Friday, October 29, 2010

Gold, Politics, the Jameson Raid and South African War

The Cecil John Rhode’s dream to further British colonies form Cape to Cairo was not only demonstrated in his will to control the vast lands but to have a monopoly over the mineral resources in South Africa. With him spearheading the BSC company to occupy Rhodesia him and Jameson wanted to further not only their political status but economical dominance. The Jameson raid in 1895 was plot to further the British and the BSC British Southern Africa interests in the mining industry of South Africa. This essay is going to discuss if the Jameson Raid was essentially the plot of mining capitalists or inspired by ambitious politicians who hoped to create an economic or political union of Sothern Africa, under Britain’s shield.

To really ascertain why the Raid was established by Rhodes and his followers in 1895 is very difficult as different authors have propounded different reasons to why this Raid occurred. According to Blainey (1965;350) cites that Henry Laboucher argued that Rhodes and other financiers organized the Jameson Raid in order to raid the market in British South Africa Company while the other assumption propounds that financiers of the Jameson Raid explained that Transvaal gold industry was endangered by harsh and unjust taxes of Kruger administration. Although there are different views to the real reason to what emanated to Jameson Raid I assume that the real reason why the Jameson Raid was propagated and formulated by Rhodes and Jameson was because of them enhancing their political and economic dominance in the booming Gold industry in Transvaal. The reason to justify the Jameson to the harsh laws of the Kruger administration mostly to deep level mines is criticized by other historians according to Blainey (1965) as mining laws were liberal in the Transvaal region then adjacent territories and more records of profits in 1895 as well as massive profits on Rand shares.

The Jameson Raid had a lot of support from the British leadership Cecil John Rhode and Jameson could by no chance overthrow Kruger’s administration without the help of the imperial thrown. Blainey (1965;352) postulates that within political realm to justify the raid the British colonial secretary Joseph Chamberlain gave vital aid to Rhode’s plan of rebellion in the hope that Britain would take over the Transvaal and so maintain its supremacy in Southern Africa. This can be one of the justifiable reasons that really links to the raid as it was not only British’s attention to overthrow the Kruger administration but the BSC Company. The Jameson Raid as l may ascertain cannot be linked to economic hardships caused by the Kruger policies in the deep level mines as the beacons of the raid Rhodes and Jameson owned outcrop mines that we attaining a lot of profits that deep level mines. Blainery (1965) elaborates that the great circumspection and secrecy were mining houses controlled by Whernher, Beit and Co and Cecil John Rhodes which virtually took all the 15 miles parallel to the outcrop companies. With the Rand eighteen months before the raid being estimated to produce two thirds of the world gold l assumed the Rhodes as an ambitious politician and capitalists had to devise a method to spearhead his interest thus which emanated to the Jameson Raid.

The supposition that outcrop mines will be outpaced by deep level mines in gold produce led to mass investments in the mining sector which according to Blainey (1965) cites that between 1894 and 1895 the owners of deep level mines got heavy investments. But this was short lived as one of the major companies in 1895 according to Blainey (1965;355) Geldhenuis Deep Gold Mining Company crushed its first deposits of ore in a big 100 stamp milling and produced virtually unexpected amounts of gold this initial failure shook the deep-level mines. This however could be one of the elements that led to the Jameson Raid as the capitalist blamed the Kruger regime for economic policies that hindered deep-level mine to produce at a profit. Blainey (1965;356) cites the same notions as Krugerism penalized the deep-level companies with more severity than outcrop companies, the effects of the dynamite monopoly was perceived by the capitalists as a sign of the corruption and nepotism in the Kruger regime as more costs were incurred by deep-level mines in attaining explosives. Also the failure of the regime to secure enough native labour supply as the grievance by the capitalists made the deep-level mine to operate at a loss. These complaints that Kruger was plundering the mining sector and the inefficient policy that made deep- level companies to suffer more than outcrop companies from Kruger method of taxing state owned minerals while the outcrop mines were treated generously.
When the final decision by Rhodes and Jameson to carry out the Jameson raid it was after the assessment of these grievances l do not assume that it was for the mutual benefit of all the deep- level mining owners as according to Blainey (1965;362) Rhodes was the managing director of Consolidated Gold Fields of South Africa and under the company’s articles he and his colleague C. D Rudd received management fee of two fifteenth of the company earnings while the Consolidated Gold Fields were the largest source of income in 1895. Beit as one of the plotters to the Jameson Raid held nearly all shares in the private Johannesburg firm of H.Eckstein and Co which was basically half of the shares in the Rand Mines. Rhodes and Beit to my assumption knew that it was invertible to gain support from capitalists that owned deep-level mines for his political and economic interests to overthrow the Kruger regime. Blainey (1965;361) the quick overthrow of Kruger’s government would lossen the economic yoke that choked deep-level mines and would instal a sympathetic government that might revive the confidence of European speculators.

The most fundamental reason that might be the sole explanation to the Jameson Raid was the motive of the British government to bring to Transvaal region under its rule and to revive the jaded commerce of the Cape Town Blainey (1965;366) argues this point as his partners in this plan were not cabinet ministers of Cape Colony but mining leaders on the rand who had no interests in the politics of South Africa federalism or the British or in the economic condition of Cape Colony. I disagree with Blainey’s philosophy as economic interests are closely linked to political interests so l assume if the capitalists really wanted to over throw the Kruger regime it was also in their political interests. Blainey (1965;365) elaborates that Rhodes and Beit personally had strong monetary motives for overthrowing Kruger and were both indispensable in the plot.

To sideline the point that the Jameson raid was more politically planned is not justified Galbraith (1970;145) elaborates that the overthrow Transvaal Government had of course been the subject among the imperial officials long before the raid. This to my view can provide the major reason to why Chamberlain was indirectly involved to the Jameson Raid as Galbraith (1970;146) propounds the same notions in which he questions the very question of Chamberlain’s complicity became involved in a bitter controversy within the board of the British South Africa Company as to the relationship Cecil Rhodes should have to the Company after the Raid. Furthermore the assumption by Grey according to Galbraith (1970;149) that Chamberlain was aware of a plan to employ an armed force under Company control to assist a rebellion and that he looked on such intervention and the allegation by Rhodes that Chamberlain was fully responsible as him to the implications of the Raid. The Jameson Raid was not only the act of capitalists who wanted to further their economic interests but it can closely related to the British government political interests Galbraith (1970;149) elaborates that Rhodes had no doubt that he had acted with blessing of the imperial government.

Although Chamberlain declined the intentions to overthrow the Kruger regime according to Galbraith (1970;153) he was prepared to employ the British force to ensure the success of Utilander revolution if the objective could not be achieved by peaceful means while he deplored Jameson’s action he condemned the Transvaal government’s injustice to the Utilanders and demanded reforms. While the BSAC Company denounced the acts of Rhodes to spearhead the Jameson Raid l ascertain that this was only an act to counter attack the alleged complicity of their involvement and took steps immediately to counter this threat to the Charter for public inquiry. While Rhodes was gaining popular support for handling the Matabeleland rebellion his influential role in the Company his resignations form the company never meant anything according to Galbraith (1970;157) there was the undeniable fact that Rhodes was considered by the directors the shareholders, the British public and the people of Rhodesia as the heart of the Company and the future of the company depended on him. Furthermore Galbraith (1970;158) the Jameson Raid as the Duke of Fife postulates that it was a deliberate planned and carried out by the company’s agents without their knowledge and without their possible consent. This fact emanates to the very question of the company interests in the Transvaal region Jameson Raid had somehow had the support of these capitalists.

The restoration of Rhodes and Beit to the broad after the Jameson raid as well with some of the company directors even reluctant to condemn him according Galbraith (1970;158) when the directors had bowed to the pressure of the government they had made it clear that they did so for reasons of expediency rather than abhorrence for what he had done. The question that Jameson Raid was essentially the plot of mining capitalists or inspired by ambitious politicians who hoped to create an economic or political union of Sothern Africa, under Britain’s shield can be provided by the failure of the British government to act upon Rhodes ,Beit and Jameson who had committed acts of banditry and treason against the Kruger regime instead Rhodes became a hero for both British capitalist and politicians.
However there conflicting assumptions to what really led to the Jameson Raid Blainey is criticized by Katz (1995;304) of notions that economic grievances of the deep level mine owners differed markedly from those of the outcrop owners. Katz argues that working costs of the first row deeps, although an unrealistic index of profits, were virtually identical to those of the outcrop mines. So according to Katz they were no substantiated reasons why the capitalists in deep level mines would have wanted to overthrow the Kruger regime. According to Katz (1995;306) some of the problems the deep level mines faced were linked to mismanagement as well as geological problems peculiar to the area for instance Village Main in 1895 was forced to shut down due to these problems not the fact that it was a deep-level mine. The notion that the Kruger economic policies caused severe damage in the deep-level company is exaggerated according to Katz(1995;317) as Blainey ascertained that Kruger’s decision to retain the dynamite monopoly ‘penalized the deep-level companies with more severity than the outcrop companies. Another point that Katz raises is the blame given to the Kruger regime for not being able to supply enough African unskilled labour as exaggerated.

Katz (1995;325)cites that the Rhodes and Beit conspiracy, economic motives had been smashed with political objectives Rhodes economic investments on the Witwatersrand were long-term while Beit was not affected by the Kruger policies as Beit holdings were barely compromised by the monopoly concessions of Kruger. Katz rises major points that can substantiate the reason that the Jameson raid was carried out with only political interests rather political. Mendelsohn (1980;158) however seems to back up the Blainey notions that economic grievances of the deep-level mines led to the Jameson Raid as working conditions and capital requirements, governmental policies exacerbated deep level mines.
Bibliography
Blainey G. “Lost Causes of Jameson Raid.” The Economic History review. New Series, Vol 18 No 2 1965
Galbraith, J.S. “The British South Africa Company and theJameson Raid.” The journal of British Studies,Vol 10 No 1 November 1970
Katz, E. N. “Outcrop and Deep Level Mining In South Africa Before the Anglo Boer War; Re-Examining the Blainey Thesis,”Economic History Review.No.2 1995
Mendelson, R.Blainey and the Jameson Raid;The Debate Renewed.” Journal of southern African Studies.Vol.6 No2 April 1980

Industrial Organisational Labour Studies

Question one..List and briefly explain three concepts used by Held to define globalisation. In your explanation show how the case study of ‘transport of nuclear waste’ illustrate these four concepts.
(i) Stretched Social Relations
(ii) Intensification of flows
(iii) Increasing interpenetration
(a) Stretched Social Relatons according to Held (2000;18) cultural, economic and political process in society are increasingly stretched across nation state boundaries so that events and decisions taking place on one side of the world are significant impact on the other. This is displayed by the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in April 1986 according to Held (2000;17) the devastating effects were not locally noticed but at a global stage as radioactive particles carried by the cloud across North Britain which caused rainy weather and affected 70000 sheep in Cumbria.
(b) Intensification of flows found in the density of communication and interaction across globe in which the impacts of events far away are felt more strongly according to Held (2000;19) electronic flows, communications network stretching across the world have the potential to connect people previously distanced from what went elsewhere . Communication that resides between countries on the nuclear waste reprocessing according to Held (2000;18) nuclear waste from all over Britain and Japan is taken to Sellafield for reprocessing as well Sellafield has produced plutonium for the British nuclear industry.
(c) Increasing Interpenetration according to Held (2000;15) it is the increasing intensity of global interactions as social relations stretch relations there is an increasing interpenetration of economic and social practices bring apparently distant cultures and face to face with each other at global stage. The effects of nuclear waste in England resulted in the plan to ship the waste around the world to the Aborigine community according to Held (2000;18) the deposition of nuclear waste in Australia will make the deposits remain radioactive for 25000 year this illustrate that actions of one nations can affect the other at a global sphere.

Question 2; What are the main arguments of the following theoretical perspectives on globalisation?
a. Globalists; view globalization as a positive trend that will benefit consumers and increase the scale and allocative efficiency of markers of goods and capital. The argument of this perspective according to Kirkbride (2001;89) the concept is neo-liberal thought were market forces are driven by individual focusing on their own interests while Gwynne (2003;8) argues that globalization is bring about denationalization of economies through the establishment of national networks of production trade and finance. Another argument according to Kirkbride (2001;89) as a perspective seen as a move by international capital and secure power and exploitation at global level.
b.Transformationalists; according to Gwynne (2000 globalization is uncertain although a powerful force yet contingent and with contradictions. According to Kirkbride (2001;89) the argument is that international economic relations have changed to such an extent that traditionalist views of the nation economy to be controlled to achieve domestic aims is no longer viable while Gwynne (2003;9) argue that development is uneven at global scale.
c. Traditionalist (sceptics). According to Kirkbride (2001;89) have a sceptical view of the wider claims of the strong globalist arguing that the international economy has not altered to such an extent that the existence of national economies as viable economic category has been undermined. Arguments to this perspective according to Kirkbride (2001;89) is that international economy is not as global as made out by the globalist position although traditionalist accept that there has been international economic integration but the extent of this activity has neither completely undermined salience of national economic management as welfare benefits can still be secured at national level.

3.Define globalisation using the following tenets/features

(a)Economic; Steger (2002;49) globalisation is the phenomenon reflected in the liberalization and integration of global markets and the reduction of governmental interference in the economy
(b). Political; Steger (2002;53) globalisation as an indispensible tool for the realization of a global order based on free market principle.
(c). Cultural; according to Steger (2002;54) globalization is defined as a densely growing network of complex cultural interconnections and interdependence that characterise the modern social life.
(d). Theoretical/ideological-according to Steger(2002;47) globalization is defined as politically motivated and contributes towards the construction of popular beliefs and values.
Question 4
Features
Hist and Thompson
Globalist views
Economy
Pessimistic view they argue that the present economy is not new. Economic industrial technology began to be generalized in the 1960s
There is a new global economy facilitated by IT and integration of markets globally
TNCs/MNCs
TNCs and MNCs very rare most companies are based nationally and trade muti-nationally. Rare because companies are not multi-national but trade international
The global economy is driven by TNCs and MNCs
Capital mobility
Foreign Direct investment are still concentrated on the West Capital mobility is not producing a shift of investment to poor countries
Globalization influencing capital mobility across the globe as all countries are mutual beneficiaries
North-South Divide
There is not real economy, trade, investment flows as all are concentrated in North America, Europe and Japan as these are countries are getting richer so there is no globalised economy
International trade flows of capital are happening at global scale
Power of Markets
Major powers are the ones coordinating policies in order to influence market operations
The present global markets as uncontrollable force beyond the force and control of nation states

Question five
According to Held (2000;110) “Globalization is not only the claim on the interpretation of the current state of international economic system. There is a rival claim summed up by the term regionalization. The international economy is characterized by regional trading and investment blocs”


Bibliography
defining globalisation: understanding global change’ from Held, D (ed.) 2000 A Globalising Word? London & New York: The Open University Press.
“Chapter 1” from Kirkbride, P (ed.) 2001 Globalisation: the external pressures, Chichester: Ashridge
“the academic debate over globalisation” from Steger, MB 2002 Globalism: the new market ideology, Lanham: Rowman
“the globalisation debate” from Held, McGrew, Goldblatt & Perraton (eds.) 2000 Global Transformations: Politics, economics and culture, Cambridge: Polity.
“Unravelling the concept of globalisation” from Gwynne, RN et al 2003 Alternative Capitalisms: geographies of emerging regions, London: Arnold.

Industrial Organisational Labour Studies

Question one..List and briefly explain three concepts used by Held to define globalisation. In your explanation show how the case study of ‘transport of nuclear waste’ illustrate these four concepts.
(i) Stretched Social Relations
(ii) Intensification of flows
(iii) Increasing interpenetration
(a) Stretched Social Relatons according to Held (2000;18) cultural, economic and political process in society are increasingly stretched across nation state boundaries so that events and decisions taking place on one side of the world are significant impact on the other. This is displayed by the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in April 1986 according to Held (2000;17) the devastating effects were not locally noticed but at a global stage as radioactive particles carried by the cloud across North Britain which caused rainy weather and affected 70000 sheep in Cumbria.
(b) Intensification of flows found in the density of communication and interaction across globe in which the impacts of events far away are felt more strongly according to Held (2000;19) electronic flows, communications network stretching across the world have the potential to connect people previously distanced from what went elsewhere . Communication that resides between countries on the nuclear waste reprocessing according to Held (2000;18) nuclear waste from all over Britain and Japan is taken to Sellafield for reprocessing as well Sellafield has produced plutonium for the British nuclear industry.
(c) Increasing Interpenetration according to Held (2000;15) it is the increasing intensity of global interactions as social relations stretch relations there is an increasing interpenetration of economic and social practices bring apparently distant cultures and face to face with each other at global stage. The effects of nuclear waste in England resulted in the plan to ship the waste around the world to the Aborigine community according to Held (2000;18) the deposition of nuclear waste in Australia will make the deposits remain radioactive for 25000 year this illustrate that actions of one nations can affect the other at a global sphere.


Question 2; What are the main arguments of the following theoretical perspectives on globalisation?
a. Globalists; view globalization as a positive trend that will benefit consumers and increase the scale and allocative efficiency of markers of goods and capital. The argument of this perspective according to Kirkbride (2001;89) the concept is neo-liberal thought were market forces are driven by individual focusing on their own interests while Gwynne (2003;8) argues that globalization is bring about denationalization of economies through the establishment of national networks of production trade and finance. Another argument according to Kirkbride (2001;89) as a perspective seen as a move by international capital and secure power and exploitation at global level.
b.Transformationalists; according to Gwynne (2000 globalization is uncertain although a powerful force yet contingent and with contradictions. According to Kirkbride (2001;89) the argument is that international economic relations have changed to such an extent that traditionalist views of the nation economy to be controlled to achieve domestic aims is no longer viable while Gwynne (2003;9) argue that development is uneven at global scale.
c. Traditionalist (sceptics). According to Kirkbride (2001;89) have a sceptical view of the wider claims of the strong globalist arguing that the international economy has not altered to such an extent that the existence of national economies as viable economic category has been undermined. Arguments to this perspective according to Kirkbride (2001;89) is that international economy is not as global as made out by the globalist position although traditionalist accept that there has been international economic integration but the extent of this activity has neither completely undermined salience of national economic management as welfare benefits can still be secured at national level.

3.Define globalisation using the following tenets/features

(a)Economic; Steger (2002;49) globalisation is the phenomenon reflected in the liberalization and integration of global markets and the reduction of governmental interference in the economy
(b). Political; Steger (2002;53) globalisation as an indispensible tool for the realization of a global order based on free market principle.
(c). Cultural; according to Steger (2002;54) globalization is defined as a densely growing network of complex cultural interconnections and interdependence that characterise the modern social life.
(d). Theoretical/ideological-according to Steger(2002;47) globalization is defined as politically motivated and contributes towards the construction of popular beliefs and values.
Question 4
Features
Hist and Thompson
Globalist views
Economy
Pessimistic view they argue that the present economy is not new. Economic industrial technology began to be generalized in the 1960s
There is a new global economy facilitated by IT and integration of markets globally
TNCs/MNCs
TNCs and MNCs very rare most companies are based nationally and trade muti-nationally. Rare because companies are not multi-national but trade international
The global economy is driven by TNCs and MNCs
Capital mobility
Foreign Direct investment are still concentrated on the West Capital mobility is not producing a shift of investment to poor countries
Globalization influencing capital mobility across the globe as all countries are mutual beneficiaries
North-South Divide
There is not real economy, trade, investment flows as all are concentrated in North America, Europe and Japan as these are countries are getting richer so there is no globalised economy
International trade flows of capital are happening at global scale
Power of Markets
Major powers are the ones coordinating policies in order to influence market operations
The present global markets as uncontrollable force beyond the force and control of nation states

Question five
According to Held (2000;110) “Globalization is not only the claim on the interpretation of the current state of international economic system. There is a rival claim summed up by the term regionalization. The international economy is characterized by regional trading and investment blocs”


Bibliography
defining globalisation: understanding global change’ from Held, D (ed.) 2000 A Globalising Word? London & New York: The Open University Press.
“Chapter 1” from Kirkbride, P (ed.) 2001 Globalisation: the external pressures, Chichester: Ashridge
“the academic debate over globalisation” from Steger, MB 2002 Globalism: the new market ideology, Lanham: Rowman
“the globalisation debate” from Held, McGrew, Goldblatt & Perraton (eds.) 2000 Global Transformations: Politics, economics and culture, Cambridge: Polity.
“Unravelling the concept of globalisation” from Gwynne, RN et al 2003 Alternative Capitalisms: geographies of emerging regions, London: Arnold.

The Politics of industrialisation

Government intervention in the economy in the history of SA has been criticized and favoured. Major criticism of the neo-classicism for its lack to denounce government intervention in the economy to my assessment has been important as it clashes with the liberal notion of free trade. I agree with Kaplan (1976;70) the state has persistently dictated to the market and not allowed the omniscient market to fix commodity or factor prices or to determine factor production. Economic production where market forces determine supply and demand mechanisms to my acknowledgment is not the true reflection of how economies operate although according to Kaplan (1976;71) as he quotes Horwitz propounding that SA economic development has been very much to the response of market forces l concur with Kaplan (1976;72) that nevertheless of Horwitz’s notion the formulation of the protection policy was primarily in favour for the protection of the domestic industry and in favour of the so called ‘civilized labour” that was white labour. Protection policy was much needed in the agricultural produce as l ascertain that with the major competition of the world prices, protection was to be imposed on imports to protect the domestic industry.

According to Kaplan (1976;74) the severe slump that followed after the boom of 1919 and 1920 and in face of rapidly increasing competition from imports as normal trading patterns resumed, industrialists began to be even more vociferous in their demands for protection. Protection policy was the only way to protect the primary industry l assumed that this led to the 1910 industrial commission to question and examine the tariff protection policy which received with a lot of criticism but industrial community realized the utter futility of expecting a proper appreciation of its needs at the hands of men whose position training and interests necessarily influence their judgement when dealing with economic problems. The argument that of free trade and protection within the history of economic development in SA to my assessment is of important as all accepts enforced for true economic development. With the South African authorities of the Tarriff Board in conflict of which economic policy was suitable to implement according to Kaplan (1976;76) in 1925 the Pact Government of the Customs Tariff act No 36 was implemented this followed major criticism as protests against protection were based on the fact that the policy was bound to raise the general wage level with adverse effects to profitability and the economic life of the industry.
Within this realm l agree to Smuts as quoted the Kaplan (1976;76) that bear in mind that we are mixed crowd and that Freetraders and Protectionists forgather in our camp.
I have learnt from this article that it is very difficult to remove government intervention or the protection policies in the economy as well to let Freetraders have ruin in the economic matters without regulation.

Bibliography

Kaplan, D. The politics of Industrial Protection in South Africa. 1919-1939.” Journal of Southern African Studies .Vol 3,No 1,October 1976

The rise and fall of the Weberian Analysis of Class

Class has been closely linked to racial categorisation the by many philosophers, the Weberian analysis of class was an attempt to understand class formation in societal structures. To may analysis why the Weberian analysis was closely linked to the South Africa was according to Seeking’s (2009; 867) citation that Weber recognised the ownership of property and means of production as an important paradox to enhance unequal opportunities and the need to further social recognition. In the 1950s the apartheid government discrimination and the objective to further economic interests of white was in the bid to achieve whites social recognition and inner satisfaction among themselves thereby creating to class that of the Africa proletariat and the white bourgeoisie.
I concur with Weber’s philosophical ideas that class is based in economic interest, status concerns prestige and honour and the deference and derogation associated with this. The apartheid government policies to my own thoughts led to Weberian analysis of class to be relevant to the South African scenario because of the white race monopolisation of the scarce economic resources which is linked to status and class categorization. With the rampart technological change in the early 1960s notably creating the capitalist class that controlled the means of production is a contributing factor to the South African relation to the Weberian approach.

Research by John Dollard according to Seeking (2009;868) to the racially segregated town of Southertown demonstrates that in that period caste had replaced slavery as a means to maintain the essence of the old status. The aspects ascriptive membership of hierarchically ranked groups, impossibility of crossing to another group to another and prohibitions of intermarriage was in the Weberian analysis of class of South America was also within the South African context. I concur with Seeking (2009;870) citation of the Kuper’s analysis to South African in relation with the Weberian approach of class that in South Africa proletarianisation of the Native was one form in which race conflict was expressed. Although the author cites that the Weberian analysis to class has disintegrated in the modern South Africa l do not ascertain that this philosophy was carefully thought off as ownership of means of production is the most radical explanation to creation of status and class. It might of relevance according to Seeking (2009;878) that intra-racial status order may have based on respect, prestige, and deference but inter-racial order was based primarily on coercion, and that status distinction coexisted with differentiation by occupational class.
The Marxists disapprove the Weberian approach citing that it lacks origins of class structure but this to my own thoughts is not valid to really overthrow Weberian analysis within the South African context. I have learnt from this reading that stratification of class and status has led to the inequalities between South Africa racial groupings and that leading scientists of sociology have tried to separate status and class which is very difficult as they all ascertain the racial grouping an individual belong to.

Bibliography Seekings,J. “the Rise and Fall of the Weberian Analyis of Class in South Africa Between 1949 and the early 1970s.” Journal of South African Studies.Vol. 35,No4, October 200
9