The National Union of South African Students: A Case-Study of the Plight of Liberalism,1924-77Author(s): Benjamin KlineSource: The Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Mar., 1985), pp. 139-145Published by: Cambridge University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/160469 .

Accessed: 09/05/2014 00:53

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TheJournal of Modern African Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Fri, 9 May 2014 00:53:20 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Journal of Modern African Studies 23, I (1985), pp. 139-145

The National Union of South African Students: a Case-Study of the Plight of Liberalism, 1924-77

by Benjamin Kline, Modern History Department, University College Cork, Ireland

Liberalism in South Africa has had a history of impotence because of its failure to adhere consistently to the belief that when the 'loss of liberty for non-whites' occurs, it 'inevitably meant [the] loss of liberty for whites as well'. Instead, the predominantly English-speaking South Africans who backed this movement have attempted to promote liberal ideals while maintaining their white prerogatives, and have subsequently found the two to be 'incompatible'.' As a result, neither the uncompromising Afrikaner Nationalists nor the demanding Africans and revolutionaries have supported liberalism, and those South Africans in the middle have been discouraged by its vacillating nature. The National Union of South African Students is an example of a liberal organisation's inability to solve this dilemma. Initially Nusas concentrated on academic needs, following a ' students as such' policy, and then later transformed its ideals into a 'students in society' view, becoming socially active in defiance of the Nationalist Government.2

After the I 914- I 8 war, there was a world-wide movement to promote national

organisations of university students. The creation of the Confederation internationale des e'tudiants in 1919 at Strasburg inspired the foundation of a national student union in Britain in 1920, which in turn influenced the formation of Nusas. At the inaugural conference, held at Bloemfontein in I924, the following Universities were represented: Cape Town, Witwatersrand, Natal, Rhodes, Stellenbosch, Pretoria, Grey (Bloemfontein), and Potchefstroom.3 Originally, the new organisation was reserved for whites only, as the exclusion of Fort Hare University College illustrated, but within the white community Nusas was open to all cultures and religions, representing liberal views for all students at affiliated institutions who automatically became members by registering for classes.

Within ten years the clash between the Afrikaner and liberal movements had moved into the Universities, causing a split within Nusas in 1933 and the subsequent creation of the Afrikaanse-JNasionale Studentebond, which catered for students at the Afrikaner Universities of the Orange Free State, Potchefstroom, Pretoria, and later (1936) Stellenbosch.

As South Africa entered World War II, the split between the Universities polarised as conservative ideals prospered on the Afrikaans-speaking campuses while Nusas identified with anti-fascist groups, taking a leftist attitude in its view and policies. At a meeting of the Afrikaanse-Nasionale Studentebond in September 1940 the guest speaker, Reverend J. D. Vorster, illustrated just how entrenched Afrikaner nationalism had become when he declared: The basis of this republic will be that the Afrikaner will no longer co-operate with the Englishman. He will make the conditions, and the Englishman will be compelled to submit to these regulations...

1 Janet Robertson, Liberalism in South Africa, 1948-i963 (Oxford, I97I), p. 231. 2 The terms 'students as such' and 'students in society' have been taken from Martin Legassick,

'The National Union of South African Students', African Studies Center, University of California, Los Angeles, I967.

3 Leo Marquard, The Peoples and Policies of South Africa (Oxford, I969 edn.), p. 210.

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Fri, 9 May 2014 00:53:20 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BENJAMIN KLINE

...Hitler's Mein Kampf shows the way to greatness- the path of South Africa. Hitler gave the Germans a calling. He gave them a fanatisicm which causes them to stand back for no one. We must follow his example because only by such holy fanatisicm can the Afrikaner nation achieve

its calling.1

Nusas attempted to counter this conservatism by broadening its own liberal

policies, and in 1945 admitted the non-white Universities of Fort Hare and Hewat Training College.2 It went further by amending its constitution to include the following objectives: 'to defend democracy' and 'to encourage the

promotion of educational and economic opportunity to all South Africa with

special attention to the underprivileged'.3 None the less, Nusas was not yet prepared to move outside the academic

community, and its leadership attempted to lessen the provocative nature of its campus actions by publicly stating that they were undertaken for purely apolitical reasons, being consistent with its 'students as such' philosophy.

From 'Students as Such' to 'Students in Society' The unexpected victory of the Nationalists in the I 948 election forced Nusas

to take a stronger stand in voicing the liberal ideals of the Universities it

represented. In order to promote these views and yet remain within the confines of academia, Nusas published in 1950 a booklet entitled The African in the University, written by its President, Phillip Tobias, that basically repudiated the Nationalist policy of segregation in higher education. The members of Nusas would refuse to 'accept as automatic the idea that different ethnic groups should have separate and independent systems of higher education'. Furthermore, 'there can be no two standards of education among any two groups of people, their relevant factors being equal'.4

By I951 Tobias had led Nusas into opposition against the Government's

discriminatory educational policies and broadened its protest by declaring that the Suppression of Communism Act would hamper the freedom of students and staff. Couched in ever-widening defined educational terms, Nusas had, by the early I950s, entered the realm of social protest, changing its views and direction. The Students Representative Council at Fort Hare University College voiced this shift to a policy of'students in society' by proposing, under the threat of disaffiliation, that there should be a definite programme on the

question of race, in which Nusas would constitutionally recognise the 'political and social equality of all men in South Africa'.5

Although the Nationalists failed to gain a majority of votes in the general election of 1953, they did increase their parliamentary strength and felt secure

enough to deal with the growing defiance of the liberal English Universities. In 1954 the Government announced its intention of introducing legislation that would create apartheid in higher education, followed in March 1956 by the

Separate University Education Bill. Essentially, this planned for the establish- ment of separate University Colleges for Bantu, Indians, and Coloureds, and

1 William Henry Vatcher, Jr., White Laager: the rise of Afrikaner nationalism (New York, I968' edn.), p. 62. 2 Legassick, op. cit. p. i6.

3 National Union of South African Students Handbook (Cape Town, I974), p. I6. 4 Phillip V. Tobias, The African in the Universities (Cape Town, I950), p. 6. 5 Legassick, op. cit. p. i9.

I40

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Fri, 9 May 2014 00:53:20 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LIBERALISM IN SOUTH AFRICA

for their exclusion from white Universities.1 Protests were inevitable, and Nusas immediately published an Open Letter to the Minister of Education that denounced the draft legislation, and this heralded the decision to fight its enactment. As regards actual tactics, however, Nusas decided to make the kind of compromise that South African liberalism has consistently accepted. Realising the need to gain support from a white majority, Nusas decided to side-step the issue of segregation and instead centred its campaign on the Government's threat to academic autonomy. Nusas could, therefore, defend the non-racial view that the Universities should decide 'who should teach, what should be taught, how it should be taught and to whom'.2

InJohannesburg, Cape Town, Alice, and Grahamstown, solemn processions of students, together with professors, lecturers, members of councils, and ex-students marched through the streets, with over 7,500 people participating. Each week while the crucial legislation was being debated, 250 students from the University of Cape Town, with placards reading, 'Keep Our Universities Free and Open ', maintained a silent vigil outside Parliament, beingjoined by members of the women's pacifist group known as Black Sash.4 Nusas was also responsible for mobilising support from sympathetic organisations in many parts of the world, including Scandinavia, Britain, the United States, Latin America, Asia, and elsewhere in Africa.

The Nationalists had to face not only domestic liberal and external opposition to their legislation, but also reservations emanating from prominent academics at the Afrikaans-medium Universities. A number of Professors, includingJ. H. Coetzee and L. J. du Plessis from Potchefstroom, C. R. Rauten- bach and F. R. Tomlinson from Pretoria, and N. J. J. Olivier and J. L. Sadie from Stellenbosch, objected to the degree of control that would be exerted by the Government over the new Universities to be established for non-whites.5 However, despite the proliferation of protests that followed the introduction of the Separate University Education Bill, the Nationalists secured its passage in June I959, albeit renamed as the Extension of University Education Act.

The efforts made by Nusas during this campaign had further identified it with the anti-apartheid and anti-Nationalist sections of South African society. The organisation had become dedicated to a 'students in society' policy based on liberal ideals, and it now attempted to apply this lesson on a larger scale. These efforts were encouraged by the support given on English-speaking campuses to the active resistance of Africans not only to 'Bantu Education', but also to the newly instituted Bantu Authorities, and the increased issuance of reference books for African women. In March 1960 as many as 69 Africans were killed and I8o injured in the so-called 'Sharpeville incident', and this resulted in a surge of support for Nusas activities.6

In the same year, the Government introduced the Publications and Entertainment Bill which enabled the Minister of the Interior to appoint a number of boards of censorship that would decide which materials of the mass media, primarily newspapers, films, plays, books, and periodicals, could be released to the South African public. This Bill was condemned by the Professor

1 Marquard, op. cit. p. 2I2. 2 Legassick, op. cit. p. 34. 3 Ibid. p. 37.

4 Marquard, op. cit. p. 213. 5 Legassick, op. cit. p. 37. 6 Robertson, op. cit. p. 205.

I4I

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Fri, 9 May 2014 00:53:20 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BENJAMIN KLINE

of Comparative Law at Cape Town, D. V. Cowen, as a 'sinister and dangerous threat' to personal freedoms, in an address sponsored by Nusas - later

published with a laudatory foreword by the President, Adrian Leftwich - and was compared with the laws and practices of Nazi Germany.1 As with the issue of university apartheid, this opposition did not keep the Government from doing as it wished. The only consolation for the Nusas activists and their liberal allies was that they helped to delay the implementation of the Act by two years.

The Response of the Nationalist Government In October I 960 the Nationalist Government held a referendum to determine

whether South Africa should become a Republic. The measure was passed with less than a 5 per cent majority, and subsequently the Prime Minister, Hendrik F. Verwoerd, withdrew South Africa from the Commonwealth on 31 May I96I1.

Psychologically free of its most troublesome international ties, the Govern- ment now took steps to handle the threat of internal disorders more effectively. Thus, the Defence Act of I960 was enacted to complement the Suppression of

Communism Act in banning and harassing outspoken critics. In 1962 the

power of the police in the interrogation and control of suspected persons was

greatly widened. By consequent stages, authority was granted to the police to detain suspects without charging them for a crime, and under conditions of

solitary confinement for single or successive periods of i2 days (i962), 90 days (1963), i8o days (1965), and later for an unlimited period if authorised by a

judge (1970) -finally, even the need for this safeguard would be removed

(1976). Sabotage was defined by statute in 1962 to cover tampering with

property, the illegal possession of offensive weapons, and unlawful entry, as well as acts of wilful destruction; while terrorism was defined in I 966 to include

training for terrorist activity, furthering the objectives of Communism, and

committing acts of sabotage.2 The Government was now equipped with an effective arsenal to combat domestic opposition.

In September 1963 the Minister of Justice B.J. Vorster, called Nusas a 'damnable and detestable organisation' and 'a cancer in the life of South Africa that must be cut out'.3 He then took items of its policy out of context, and issued a statement for the Sunday newspapers that attempted to link Nusas with Communism and a variety of' subversive' bodies, including the Organis- ation of African Unity.4 This was a purposeful ploy to exploit a growing difference of outlook on the English-speaking campuses, and although Nusas

replied to Vorster's charges, answering and refuting each allegation, a number of Nationalist supporters began to campaign against automatic membership. By 1964 they were ready to found the Conservative Student Association and the South African Conservative Student Association, and to recruit students who were disaffected with Nusas. The subsequent failure of these two groups to gain support reflects the political aims they preached, which alienated the

very apolitical students who were disenchanted with Nusas.

1 D. V. Cowen, Freedom of Thought and Its Expression in South Africa (Cape Town, i960), p.2. 2 T. R. H. Davenport, South Africa: a modern history (London, I977), p. 292. 3 Guy Arnold, The Last Bunker (London, 1976), pp. 217-I8. 4 Legassick, op. cit. p. 45.

I42

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Fri, 9 May 2014 00:53:20 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LIBERALISM IN SOUTH AFRICA

White apathy on University campuses had been steadily growing since I960 and had coincided with an upsurge of non-white militancy. As this trend persisted, it soon became clear that although Nusas was continually sponsoring protests and organising opposition forces, it relied more and more on non-white centres, thereby creating a widening gap between the liberal leadership and the mass of white students. In an attempt to mollify criticism, Nusas moderated its more 'extreme' policies, and this, in turn, resulted in a backlash of indignation from its own black supporters who denounced these actions ' as the result of a liberal training which causes them to shiver in their boots when attacked by members of their own class '. These students criticised the decision to re-emphasise practical activities over politics, and condemned the apparent new conservative interpretation of Nusas policy.

Such protests were representative of an emerging continent-wide African consciousness. In May I984, Jonty Driver, the Nusas President, expressed his personal views about these developments at a national seminar, when he responded to a critical resolution which had been adopted at a meeting of African students at Dar-es-Salaam, charging Nusas with not sufficiently representing the aspirations of the African majority in South Africa. Although Driver concluded that Nusas should increase African and decrease conservative membership, these proposals were rejected, primarily because they imposed new criteria.2 The swing from a 'students in society' to a 'students as such' policy apparently was growing in momentum. Driver's speech was generally distorted by the press, and despite the rejection of his proposals by Nusas, there was a conservative backlash that identified his opinions as official policy. The Students Representative Council at Natal took steps to disaffiliate, and in Parliament a Nationalist member called Nusas a 'camouflaged Communist Party'. Marais Steyn of the United Party warned that in the absence of reform 'we on this side of the House will not find it possible to defend NUSAS', 3while Vorster joined in by calling on conservative students to exert their influence on Nusas policy.

Disclosures and arrests were stepped up. At the Nusas assembly inJuly 1 964, David de Keller was arrested, together with other past and present students, all suspected of involvement in the African Resistance Movement. The subsequent conviction of de Keller and the proved participation in the A.R.M. of Adrian Leftwich and Neville Rubin, former Presidents, and of Hugh Levin, a former Vice-President for International Relations, seemed to implicate Nusas itself.4 Although not officially accused, it was difficult for Nusas to separate its activities with that of its former leadership, and hence the calls for it to be outlawed by the University authorities in the Nationalist press. The Principals of Witwatersrand and Cape Town replied by condemning those who employed violence, albeit being careful to state that 'students were entitled to their own opinions and to express them as they thought fit'5- an expression of encouragement in an otherwise depressing situation for Nusas.

I Ibid. p. 46. 2 Ibid. p. 47. 3 Ibid. 4 National Union of South African Students Handbook, p. I9. 5 Cape Times (Cape Town), i December I964.

I43

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Fri, 9 May 2014 00:53:20 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

BENJAMIN KLINE

The Schlebusch Committee In a further effort to immobilise the active liberal factions within South

Africa which had managed to survive as legitimate sources of opposition, Vorster - who had become Prime Minister in I966 - appointed members from both the Nationalist and United Parties to investigate the National Union of South African Students, the Christian Institute, and the South African Institute of Race Relations.1 Meanwhile, the South African Students Organis- ation had been formed on black campuses to give expression to the principle of'black power'; Nusas identified with these demands and held protests in

Cape Town and Johannesburg that were broken up by police using batons and tear gas.2

As a result, the Schlebuschl Committee found it expedient to issue an interim

report on Nusas, recommending that eight of its leaders, including the President, Paul Pretorius, should be served with banning orders. The Govern- ment simultaneously introduced the Affected Organisation Bill in 1974; this declared that Nusas was dangerous to the security of the state, prohibited certain organisations from receiving funds, and legalised the subjection of those named to a non-judicial form of enquiry from which penalties could ensue.3

Apart from the extensive hearings of individuals, the Schlebusch Commis- sion's main piece of evidence was a diary kept by Pretorius during a visit to

Europe in 197 , and allegedly stolen by the Bureau of State Security.4 Their final report was prefaced by admissions that they had not done a thorough job, and that rumours and hearsay evidence had been considered. They appear to have based their arguments for the existence of a conspiracy on the paper given byjonty Driver in I964, although curiously admitting that 'where a state of affairs is described as current, it is the state of affairs which existed when the Commission was making its investigation. Office bearers may no longer be in office and the constitution may have been amended.' Then, in a virtual admission of the irrelevance of their findings, they stated: 'every year NUSAS also abandons most of the stands it took during that year, and then starts from the beginning again'.5 It seems questionable whether a ten-year conspiracy could have lasted in such an organisation.

Despite the admitted inadequacies and dubious procedures of the investi-

gation, the Commission made three recommendations: (i) since Nusas was active in South African politics, measures should be instituted to prevent the work of the organisation from being supported and influenced by financial help from abroad; (2) central affiliation should be ended; and (3) students should have an individual choice of political affiliation on University campuses.6

In response to the report, Charles Nupen, who had succeeded Pretorius as

1 South African Institute of Race Relations, A Survey of Race Relations in South Africa, 1972

(Johannesburg, '973), pp. 52-3. 2 Arnold, op. cit. p. 220. 3 Ibid. p. I99. 4 International University Exchange Fund, Summary of the So-Called Schlebusch Committee's Report

on the National Union of South African Students (Geneva, 1975), p. iii. 5 Charles Nupen, Response to the Schlebusch Commission's Final Report on NUSAS (Cape Town,

I974), P. I- 6 South African Institute of Race Relations, A Survey of Race Relations in South Africa, 974

Johannesburg, 1975), pp. 32-3.

I 44

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Fri, 9 May 2014 00:53:20 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LIBERALISM IN SOUTH AFRICA

President of Nusas in I974, accused the Commission of not having conducted a judicial enquiry since it had allowed no cross examination or proper legal counsel, no formal charges had even been named, while witnesses had been refused access to evidence, much of which had been based on stolen or

intercepted correspondence. Such pleas had little effect, as it became evident that the findings of the Commission were simply meant to justify the sanctions

already taken by the Government against Nusas. The combination of the Affected Organisations Bill and the final report of the Schlebusch Commission

dramatically reduced the vitality of Nusas, not least because it had relied on

foreign contributions for 70 per cent of its RIoo,ooo annual budget.1 This

neutralising of Nusas's energies stimulated its already dissipating student

support and resulted in referendums at many University campuses as to whether or not they should continue their central affiliation. In the subsequent voting, the University of Witwatersrand opted to continue its membership, unlike the Johannesburg College of Education, the Maritzberg campus of the

University of Natal, and Rhodes University.2 In an effort to retain some viability, Nusas began in I975 to decentralise

its activities, in order to delegate more responsibility on individual campuses and away from the slighted governing body, by appointing full-time directors at each University. Faced with the prospect of bankruptcy, Nusas decided in

February 1976 to continue this trend, while the President and executive resigned in order to ' cut administrative expenses and make way for leaders with a less left-wing image'.3 At the 54th Nusas Congress in November 1976, Richard de Villiers, the new President, declared that white students could no longer identify with either Afrikaner or Black Consciousness movements and must identify as white Africans, ridding themselves of their European roots.4 In an effort to re-establish itself, Nusas had discovered a programme that was patriotic in sentiment, educational in practice, and less controversial in philosophy. At the 55th Nusas Congress in I977, this policy of'Africanisation' was reaffirmed, and students were encouraged to make a commitment to South Africa.

Although Nusas would continue its anti-Nationalist stance, its efforts to keep a 'low profile' by concentrating on educational matters were indicative of its demise as a potent liberal activist group. The I960s had illustrated the failure of Nusas to stimulate and propagate liberalism among the white student community, while it simultaneously hesitated to incorporate black activist and white radical elements. This inability is not peculiar to Nusas but is repre- sentative of South African liberalism. The incorporation of either moderate or radical ideals in a liberal framework has consistently alienated those left out, and their failure to compromise has debilitated liberal activities. The Nationalists have successfully nurtured this situation by outlawing multi-racial organisations, and by paralysing any white group that has shown signs of success. These contrasting forces, with the Nationalist Government acting as a catalyst, have continually demonstrated the impotency of South African liberalism.

1 Ibid. p. 35. 2 Rand Daily Mail (Johannesburg), 4 August 1976. 3 South African Institute of Race Relations, A Survey of Race Relations in South Africa, 1976

(Johannesburg, 1977), p. 373. 4 Ibid.

I45

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Fri, 9 May 2014 00:53:20 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions