ANALYSIS [+PDF] van der Walt, 1997, “Breve Histoire de l’anarchisme en Afrique du Sud”

Lucien van der Walt, 1997, “Breve Histoire de l’anarchisme en Afrique du Sud,” Le Monde Libertaire, 12 November 1997, no. 1099.

pdflogosmall

 

Click the image to get the PDF  or click here

 

van der Walt - Breve Histoire de l'anarchisme en Afrique du Sud [1997]

 

 

CHAPTER [+PDF] Lucien van der Walt, 2014, “Revolutionary Syndicalism, Communism and the National Question in South African Socialism, 1886-1928”

brill2Lucien van der Walt, 2014, “Revolutionary Syndicalism, Communism and the National Question in South African Socialism, 1886-1928”,  in Steven J. Hirsch and Lucien van der Walt (eds.), (foreword by Benedict Anderson), 2014, Anarchism and Syndicalism in the Colonial and Postcolonial World, 1870-1940: the praxis of national liberation, internationalism, and social revolution, Brill Academic Publishers, Leiden, Studies in Global Social History , pp. 33-94.

pdflogosmall

Get the PDF here.

This chapter examines the manner in which anarchists and revolutionary syndicalists confronted the national question in South Africa, particularly during the 1910s, the period of unquestioned syndicalist hegemony on the revolutionary left. The national question centred on two main elements: the deep racial and national divisions in the country, and the national oppression of the African, Coloured and Indian majority.

I argue that local anarchists and syndicalists maintained a principled opposition to racial discrimination and oppression, and a principled commitment to the creation of a multiracial anti-capitalist, anti-statist movement. These positions constituted the irreducible core of the libertarians’ approach to the national question— however, the most successful strategic/ tactical application of this approach was the activist-integrationist approach: this moved from analysis and principle to consistent and targeted efforts to mobilise African, Coloured, and Indian workers around both class and  national issues.  It enabled the construction, by 1921, of a genuinely multiracial revolutionary syndicalist movement, organised in a network of newspapers, unions and political groups, firmly committed to uniting the local working class to struggle simultaneously against the specific national oppression of the African, Coloured and Indian majority, and the capitalist exploitation and state domination of the whole working class, African, Coloured, Indian and white. The vehicle of this combined struggle was generally envisaged as a revolutionary interracial One Big Union on the model of the Industrial Workers of the World (the IWW) — this was to be the proletarian forge in which a common society embracing all, regardless of colour, would be created. The aim of the working class revolution was not to constitute an independent national  state. It was to overcome national and class inequality through the working class battle to constitute a self-managed libertarian socialist “Industrial Republic,” which would also form “an integral part of the International Industrial Republic”.

This vision has been obscured by the misrepresentations of the pre-Communist Party of South Africa left practiced by the influential “Communist school” of labour and left history. It is also fundamentally at odds with the two-stage strategy identified with the Communist Party from 1928 onwards, which envisages the establishment of an independent, democratic and capitalist republic as a stage towards a socialist order.  This Communist Party strategy assumes the necessity and desirability of delinking anti-colonial and class struggles, and tends to conflate national liberation with  nationalism.  By contrast, the One Big Union against national oppression, capitalism and the state, would fuse national liberation and social revolution, both in immediate struggle and as a final project, thus simultaneously addressing the national and social questions. It poses a solution to the national question that is anti-nationalist, since it rejects key precepts of nationalism: formation of a nation-state (for anti-statism), cross-class alliances within the nation (for class struggle), and national exclusivity (for popular class internationalism).

CHAPTER [+PDF] Hirsch and van der Walt, 2010, “Final Reflections: the vicissitudes of anarchist and syndicalist trajectories, 1940 to the present

Steven J. Hirsch and Lucien van der Walt, 2010, “Final Reflections: the brillvicissitudes of anarchist and syndicalist trajectories, 1940 to the present”,in Steven J. Hirsch and Lucien van der Walt (eds.), (foreword by Benedict Anderson), Anarchism and Syndicalism in the Colonial and Postcolonial World, 1870-1940: the praxis of national liberation, internationalism, and social revolution, Brill Academic Publishers, Leiden, Studies in Global Social History, pp. 395-412.

pdflogosmall

Get the PDF here

Concluding chapter to widely-praised edited volume, this tracks anarchism and syndicalism from the 1940s to the present, disputing the notion of eclipse (by drawing attention to a range of important post-1940 anarchist and syndicalist movements, influences and waves of growth), and disputes the notion that there is a “new” anarchism from the 1960s (since most of the “new” features are long extant). It also provides a partial explanation for the relative decline of the movement from the 1940s to the 1990s, and its current revival, stressing both objective factors (repression, the rise of statist forms of capitalism, state funding of Marxist movements etc.) as well as subjective factors (including costly organisational and strategic errors on the part of the anarchists and syndicalists — errors not by any means, it should be noted, inherent in anarchism and syndicalism).  Concludes that labour, left and colonial history must give due weight to the contribution of anarchism and syndicalism,

**The edited volume included specialist papers by Steven Hirsch, Lucien van der Walt, Luigi Biondi, Arif Dirlik, Anthony Gorman, Dongyoun Hwang, Geoffroy de Laforcade, Emmet O’Connor, Kirk Shaffer, Aleksandr Shubin, Edilene Toledo — and an introduction by the renowned Benedict Anderson. The focus was on movements in the period of classic imperialism, and countries covered included Argentina, Brazil, China, Cuba, Egypt, Korea, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Puerto Rico, South Africa, and the Ukraine. The original edition appeared in 2010, and a paperback, slightly revised and with a new preface, appeared in 2014.  You can read more about the volume here and here.

CHAPTER [+PDF] van der Walt & Hirsch, 2010, “Rethinking Anarchism and Syndicalism: The colonial and post-colonial experience, 1870-1940”

brillLucien van der Walt and Steven J. Hirsch, 2010, “Rethinking Anarchism and Syndicalism: the colonial and post-colonial experience, 1870-1940”,  in Steven J. Hirsch and Lucien van der Walt (eds.), (foreword by Benedict Anderson), Anarchism and Syndicalism in the Colonial and Postcolonial World, 1870-1940: the praxis of national liberation, internationalism, and social revolution, Brill Academic Publishers, Leiden, Studies in Global Social History, pp. xxxi-lxxiii .

pdflogosmall

Get the PDF here.

Extensive introduction to widely-praised edited volume, examining the role that anarchism and syndicalism played in the colonial and postcolonial world, from 1870-1940. Close attention is paid to the movement’s role in union movements, in anti-colonial, anti-imperialist and national liberation struggles, and in tackling the national question including racial segregation and divisions.  To understand anarchism and syndicalism, a global analysis that places in Africa, Asia, East Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as Ireland, centre stage, is essential. This does not mean inventing false categories like “Southern” or “third world” anarchism, but rather, seeing anarchism and syndicalism as a global current conceived and forged internationally. While absolutely crucial, the Spanish movement was neither unique nor unusual, but , and but one of a series of mass movements, with close linkages that are partially captured by a transnational analytical framing.

**The edited volume included specialist papers by Steven Hirsch, Lucien van der Walt, Luigi Biondi, Arif Dirlik, Anthony Gorman, Dongyoun Hwang, Geoffroy de Laforcade, Emmet O’Connor, Kirk Shaffer, Aleksandr Shubin, Edilene Toledo — and an introduction by the renowned Benedict Anderson. The focus was on movements in the period of classic imperialism, and countries covered included Argentina, Brazil, China, Cuba, Egypt, Korea, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Puerto Rico, South Africa, and the Ukraine. The original edition appeared in 2010, and a paperback, slightly revised and with a new preface, appeared in 2014.  You can read more about the volume here and here.

REVIEW [+PDF] Lucien van der Walt, 2012, Berry and Bantman (eds.), “New Perspectives on Anarchism, Labour and Syndicalism: the Individual, the National and the Transnational”

Lucien van der Walt, 2012, “David Berry and Constance Bantman, eds., New Perspectives on Anarchism, Labour and Syndicalism: the individual, the national and the transnational ”, Anarchist Studies, volume 20, number 1, pp. 123-126.

David Berry and Constance Bantman (eds.), New Perspectives on Anarchism, Labour and Syndicalism: the Individual, the National and the Transnational, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010, 228pp.
ISBN 978-1-4438-2393-7

pdflogosmall

 

Get the PDF here

 

Bantman, BerryThis fine collection draws together studies of anarchism and syndicalism, mainly covering the 1890s to the 1940s in Europe. These underline the important role of anarchism in labour movement history, and, conversely, demonstrate anarchism’s and syndicalism’s commitment to a libertarian, revolutionary class struggle politics. The individual chapters are remarkably interesting and solidly researched; the editors’ introduction is insightful; and the volume is cohesive, as important synergies make the whole greater than the sum of the parts.

Berry and Bantman make a case for the importance of global – especially transnational – approaches to labour and left history. They argue for the utility of biography, network analysis, comparative analysis and attention to political languages, in shifting

p. 124

from the ‘methodological nationalism’ (p.6) that has long shaped these fields. Bert Altena’s stimulating survey picks up these analytical issues. He argues against approaches that treat syndicalism as something ‘abnormal’, a ‘Pavlovian reaction’ triggered by external structural conditions such as the second industrial revolution, social democratic failure etc. Inc problem is that mass syndicalism existed where many of these conditions did not apply (e.g. Spain, 1870s, France, 1890s), and was conversely absent (e.g. Belgium) or only a minority current (e.g. Germany) where they did apply. Second, structuralist arguments fail to examine syndicalism on its own terms, as a revolutionary movement with its own political culture, driven by the *ideas* and *aspirations* of working class people in particular communities and contexts.

The editors apologise for their ‘Eurocentrism’, but this is surely unnecessary.  The methodological problems of Eurocentrism reside not in a focus on Europe *as such*, but in a conflation of world history with (West) European history, with other regions ignored or caricatured. This is certainly not the approach of Berry and Bantman, who are keenly aware that European anarchism/syndicalism was but part of a global movement. Levy’s fine discussion of anarchist ‘global labour organiser’ Errico Malatesta’s role in anti-colonial risings in Bosnia and Egypt, and in activism and networks in North Africa, the Middle East, the Caribbean and Latin America, Read more of this post

REVIEW [+PDF] Lucien van der Walt, 2006, “Neil Roos, Ordinary Springboks: white servicemen and social justice in South Africa, 1939-1961”

Lucien van der Walt, 2006, “Neil Roos, Ordinary Springboks: white servicemen and social justice in South Africa, 1939-1961”, International Review of Social History, volume 51, part 3, pp. 501-504.

REVIEW: Roos, NEIL. Ordinary Springboks. White Servicemen and Social Justice in South Africa, 1939- 1961. Ashgate, Aldershot [etc.] 2005. xvi, 23 I pp. £45 .oo;

RoosA growing literature has drawn attention to the role of the state military in the political culture of South Africa’s white working class. Many of the key figures in the anarchist and

p. 503

syndicalist movement of the early twentieth century, like S.P. Bunting, Wilfred Harrison, and Tom Glynn were former soldiers[1]. Jeremy Krikler noted the impact of World War I on the strikers’ militias of the 1922 Rand Revolt, the ‘commandos’ [2].  Walking to the gallows in Pretoria in November 1922, strike leader Taffy Long called out “Are we downhearted?”, to which the other condemned called back, “No, we are not!”, a refrain common to British troops in the bloody trenches of Flanders.

pdflogosmall

Get the PDF here

 

Rather less, however, is known about the impact of World War II – much of the literature has focused on domestic developments, like the rise of African unions in the wartime economy – and so Neil Roos’s elegant study fills a major gap. It is an important and fascinating social history, although Roos’s reliance on American “whiteness studies”, which tends to conflate white identities, in general, with the particular politics of racial privileges for whites, creates some problems, to which I return below.

Between 200,000 and 260,000 white South African men volunteered from 1939, along with around 110,ooo white women and 8o,ooo people of colour (pp. 26-27). Volunteers were drawn from a broad spectrum of South Africa’s diverse nationalities, but the war issue was also deeply divisive. The Afrikaner nationalists, generally a right-wing populist movement, typically opposed support for the British Empire (some openly sympathized with fascism, pp. 23-27), while the multi-racial Communist Party of South Africa (CPSA) initially stressed the contradiction between “anti-fascist” rhetoric and South Africa’s segregated order. Yet poor whites, particularly Afrikaners, were  disproportionately represented amongst recruits, a large pool of desperate men (pp. 30-34, 41-43). My own father, a poor white and Afrikaner nationalist, was one of many recruits whose nationalist convictions Read more of this post

REVIEW [+PDF] Lucien van der Walt, 2005, Lis Lange, “White, Poor and Angry: white working class families in Johannesburg”

Lucien van der Walt, 2005, “Lis Lange, White, Poor and Angry: white working class families in Johannesburg”, International Review of Social History, volume 50, number 1, pp. 115-117.

LANGE, LIS. van der Walt – Review of Lange ‘White, Poor and Angry’ lange [Race and representation.] Ashgate, Aldershot [etc.] 2003. viii, 186 pp. £45.00.

Lis Lange provides that rarity in African studies: a monograph on the social history of white yet working-class South Africans. This nuanced study looks at the emergence, social conditions, and social and political responses of the white working class in its formative period: roughly from 1890, when the new Witwatersrand mining industry came under the control of the monopoly capitalists christened “Randlords,” to the 1922 general strike and armed uprising that famously demanded “Workers of the World Unite and Fight for a White South Africa”.

pdflogosmall

 

PDF is here.

While the 1922 Rand Revolt must be understood as part of an international wave of popular insurgency that swept up from Ireland and Mexico in 1916, and crashed down in Bulgaria and Germany in 1923, its particularities cannot be fully grasped without the details of daily life provided by writers such as Lange, who pays particular attention to the role of family, housing, and state policy in shaping white workers’ identities and communities, which she stresses were not always “clearly defined, homogenous and coherently expressed” (p. 166). Lange’s focus is Johannesburg, the heart of the Witwatersrand complex. Beginning as a diggers’ tent city in 1886, the city had over 82,000 white inhabitants by 1904, out of a population of 155,462, spread over 82 miles (pp. 12,39,84). Many were drawn from abroad by the lure of good wages and “cheap steamship travel” (p. 13); others were local Afrikaners proletarianized by changes in rural South Africa. Settled white working-class communities were soon evident – partly a function of growing confidence in the future of the mines – with 80.16 per cent of whites overall living

p. 116

in families by 1904 (p. 12), although, even eight years later, 49.31 per cent of white miners were unmarried (p. 79).

While South Africa was a “racially organized colonial society” (p. 64), and cheap, unfree, migrant African labour formed the bedrock of the mining industry, conditions for the white working class were generally grim. Residential land was Read more of this post

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 46 other followers

%d bloggers like this: