Apartheid: The rise and fall of South Africa’s ‘apartness’ laws

Apartheid: The rise and fall of South Africa's 'apartness' laws

Apartheid: The rise and fall of South Africa's 'apartness' laws


South Africa is marking the 25th anniversary of the fall of apartheid in 2019.

Apartheid, the Afrikaans word for “apartness,” was made up of a collection of strict laws targeting visible minorities in the country and is viewed as one of the darkest periods in the nation’s history.

For nearly half a century, non-white South Africans were stripped of their freedoms and suffered under government imposed restrictions.

The face of the anti-apartheid movement became Nelson Mandela – who was jailed as a political prisoner for 27 years – whom would later become the nation’s president and an icon of freedom and justice.

So, how could institutionalized discrimination take hold in South Africa, and what steps were taken to bring an end to apartheid?

For more info, please go to https://globalnews.ca/tag/apartheid/
Subscribe to Global News Channel HERE: http://bit.ly/20fcXDc
Like Global News on Facebook HERE: http://bit.ly/255GMJQ
Follow Global News on Twitter HERE: http://bit.ly/1Toz8mt
Follow Global News on Instagram HERE: https://bit.ly/2QZaZIB
#AntiApartheid #Apartheid #SouthAfrica #SAapartheid #GlobalNews #ApartheidLaws

Author

Author

46 Responses

  1. My friend whas a musician the ak hi left the country in 82 coz they wannit him hang later here hi playt music to give it all to the south afrika strugel . Here the band whas callt deezo and the bannabeat . My friend is deezo

  2. Now we see the racism in reverse. All humans are racists to some degree. Everybody always trying to feel good jumping on one band wagon or another. All groups should have the same rights. I guess we should just segregate the whole world into their own little groups .

  3. South Africa’s majority didn’t want apartheid. In 1948, a wrong-winner First Past the Post election gave it to them any way. When apartheid ended the country brought in Proportional Representation.

  4. So many comments defending apartheid. Yeah, we get it, the ANC sucks. But the National government was even worse. This would be like someone saying, "The Soviet Union was awesome because I don’t like Putin." Or "Nazi Germany was awesome because I don’t like Merkel." Total stupidity and willing ignorance.

  5. Agenda much ? Ever heard of the white farmers fleeing Genocide in Sth Africa which is actually happening now , have you heard about that ? Is the real reason of dragging this up ignoring white genocide actually ongoing now to create more racism ? What a disgusting Agenda driven MSM piece , join CNN they’d love you there …

  6. Maybe you could do a video and explain why, in spite of Apartheid, thousands of blacks from neighboring countries migrated to South Africa every year? South Africa is now on a course that will ultimately take it to the same status of Zimbabwe, formally know as Rhodesia. And when millions are suffering from lack of food and water, somehow, the "news" outlets will find a simpleminded way of laying the blame at the feet of the white European colonizers.

  7. You had to go back so far to make this story… South Africa is a POS now. It’s the worst it has been in history. Why don’t you report on that? But you defend SA fine, come live here in a township. Let’s see how much you love SA after that.

  8. You neglect to mention Mandela and his wife both participated in violent actions themselves. The missus was particularly keen on "necklacing".

    You don’t explore why it was implemented in the first place and how the world was at the time.

  9. I AM NOT AGAINST APARTHEID IT REPRESENTS SEPARATION BETWEEN RACE AND CULTURE FOR PEACE LIKE THE ANIMAL KINGDOM AND ANIMAL SPECIES 🇺🇸💪🤘🏻🗡🛢💣💥

  10. how was it possible that a less than 10% minority could do all this with the 90% majority?The answer should be simple: the 90% were primitive enough. What ended apartheid? Black resistance? No. International sanctions. White Europeans are/were the best mankind could offer with one exception: the Japanese.

  11. 10X more people have been killed since 1994 than over the 50 years of apartheid rule. Look it up… More violence more death more rape more race related murders… It’s going to get worse

  12. Biased, selective reporting glorifying Nelson Mandela and the ANC. The ANC was a terror organisation who have killed many innocent people in the name of freedom. Nelson Mandela was tried before court and found guilty. Today SA is ruled by former terrorist. How about that as a topic for your next video exposé?

  13. With all the calls for dead white farmers I can’t blame them for wanting these rules to begin with. This is 100% propaganda

  14. and now a white genocide and a white farmer land confiscation . what a disgrace. Canada should be bringing in white SA farmers they face true hardships, at least they can contribute to our economy and will fit in with us not attack us in the name of Allah

  15. If you ignore the ominous sounding music, None of that sounds that bad.
    Blacks lived in one place and whites in another, what’s unfair with that arrangement?
    Blacks had residence of most of africa so limiting them to 7% of south africa wasn’t too unjust, especially considering that 7% of SA land would be able to house the entirety of the country’s black population at the time with room to spare, how much of SA was held by whites? how much by the natives? that seems a bit important if you are to convince us that 7% is low. I live in canada, and we mostly occupy a small strip of land along the southern border of our country, japan has a lot of unsettled land as well, this is largely because the areas left sparsely inhabited or uninhabited are very difficult to live in.
    Remember that thew blacks were invaders with a history of carrying out the worst genocidal conquest in human history, the bantu expansion (which was even worse than the famous campaigns of genghis khan, or the islamic empire), blacks arrived in south africa after the whites had already settled there and were essentially squatters on the lands white purchased from the south african natives, who would have been slaughtered by the blacks if not for the presence of the white settlers. With this in mind, the whites not only didn’t kill all of them on sight, as would be most sensible, they allowed them to stay in the country.

    Mind you, they haven’t explained the pictures, and left you to assume these were the whites killing and oppressing blacks, in fact, it was the ANC, the current ruling party in Africa, which was then carrying out terrorist attacks against the white and native south african people, they were openly black supremacist, communist, and preached a genocide of all non-blacks, this was ignored because they were striking out against apartheid which most of the world didnt understand much about beyond that it was a really evil thing, nelson mandela orchestrated the bombing of school busses full of children, and acts like that put him in jail for so long, he never stopped supporting the idea of a black-only communist south africa, but the ANC and Mandela realized they needed to tone that down and pretend to be in favor of egalitarianism, only to change their mind once they had the power and the rest of the world wasnt caring about what they did.

    The rainbow nation of post-aparthied SA was supposed to set an example of the power of a post-racial country, it was the world’s experiment for racial diversity and multiculturalism in the same way the USSR was the world’s experiment for socialism and communism.
    They literally were airing programs in the US about how americans should look to south africa for an example of how to handle racial politics. But when the result was decline and fall into a poor, violent, and corrupt country, the words "rainbow nation" were no longer spoken, and the experiment was thrown down the memory hole.

    read robert putnam’s study on diversity, look up "bowling alone" on youtube for a story about a liberal professor who decided to demonstrate the benefits of diversity and the lack of harm from diversity by conducting the largest ever meta-analysis on the effects of racial diversity. The results were no advantages, and severe harm in virtually every category, most surprising being that greater amounts of racial diversity increased the amount of hatred between races and damaged racial relations, at least when it came to the races that came into contact with one another, exposure to members of other races also increased the likelihood of belief in the accuracy of racial sterotypes of the races they came into contact with.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *