Starting in 1948, the Nationalist Government in South Africa enacted laws to define and enforce segregation.

What makes South Africa’s apartheid era different to segregation and racial hatred that have occurred in other countries is the systematic way in which the National Party, which came into power in 1948, formalised it through the law. The main laws are described below.

Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act, Act No 55 of 1949
Prohibited marriages between white people and people of other races. Between 1946 and the enactment of this law, only 75 mixed marriages had been recorded, compared with some 28,000 white marriages.

Immorality Amendment Act, Act No 21 of 1950; amended in 1957 (Act 23)
Prohibited adultery, attempted adultery or related immoral acts (extra-marital sex) between white and black people.

Population Registration Act, Act No 30 of 1950
Led to the creation of a national register in which every person’s race was recorded. A Race Classification Board took the final decision on what a person’s race was in disputed cases.

Group Areas Act, Act No 41 of 1950
Forced physical separation between races by creating different residential areas for different races. Led to forced removals of people living in “wrong” areas, for example Coloureds living in District Six in Cape Town.

Suppression of Communism Act, Act No 44 of 1950
Outlawed communism and the Community Party in South Africa. Communism was defined so broadly that it covered any call for radical change. Communists could be banned from participating in a political organisation and restricted to a particular area.

Bantu Building Workers Act, Act No 27 of 1951
Allowed black people to be trained as artisans in the building trade, something previously reserved for whites only, but they had to work within an area designated for blacks. Made it a criminal offence for a black person to perform any skilled work in urban areas except in those sections designated for black occupation.

Separate Representation of Voters Act, Act No 46 of 1951
Together with the 1956 amendment, this act led to the removal of Coloureds from the common voters’ roll.

Prevention of Illegal Squatting Act, Act No 52 of 1951
Gave the Minister of Native Affairs the power to remove blacks from public or privately owned land and to establishment resettlement camps to house these displaced people.

Bantu Authorities Act, Act No 68 of 1951
Provided for the establishment of black homelands and regional authorities and, with the aim of creating greater self-government in the homelands, abolished the Native Representative Council.

Natives Laws Amendment Act of 1952
Narrowed the definition of the category of blacks who had the right of permanent residence in towns. Section 10 limited this to those who’d been born in a town and had lived there continuously for not less than 15 years, or who had been employed there continuously for at least 15 years, or who had worked continuously for the same employer for at least 10 years.

Natives (Abolition of Passes and Co-ordination of Documents) Act, Act No 67 of 1952
Commonly known as the Pass Laws, this ironically named act forced black people to carry identification with them at all times. A pass included a photograph, details of place of origin, employment record, tax payments, and encounters with the police. It was a criminal offence to be unable to produce a pass when required to do so by the police. No black person could leave a rural area for an urban one without a permit from the local authorities. On arrival in an urban area a permit to seek work had to be obtained within 72 hours.

Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act of 1953
Prohibited strike action by blacks.

Bantu Education Act, Act No 47 of 1953
Established a Black Education Department in the Department of Native Affairs which would compile a curriculum that suited the “nature and requirements of the black people”. The author of the legislation, Dr Hendrik Verwoerd (then Minister of Native Affairs, later Prime Minister), stated that its aim was to prevent Africans receiving an education that would lead them to aspire to positions they wouldn’t be allowed to hold in society. Instead Africans were to receive an education designed to provide them with skills to serve their own people in the homelands or to work in labouring jobs under whites.

Reservation of Separate Amenities Act, Act No 49 of 1953
Forced segregation in all public amenities, public buildings, and public transport with the aim of eliminating contact between whites and other races. “Europeans Only” and “Non-Europeans Only” signs were put up. The act stated that facilities provided for different races need not be equal.

For the TL1 pupils,

please watch the videos on Ellis Island (there are 3 articles) –> use “recherche” and type “Ellis Island” to watch them.

The game which united a country : more information here

More information about the South African flag

South Africa : history

Nelson Mandela’s biography is here

A twelfth-century poem newly translated into English casts fresh light on the origin of today’s Francophobic stereotypes. Although it is meant to be an ‘entente cordiale’, the relationship between the English and the French has been anything but neighbourly.

When the two nations have not been clashing on the battlefield or the sporting pitch they have been trading insults from ‘frogs’ to ‘rosbifs’.Now the translation of the poem has shown just how deep-rooted in history the rivalry and name-calling really is.

Written between 1180 and 1194, a century after the Norman Conquest united England and Normandy against a common enemy in France, the 396-line poem was part of a propaganda war between London and Paris.Poet Andrew de Coutances, an Anglo-Norman cleric, describes the French as godless, arrogant and lazy dogs. Even more stingingly, he accuses French people of being cowardly, and calls them heretics and rapists.

It has taken David Crouch, a professor of medieval history at Hull University, months to complete the translation of what is one of the earliest examples of anti-French diatribe. The poem was written at a time when Philip II of France was launching repeated attacks on Normandy, taking advantage of in-fighting within the English royal family. Prof Crouch says that the poem is of great interest to historians because of its “racial rhetoric”, which was deployed by Anglo-Norman intellectuals in support of their kings’ bitter political and military struggle.

While rivalry between the English and their Gallic neighbours now only tends to surface at sporting occasions and European summits, the poem recalls battles between the two countries and describes the vices of the French in detail.

In one passage, it claims that “eating is their religion” and warns that dining with them is not a pleasant experience.

“A man who dines with the French/ should grab whatever he may/ as either he will end up with the nuts/ or will just carry off the shallots,” the poet writes.

“When they’re abroad they’re even more greedy/And shamefully gorge themselves at every table/Whenever they get near one.

“And whenever hosts have them in their homes/they realise the French are such men/So greedy and so avaricious/That he ought to drive them off with kicks.”

“Intellectuals were deployed to compose diatribes against the enemy,” said Prof Crouch.

“This poem was poisonously undermining the French and their national legend while promoting the legend of King Arthur.”

The poet refutes criticisms of King Arthur and celebrates a legendary victory over Frollo, the French ruler who is portrayed as lazy and incompetent.

“Lying flat out without stirring himself/Frollo got the French to equip him/For that is the way of the French/ Getting their shoes on while lying down,” he writes.

Having described at length the cowardly nature of the French, he even claims, wrongly, that Paris derived its name from the word ‘partir’, which means to flee.

He calls the French “serfs” and “peasants” in an attempt to suggest that they are a race without nobility, adding: “People remind them often enough about this source of shame, but they may as well have not bothered; for they take neither offence or account, as they know no shame.”

Using phrases reminiscent of the insults used by the French knights in the film Monty Python and the Holy Grail, de Coutances says the French “live more vilely than a dog” and calls them “rascals” and “mockers”.

TAKEN FROM : http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/12/27/opinion/28opchart.html

La FIFA a tenu une réunion de son comité exécutif jeudi sur l’île de Robben Island, qui a accueilli pendant près de 30 ans des prisonniers politiques tels que Nelson Mandela et Jacob Zuma, l’actuel président sud-africain. Emotions…

Il est des endroits que ni le temps, ni les hommes ne pourront totalement transformer, malgré tous leurs efforts. Il y a quarante ans, Robben Island était le symbole d’une certaine forme d’oppression politique. C’est là, sur ce caillou situé à plusieurs kilomètres des côtes sud-africaines, au large du Cap, qu’un gouvernement autoritaire et raciste avait regroupé ceux qui avaient choisi de combattre cette abomination qu’était le régime d’apartheid. Des centaines de prisonniers, noirs et indiens, parmi lesquels plusieurs futurs présidents de la République. C’était entre 1960 et 1990.

La Makana FA, fédération créée de toutes pièces par les prisonniers

Ce jeudi, le Comité exécutif de la FIFA a tenu sur ce caillou balayé par les rafales de vent une réunion historique, évidemment. Plusieurs centaines de journalistes, venus du monde entier, avaient effectué la traversée, et ils ont visité ce qui fut l’une des prisons les plus terribles de l’histoire de l’humanité. Sur place, plusieurs ex-détenus, dont un ministre, Tokyo Sexwale, également membre de la Commission FIFA du fair-play, et surtout quatre membres fondateurs de la Makana FA, cette fédération créée de toutes pièces par ces prisonniers politiques, en 1967.

Anthony Suze (68 ans) était justement l’un de ces « freedom fighters », et son récit, édifiant, nous raconte l’histoire d’hommes qui ont survécu tout en défendant pleinement leur passion. « On avait créé huit clubs, tous rattachés à une famille politique. Moi, j’en voulais un qui rassemble tout le monde, je l’ai baptisé Manong Vultures. Et je choisissais les meilleurs joueurs de la prison ! » Les prisonniers, qui administraient cette Ligue avaient adopté les règlements de la FIFA, ont commencé par fabriquer leur propre ballon, puis ils ont pétitionné auprès des gardiens de l’île, leurs bourreaux, afin d’obtenir plus de temps pour jouer. « On s’entraînait dans nos cellules, où l’on mettait d’ordinaire 90 personnes. »

«J’ai passé quinze ans ici, ensuite je n’ai plus jamais joué au foot»

Deux terrains sablonneux, à l’intérieur de la prison, leur permettaient alors de s’évader. Et de redevenir, pour quelques heures, des hommes libres. « On n’a commencé qu’à partir de 1965 parce qu’avant, les conditions de survie étaient atroces », raconte encore Mister Suze, dans un immense sourire. « Pour nombre d’entre nous, cette Ligue a constitué un terrain d’entraînement pour nos vies futures. J’ai passé quinze ans ici, ensuite je n’ai plus jamais joué au foot. » Le récit de ces hommes courageux a donné lieu à un film, « More than just a game », ainsi qu’à un superbe ouvrage. Quelques années plus tard, la Makana FA a été faite membre honoraire par la FIFA…

En quittant tout à l’heure Robben Island, ce musée vivant qui témoigne de tant de souffrances endurées par des milliers d’hommes, on comprend évidemment pourquoi cette Coupe du monde 2010, organisée sur le sol africain, a tant d’importance pour cette génération. Les survivants, malheureusement, ne savent même pas s’ils pourront assister à quelques rencontres au See Point, le nouveau stade du Cap, qu’on aperçoit, au loin, depuis Robben Island…

Franck Simon, au Cap

taken from : http://www.francefootball.fr/FF/breves2009/20091203_194837_il-etait-une-fois-une-ile.html

On estime qu’ils furent près de 500.000. On les appelle les «Forgotten Australians», les «Australiens oubliés». Ce sont ces centaines de milliers d’enfants victimes de violences dans des orphelinats ou des foyers d’accueil publics australiens entre 1930 et 1970.

L’Australie avait déjà présenté ses excuses l’an passé aux milliers d’enfants aborigènes retirés de force à leurs familles à des fins d’assimilation.

Le Premier ministre Kevin Rudd a étendu lundi la reconnaissance de ces abus à l’ensemble de cette génération volée. En 2004, un rapport du Sénat avait recommandé cette démarche de repentance envers ces enfants victimes d’abus en tous genres, sexuels notamment. Environ 7.000 d’entre eux étaient des Britanniques déplacés en Australie dans le cadre d’un programme mis en place entre 1920 et 1967 par les autorités de Londres. Celles-ci avaient envoyé près de 130.000 enfants pauvres, âgés de 3 à 14 ans, vers l’Australie, le Canada, la Nouvelle-Zélande, l’Afrique du Sud et ce qui était alors le Zimbabwe, avec la promesse que leur vie y serait meilleure. Nombre de ces enfants avaient été envoyés à l’étranger par des agences spécialisées qui souhaitaient peupler les anciennes colonies avec des gens de «bonne souche britannique blanche», selon l’association. La plupart ont fini dans des institutions publiques ou des établissements agricoles.

Excuses de la Nation

L’Australie est «désolée pour cette tragédie, cette tragédie absolue, des enfances perdues», a-t-il lancé devant un millier de «Forgotten Australians» survivants réunis au Parlement, déclenchant un tonnerre d’applaudissements.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/interactive/timelines/british/index.shtml