IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gig/afjour/v35y2000i3p273-292.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A culture of boycott. Reasons for the fragility of South Africa's democracy at the local level: the case of Umtata/Transkei

Author

Listed:
  • Dirk Asendorpf

Abstract

Between 1994 and 1999 South Africa has been officially labelled a society in transition. Constitution, legal framework, public institutions and political structures were changed fundamentally. The new political dispensation was introduced from the top. At the bottom of society it is confronted with a political culture that has been shaped by the experiences of 300 years of colonialism, 50 years of Apartheid and the struggles against them. Thus today a rapid democratisation of the legal and administrative framework meets a political culture that has been formed by an undemocratic society. How does this confrontation shape the work of the new democratic institutions? This paper gives some aspects of an answer to this question. It is based on an empirical study of the transformation process in Umtata, former capital of the Transkei "homeland", conducted between January 1997 and July 1999. Mass action and a culture of boycott continue to be the main means of political expression in the public. Political culture in Umtata is a lot more confrontational than co-operative. This paper looks into four key areas of the transition process: the problems of getting people to pay their rates and user fees, the pressing land invasion, the failure of all attempts to regulate the local taxi industry and the expectations of people in regard to the future of their town.

Suggested Citation

  • Dirk Asendorpf, 2000. "A culture of boycott. Reasons for the fragility of South Africa's democracy at the local level: the case of Umtata/Transkei," Africa Spectrum, Institute of African Affairs, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg, vol. 35(3), pages 273-292.
  • Handle: RePEc:gig:afjour:v:35:y:2000:i:3:p:273-292
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gig:afjour:v:35:y:2000:i:3:p:273-292. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Andreas Mehler). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dueiide.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.