African Studies Seminar series. Paper presented 26 September, 1994This paper outlines the contents of two 'manuscripts of modernity' produced in
defence of the Afrikaner Boerestand in the late 1950's. My reconstruction of these
'manuscripts' is both incomplete and sketchy. I hope that their intrinsic interest to
the cultural exploration of the inner contours of Afrikaner ethnic ideology justifies
the effort below.1 The two 'manuscripts of modernity' are the cumulative opinions,
ideas and objections of Afrikaner (male) academics, State officials, clerics, farmers
and members of the rural bourgeoisie in evidence to the Commission of Inquiry into
European Occupancy of the Rural Areas in the late 1950's. 2 They debate the
relationship of Afrikanerdom to modernisation in a particularly vivid way. 3 In doing
so, they demonstrate not just the contingent and protean nature of ethnicity, but
the contested nature of modernisation to Afrikanerdom. In the context of the
1950's, with Afrikanerdom ascendant, this contestation within Afrikanerdom in
regard to the Boerestand offers a unique view of how Afrikanerdom viewed the
modernisation experience on the platteland farms under Apartheid. The first 'manuscript' outlines a vision of modernity grounded in the
Boerevolk ideal -- that "those that do the work, will ultimately rule the land." 4 It
envisaged the defence of a homogenous Afrikaner rural society - a stand -- as a
counterweight to the new arbeiderstand in the cities (the product of the
verswarting ('blackening') and ontvolking ('depopulation') of the platteland) and
growing influence of anti-national urban capitalist interests on the State and urban
Afrikaner society in the 1950's. The Transvaaler wrote in 1956:
"No Volk can exist without a Boerestand. We naturally mean by the
Boerestand not simply landowners, but also those who ordinarily must
do the physical labour on the farms. A sound Boerestand is necessary
to serve as the basis for white civilisation in the Union (and) this
foundation must be strengthened." 5
Boerevolk promoters commented on increasing dominance of the State by the late
1950's by the 'urban interest'. This Boerevolk had to "perform the function of
preserving and implementing the national spirit and culture" against the "urban
tendency towards anglicisation":
Our history confirms the findings of sociologists that even when a
Volk loses its independence, and is overwhelmed by force of arms, if
it has a strong rural character, the Volk will in all probability be able
to preserve its individuality and its culture, and thereby recover its
political independence." 6
The second 'manuscript of modernity' - a 'modernisation charter' -- at first
glance seems to be familiar to us. It outlined a development policy on the platteland
that derived from the textbooks of the most avid pro-modernisation theorists of the
1950's. Yet when analysed in its historical-cultural context, it reveals a number of
core ethnic and cultural concerns in common with Boerevolk ideologues
