Jonno Marlton Blog 6: Deconstructing the European Model

As we can see through the process of colonization, power shifts as one group asserts its dominance over another.  Anderson discusses reasons for and manifestations of these power shifts.  Looking to language (administrative and spoken,) print media, and conscious imperial efforts to spread nationalist sentiment that reflects, in a sense, the conqueror, Anderson offers examples of “the European model” of colonial reign (Anderson 99.)  The point I am making is that the European model, which was adopted by Japan, inherently involves racism (a not-so-subtle, almost confessed-to racism) that privileges the goals and characteristics of the dominant group over those of the groups being pushed aside, used for the dominant group’s advantage, or both.  Matt R. made a terrific point in his blog when he asserted that empires employing anticipatory strategies, as opposed to exercising what I think of as straight-up imperialism, were adeptly fortifying themselves from outside influence as they used a uniform nationalist image to expand their realms.

Looking for a current case of an anticipatory strategy proved difficult for me, but I landed on South Africa because I have been studying it in another course.  South Africa has a complex and tumultuous history that involves many different groups that often get shoved into about four or five different categories, despite consisting of many separate nations that identified as distinctly different from the others.  The colonial powers involved (the English and the Dutch) competed for South Africa against each other because they had the power.   The native African tribes were in many ways an afterthought.  Fast forwarding quickly (and not doing any justice to the rich history of the territory and its many peoples,) the Afrikaners, a group descended from the Dutch (but distinct from their Dutch forefathers) became the dominant power in the country.  Whiteness of course still dominated the top of the hierarchy, but the Afrikaners were above the English, who were above everybody else.

An anticipatory strategy was completely out of the picture.  The Afrikaners instituted ‘separate development,’ which is best of as separate, but intentionally unequal.  People of color were excluded from the cities.  So, you may ask, how could I be talking about anticipatory strategies when the Afrikaners, who importantly never made up the majority –even almost- in South Africa, never used one?  Well, in 1994, Nelson Mandela became president of a new South Africa.  Apartheid was abolished and the mistreated majority now had one of their own as a leader.  Mandela is on record as having refused to tell militant black groups to stop using violence, but as a candidate and as President, he ran a non-race-oriented campaign.  Therefore, he and his administration cleverly developed an anticipatory strategy that served many groups of the country.  The difference from Anderson’s examples is that the group soon to be dominant padded the blow for the takeover of the other group instead of the other way around.  Being South African, clearly, now meant something very different.