijah into heaven just as the Underground Railroad conductors in the United States seemed to descend from heaven to guide the enslaved to freedom” (16). The Jubilee Singers managed to become a “spiritual musical metaphor for an advanced civilization”, as well as symbols from cultural equality (16). Additionally, both groups of singers had received a university education from Hampton and Fisk institutions. Also, for a small portion of time, “the Virginia Jubilee Singers were sometimes able to resist being restricted by segregationist laws and customs…. Claiming that their American citizenship made them exempt
from racially discriminatory legislation” (18). During this time frame, I believe African Americans seemed to have what South Africans craved the most; a functional place in society. African Americans ability to have a place in society from such desolate beginnings made Africans look at them as their way out in a darkened tunnel. Their yearning for equality lead them to follow the likes of Marcus Garvey and centralize his philosophy in their daily beliefs. However, like most great leaders, not all of Garvey’s doctrines were purely correct. This notion would lead to a major flaw in one of his most famous mantras.
In my perspective, Garvey had good intentions with his mantras, however some came to have a negative impact.
Although Garvey had a positive impact with his philosophies for African Americans and Africans, some of his policies were that of a double-edged sword. One of his most common maxims, “Africa for Africans”, focused on the idea of racial nationalism, or the idea that racial identity should emphasized and preserved through means such as separating from other races. Amongst other ethnicities, however, racial nationalism was a chance to support movements such as segregation. For example, terrorist groups in the Americas such as the Ku Klux Klan supported movements like the Black Star Line to remove African Americans from the United States. This radical perspective was not only taken up by the US, but also spread to other nations such as Africa. With this fact solely, the double-edged sword of Garveyism would lead to the downfall of its practice in South
Africa.
In my opinion, I believe that political factors led to the downfall of Garveyism in South Africa. Beginning after World War II, the peril of apartheid took place in South Africa. The prime minister, James Hertzog, agreed with the implementation of this divisive type of society. With his reelection, Hertzog promised a “white South Africa” and classified Africans as “disenfranchised temporary migrant workers coming from their supposed homes in the reserves, where they could develop ‘along their own lines’” (124). In response to this perception, Garvey did not necessarily disagree with this radical action. He also “advocated for racial nationalism to secure an African republic and to avoid racial extermination” and “pointed to Hertzog’s Native Bills and other discriminatory laws as evidence of whites’ unfitness to govern Africans” (125). In spite of the fact that Garvey wanted the best for Africans at the time being, his stance had the opposite reaction of supposed support of apartheid. As a result, his “Africa for Africans prophecy would not prevail [in South Africa] in decades” (119). Garvey’s flaw in not realizing the global applicability of his most famous statement led to his political demise in South Africa; his agreement for separation amongst blacks and whites fueled an ideology that supported the inequality of black South Africans. Yet, his contribution to the country was extremely impactful, like other influencers that visited this nation.
Comprehensively, Africans have been molded through exterior influences such as Marcus Garvey and the Jubilee Singers from the United States. Most of these influences have had a propitious effect on Africans, increasing their morale and want for a future with no discrimination. However, strong forces such as Garvey eventually declined due to the change Africans realized they needed in a time of political disparity. Natives of Africa, nonetheless, have carried the principals and teachings used to mold them over time to become a stronger, more affirmative continent.