Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Subscribe now for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Genocide: Its Political Use in the Twentieth Century, by Leo Kuper

Genocide: Its Political Use in the Twentieth Century, by Leo Kuper BOOK REVIEWS | 167 the bargaining process between the various groups in a plural society. As the authors demonstrate, it is quite clear that the National Party “does not intend to devolve or share an iota of real power at this stage” (p. 443). The recent split in the National Party resulting in the formation of Dr. Andries Treurnicht’s Conservative Party (CP), a devel­ opment thought highly unlikely by Hanf and his colleagues in 1978 (p. 414), has produced a combined “ultra right” vote (CP and Herstigte Nasionale Party) in by-elections at Ger- miston and Parys equal to that of the government. The National Party leadership seems unlikely to make real concessions unless forced to do so by increased black pressure, but by the time it may be ready to yield, it seems doubtful whether the black leadership will be able to accept a settlement short of unitary democracy. This is the South African dilem­ ma. Without an escalation of violence, Gatsha Buthelezi and other “moderate” leaders will be unable to exact meaningful political advantage from the white elite; after a violent struggle, he could well face the same fate as Bishop Abel Muzorewa in Zimbabwe. Despite these reservations http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Political Science Quarterly Oxford University Press

Genocide: Its Political Use in the Twentieth Century, by Leo Kuper

Political Science Quarterly , Volume 98 (1): 3 – Mar 15, 1983

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/genocide-its-political-use-in-the-twentieth-century-by-leo-kuper-0mX8gLPjWC

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Copyright
1983 The Academy of Political Science
ISSN
0032-3195
eISSN
1538-165X
DOI
10.2307/2150245
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

BOOK REVIEWS | 167 the bargaining process between the various groups in a plural society. As the authors demonstrate, it is quite clear that the National Party “does not intend to devolve or share an iota of real power at this stage” (p. 443). The recent split in the National Party resulting in the formation of Dr. Andries Treurnicht’s Conservative Party (CP), a devel­ opment thought highly unlikely by Hanf and his colleagues in 1978 (p. 414), has produced a combined “ultra right” vote (CP and Herstigte Nasionale Party) in by-elections at Ger- miston and Parys equal to that of the government. The National Party leadership seems unlikely to make real concessions unless forced to do so by increased black pressure, but by the time it may be ready to yield, it seems doubtful whether the black leadership will be able to accept a settlement short of unitary democracy. This is the South African dilem­ ma. Without an escalation of violence, Gatsha Buthelezi and other “moderate” leaders will be unable to exact meaningful political advantage from the white elite; after a violent struggle, he could well face the same fate as Bishop Abel Muzorewa in Zimbabwe. Despite these reservations

Journal

Political Science QuarterlyOxford University Press

Published: Mar 15, 1983

There are no references for this article.