What do you think?
Rate this book
South Africa's War Against Capitalism
Written for students, laypersons, and scholars who seek a deeper understanding of the roots of apartheid in South Africa, this book focuses upon the relationship between apartheid and capitalism. The author argues, in contrast to prevailing views held both in South Africa and the West, that rather than resulting from capitalism, apartheid is the antithesis of capitalism. In short, Williams asserts, the evolution of apartheid can be seen as a struggle against market forces in order to confer privilege and status on South African whites.
Williams begins with a brief overview of South African history, the racial and ethnic diversity of its peoples, and the development of thinking about apartheid. He then highlights some of South Africa's legal institutions, particularly its racially discriminatory laws, and traces the historical forces behind racially discriminatory labor law. Subsequent chapters apply standard economic analysis to apartheid in business and the labor market and consider market challenges to apartheid and governmental responses. Finally, Williams summarizes recent changes to apartheid laws and offers a general discussion of the lessons about racial relations that can be drawn from the South African experience.
Williams begins with a brief overview of South African history, the racial and ethnic diversity of its peoples, and the development of thinking about apartheid. He then highlights some of South Africa's legal institutions, particularly its racially discriminatory laws, and traces the historical forces behind racially discriminatory labor law. Subsequent chapters apply standard economic analysis to apartheid in business and the labor market and consider market challenges to apartheid and governmental responses. Finally, Williams summarizes recent changes to apartheid laws and offers a general discussion of the lessons about racial relations that can be drawn from the South African experience.
159 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1989
About the author
Walter E. Williams
31 books247 followersBorn in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Dr. Walter E. Williams holds a B.A. in economics from California State University, Los Angeles, and M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in economics from UCLA. He also holds a Doctor of Humane Letters from Virginia Union University and Grove City College, Doctor of Laws from Washington and Jefferson College and Doctor Honoris Causa en Ciencias Sociales from Universidad Francisco Marroquin, in Guatemala, where he is also Professor Honorario.
Dr. Williams has served on the faculty of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics, since 1980; from 1995 to 2001, he served as department chairman. He has also served on the faculties of Los Angeles City College, California State University Los Angeles, and Temple University in Philadelphia, and Grove City College, Grove City, Pa.
Dr. Williams is the author of over 150 publications which have appeared in scholarly journals such as Economic Inquiry, American Economic Review, Georgia Law Review, Journal of Labor Economics, Social Science Quarterly, and Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy and popular publications such as Newsweek, Ideas on Liberty, National Review, Reader's Digest, Cato Journal, and Policy Review. He has authored six books: America: A Minority Viewpoint, The State Against Blacks, which was later made into the PBS documentary "Good Intentions," All It Takes Is Guts, South Africa's War Against Capitalism, which was later revised for South African publication, Do the Right Thing: The People's Economist Speaks, and More Liberty Means Less Government.
He has made scores of radio and television appearances which include "Nightline," "Firing Line," "Face the Nation," Milton Friedman's "Free To Choose," "Crossfire," "MacNeil/Lehrer," "Wall Street Week" and was a regular commentator for "Nightly Business Report." He is also occasional substitute host for the "Rush Limbaugh" show. In addition Dr. Williams writes a nationally syndicated weekly column that is carried by approximately 140 newspapers and several web sites.
Dr. Williams serves on several boards of directors: Grove City College, Reason Foundation and Hoover Institution. He serves on numerous advisory boards including: Cato Institute, Landmark Legal Foundation, Institute of Economic Affairs, and Heritage Foundation.
Dr. Williams has received numerous fellowships and awards including: Foundation for Economic Education Adam Smith Award, Hoover Institution National Fellow, Ford Foundation Fellow, Valley Forge Freedoms Foundation George Washington Medal of Honor, Veterans of Foreign Wars U.S. News Media Award, Adam Smith Award, California State University Distinguished Alumnus Award, George Mason University Faculty Member of the Year, and Alpha Kappa Psi Award.
Dr. Williams has participated in numerous debates, conferences and lectures in the United States and abroad. He has frequently given expert testimony before Congressional committees on public policy issues ranging from labor policy to taxation and spending. He is a member of the Mont Pelerin Society, and the American Economic Association.
Dr. Williams has served on the faculty of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics, since 1980; from 1995 to 2001, he served as department chairman. He has also served on the faculties of Los Angeles City College, California State University Los Angeles, and Temple University in Philadelphia, and Grove City College, Grove City, Pa.
Dr. Williams is the author of over 150 publications which have appeared in scholarly journals such as Economic Inquiry, American Economic Review, Georgia Law Review, Journal of Labor Economics, Social Science Quarterly, and Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy and popular publications such as Newsweek, Ideas on Liberty, National Review, Reader's Digest, Cato Journal, and Policy Review. He has authored six books: America: A Minority Viewpoint, The State Against Blacks, which was later made into the PBS documentary "Good Intentions," All It Takes Is Guts, South Africa's War Against Capitalism, which was later revised for South African publication, Do the Right Thing: The People's Economist Speaks, and More Liberty Means Less Government.
He has made scores of radio and television appearances which include "Nightline," "Firing Line," "Face the Nation," Milton Friedman's "Free To Choose," "Crossfire," "MacNeil/Lehrer," "Wall Street Week" and was a regular commentator for "Nightly Business Report." He is also occasional substitute host for the "Rush Limbaugh" show. In addition Dr. Williams writes a nationally syndicated weekly column that is carried by approximately 140 newspapers and several web sites.
Dr. Williams serves on several boards of directors: Grove City College, Reason Foundation and Hoover Institution. He serves on numerous advisory boards including: Cato Institute, Landmark Legal Foundation, Institute of Economic Affairs, and Heritage Foundation.
Dr. Williams has received numerous fellowships and awards including: Foundation for Economic Education Adam Smith Award, Hoover Institution National Fellow, Ford Foundation Fellow, Valley Forge Freedoms Foundation George Washington Medal of Honor, Veterans of Foreign Wars U.S. News Media Award, Adam Smith Award, California State University Distinguished Alumnus Award, George Mason University Faculty Member of the Year, and Alpha Kappa Psi Award.
Dr. Williams has participated in numerous debates, conferences and lectures in the United States and abroad. He has frequently given expert testimony before Congressional committees on public policy issues ranging from labor policy to taxation and spending. He is a member of the Mont Pelerin Society, and the American Economic Association.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
March 11, 2021
Walter Williams is great. This was written in 1989, before Apartheid was abolished in 1994, so it was not written with the current regime in mind, but rather with the white apartheid regime in power. But it does have some enduring lessons for the current regime, since they have exacerbated the anti-capitalist policies, just in different ways.
2020-06-08
Witnessing the craziness with the George Floyd murder in Minneapolis and resulting protests, riots and other mayhem, additional murders, and claims of "systemic racism," this book comes to mind.
The over-regulation of our society: the masses of laws, government rules, and resulting enforcement escalation, lawlessness, corruption, etc. definitely play a big part in the reasons for the treatment of George Floyd by the cop as well as the resulting anger and nationwide protests. Might be cool to see a rif on this book by Walter Williams, focused on this country.
2020-06-08
Witnessing the craziness with the George Floyd murder in Minneapolis and resulting protests, riots and other mayhem, additional murders, and claims of "systemic racism," this book comes to mind.
The over-regulation of our society: the masses of laws, government rules, and resulting enforcement escalation, lawlessness, corruption, etc. definitely play a big part in the reasons for the treatment of George Floyd by the cop as well as the resulting anger and nationwide protests. Might be cool to see a rif on this book by Walter Williams, focused on this country.
February 13, 2014
While the main subject of the book has thankfully been lost to history, Williams' book retains worth for its deeper thesis, which is that a free market benefits the outsiders in an economy, and that economic interest weakens racist "principles" instead of protecting them. It also has poignancy as he draws sadly apt comparisons between US protectionist policy in the past and present (previously chronicled in his subversive masterpiece, THE STATE AGAINST BLACKS) and similar measures in apartheid. Were the South African apartheid still existent, I would have rated this book another star.
June 16, 2024
THE CONSERVATIVE BLACK ECONOMIST LOOKS AT SOUTH AFRICA & APARTHEID
Walter Edward Williams (born 1936) is Professor of Economics at George Mason University, as well as a syndicated columnist and author.
He wrote in the preface to this 1989 book, “South Africa deserves the moral condemnation that it has received from most of the world. However… decades later it is readily apparent … the mere elimination of colonialism was not a sufficient guarantee for the personal liberty and higher standard of living hoped for by the African common man and woman.. My purpose in writing this book is several fold. For one thing, I want to provide the average Western layperson with a sketch of South Africa. All too often, the conflict there is seen as a struggle between blacks and whites. The reality is quite different. South Africa’s black population consists of several major ethnic groups, who have developed different customs and values… A more important purpose in writing this book is to address … an all-too-popular theme among the oppressed … that apartheid is a result of capitalism…. Therefore, I devote many pages to making the argument that apartheid is indeed a struggle AGAINST capitalism… the major emphasis here is placed on South Africa’s labor markets in the development of apartheid.”
He notes, “Professor Nellie I. Oliver, head of the Department of Bantu Studies at Stellenbosch University, saw the sharp U.S. criticism of South Africa as stemming from an invalid comparison between blacks in South Africa and blacks in the United States. According to Oliver, there is no comparison. Black Americans are American; they have no culture and language of their own… Discrimination against them has been solely on the ground of color. It is different in South Africa, where blacks and whites are of different cultures. Moreover… in the United States, whites are numerically superior and have no fear of domination, while the opposite has been the case in South Africa.” (Pg. 14)
He explains, “The South African parliamentary system of government leaves little mystery as to how a ‘civilized’ nation can produce an apartheid system that violates the fundamental freedoms of most of its population. Other Western countries… maintain a respect for individual rights because their Rule of Law restricts the powers of the legislative and executive arms of government. In South Africa, Parliament’s will is absolute.” (Pg. 26) He adds, “It is a major personal liberty problem in South Africa that there is no such thing as judicial review of the legislative acts of Parliament.” (Pg. 29)
He argues, “Why are racially restrictive employment laws necessary? If racism were the complete answer, racial laws would be unnecessary because white business owners and government agencies simply WOULD NOT hire blacks for jobs desirable to whites. The mere existence of laws restricting certain jobs to whites only… suggests that, were it not for those laws, white business owners WOULD hire blacks. Otherwise, it is hard to explain why racially discriminatory laws were thought to be necessary.” (Pg. 45)
He recounts, “Prime Minister Louis Botha … traveled throughout the country urging white farmers to fire their black workers and replace them with poor whites. This admonishment fell on deaf ears because farmers had little incentive to do so. First of all, black workers were cheaper and more reliable; and second, many poor whites were unwilling to do ‘kaffirwerk’.” (Pg. 51)
He observes, “Whites came to realize that the nonwage component of their earnings was also beginning to put them at a competitive disadvantage. Therefore… in 1912, the Labor party urged Parliament to extend compulsory employer compensation to blacks when they were injured on the job or suffered from miners’ phthisis. The reason is obvious. The fact that the mine companies are not required by law to compensate blacks for industrial injuries made blacks cheaper to hire, thus providing additional incentive to substitute black workers for white workers.” (Pg. 71)
He notes, “More recent South African history has seen… a renewed concern over black wages. Professional associations such as the South African Nursing Association … condemn the low wages received by black nurses as ‘unfair’… Some branches of the nursing association---fearing that they will be priced out of the market---have gone so far as stating that their [white] members would not accept a wage increase until the wages of black nurses are raised… It seems the height of innocence to believe that the same white supremacists who one year were calling for the protections of job reservation would the next year call for racially neutral minimum wage legislation---now having also the interests of blacks in mind.” (Pg. 74)
He states, “Apartheid distorts resource allocation simply because race---rather than economic criteria, such as worker productivity---decides who should work in what jog, where a business should be located, and where people should live. Inefficient recourse allocation clearly reduces South Africa’s overall material wealth from what it might otherwise be.” (Pg. 99)
He asserts, “The business pursuit of profits---which caused employers to be less ardent supporters of the white supremacist doctrine---has always been the enemy of white privilege. This is why South African white workers resorted to government. The political arena allows one to achieve privilege that would be impossible---or very costly---in the market arena because market forces have little respect for status attributes like race, sex, and nationality. The political arena does…” (Pg. 128)
He suggests, “Acknowledging the fact that South African blacks enjoy freedoms and living standards envied elsewhere should in no way provide justification for… the immorality of apartheid… [But] All of Africa’s postcolonial experience should have taught us to ask: When one kind of oppression is eliminated, what is going to take its place?” (Pg. 134)
He contends, “A moral dilemma also confronts the proponents of disinvestment. Church and college officials disinvest … when the transaction has been made, the stock certificate still exists; only its ownership has been changed… In other words, a minister can purge the church’s holdings of ‘evil’ IBM stock ONLY by selling to somebody else that ‘evil’ stock… [This] is analogous to the repentant slaveowner who sells an awakened craving for justice by selling his slave to another slaveowner. The more moral action would be to FREE his slave… Disinvestors could make a similar show of moral commitment by ‘freeing’ their stock certificates … [and] putting them in a shredding machine.” (Pg. 136)
Even those who are not normally fans of Williams’ brand of conservative economics will likely find many of his insights about South Africa interesting and even sometimes persuasive.
Walter Edward Williams (born 1936) is Professor of Economics at George Mason University, as well as a syndicated columnist and author.
He wrote in the preface to this 1989 book, “South Africa deserves the moral condemnation that it has received from most of the world. However… decades later it is readily apparent … the mere elimination of colonialism was not a sufficient guarantee for the personal liberty and higher standard of living hoped for by the African common man and woman.. My purpose in writing this book is several fold. For one thing, I want to provide the average Western layperson with a sketch of South Africa. All too often, the conflict there is seen as a struggle between blacks and whites. The reality is quite different. South Africa’s black population consists of several major ethnic groups, who have developed different customs and values… A more important purpose in writing this book is to address … an all-too-popular theme among the oppressed … that apartheid is a result of capitalism…. Therefore, I devote many pages to making the argument that apartheid is indeed a struggle AGAINST capitalism… the major emphasis here is placed on South Africa’s labor markets in the development of apartheid.”
He notes, “Professor Nellie I. Oliver, head of the Department of Bantu Studies at Stellenbosch University, saw the sharp U.S. criticism of South Africa as stemming from an invalid comparison between blacks in South Africa and blacks in the United States. According to Oliver, there is no comparison. Black Americans are American; they have no culture and language of their own… Discrimination against them has been solely on the ground of color. It is different in South Africa, where blacks and whites are of different cultures. Moreover… in the United States, whites are numerically superior and have no fear of domination, while the opposite has been the case in South Africa.” (Pg. 14)
He explains, “The South African parliamentary system of government leaves little mystery as to how a ‘civilized’ nation can produce an apartheid system that violates the fundamental freedoms of most of its population. Other Western countries… maintain a respect for individual rights because their Rule of Law restricts the powers of the legislative and executive arms of government. In South Africa, Parliament’s will is absolute.” (Pg. 26) He adds, “It is a major personal liberty problem in South Africa that there is no such thing as judicial review of the legislative acts of Parliament.” (Pg. 29)
He argues, “Why are racially restrictive employment laws necessary? If racism were the complete answer, racial laws would be unnecessary because white business owners and government agencies simply WOULD NOT hire blacks for jobs desirable to whites. The mere existence of laws restricting certain jobs to whites only… suggests that, were it not for those laws, white business owners WOULD hire blacks. Otherwise, it is hard to explain why racially discriminatory laws were thought to be necessary.” (Pg. 45)
He recounts, “Prime Minister Louis Botha … traveled throughout the country urging white farmers to fire their black workers and replace them with poor whites. This admonishment fell on deaf ears because farmers had little incentive to do so. First of all, black workers were cheaper and more reliable; and second, many poor whites were unwilling to do ‘kaffirwerk’.” (Pg. 51)
He observes, “Whites came to realize that the nonwage component of their earnings was also beginning to put them at a competitive disadvantage. Therefore… in 1912, the Labor party urged Parliament to extend compulsory employer compensation to blacks when they were injured on the job or suffered from miners’ phthisis. The reason is obvious. The fact that the mine companies are not required by law to compensate blacks for industrial injuries made blacks cheaper to hire, thus providing additional incentive to substitute black workers for white workers.” (Pg. 71)
He notes, “More recent South African history has seen… a renewed concern over black wages. Professional associations such as the South African Nursing Association … condemn the low wages received by black nurses as ‘unfair’… Some branches of the nursing association---fearing that they will be priced out of the market---have gone so far as stating that their [white] members would not accept a wage increase until the wages of black nurses are raised… It seems the height of innocence to believe that the same white supremacists who one year were calling for the protections of job reservation would the next year call for racially neutral minimum wage legislation---now having also the interests of blacks in mind.” (Pg. 74)
He states, “Apartheid distorts resource allocation simply because race---rather than economic criteria, such as worker productivity---decides who should work in what jog, where a business should be located, and where people should live. Inefficient recourse allocation clearly reduces South Africa’s overall material wealth from what it might otherwise be.” (Pg. 99)
He asserts, “The business pursuit of profits---which caused employers to be less ardent supporters of the white supremacist doctrine---has always been the enemy of white privilege. This is why South African white workers resorted to government. The political arena allows one to achieve privilege that would be impossible---or very costly---in the market arena because market forces have little respect for status attributes like race, sex, and nationality. The political arena does…” (Pg. 128)
He suggests, “Acknowledging the fact that South African blacks enjoy freedoms and living standards envied elsewhere should in no way provide justification for… the immorality of apartheid… [But] All of Africa’s postcolonial experience should have taught us to ask: When one kind of oppression is eliminated, what is going to take its place?” (Pg. 134)
He contends, “A moral dilemma also confronts the proponents of disinvestment. Church and college officials disinvest … when the transaction has been made, the stock certificate still exists; only its ownership has been changed… In other words, a minister can purge the church’s holdings of ‘evil’ IBM stock ONLY by selling to somebody else that ‘evil’ stock… [This] is analogous to the repentant slaveowner who sells an awakened craving for justice by selling his slave to another slaveowner. The more moral action would be to FREE his slave… Disinvestors could make a similar show of moral commitment by ‘freeing’ their stock certificates … [and] putting them in a shredding machine.” (Pg. 136)
Even those who are not normally fans of Williams’ brand of conservative economics will likely find many of his insights about South Africa interesting and even sometimes persuasive.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews