Re: The Boer War

[TAHIR WOOD <TWOOD@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> "George Pennefather" <poseidon@xxxxxxxx> 10/14 7:50 PM
>>>
Just a short while ago the 100 year anniversary of the Boer
occurred. It is a war is little discussed despite the
importance Lenin seems attributed to it as a historic event.

This is the case even in SA. Yes it was hugely important,
and one of those neglected areas (like slavery at the Cape),
whose significance is underappreciated amongst much of the
left.

Imperialism faced a dual threat from Boers and Blacks, which
were dealt with in that order. Prejudice on the part of the
British has almost always been equally directed against Boer
as against Black, but having defeated the Boers, the Boer
generals were co-opted by a very lenient and gracious treaty
of Vereeniging, which laid the basis for 'white unity' and
the Union of 1910. This is enormously significant, since it
shows the roots of the apartheid system being created under
the stewardship of British imperialism. It shows the
creativity of imperialism in co-opting and controlling,
creating new ideologies and legal frameworks for super
exploitation. 1948 was just a consolidation and perfection
of what was essentially already in place. And 1994? If one
set of militant anti-imperialist nationalists can be
successfully co-opted after a guerilla war, why not another?

But none of this makes any sense unless one realises that
the Boer struggle was indeed an anti-mperialist one, which
is a controversial thesis, even a startling one to some. But
look at the chain of events and the picture they create.
Defeat of the Boers - Treaty of Vereeniging - defeat of the
Zulu uprising - Union of South Africa - formation of the
African National Congress - the Land Acts, etc, etc.

Tahir