This recent New York Times article highlights an ongoing problem in South Africa concerning the prevalent tensed racial undercurrents. It is an account of a right-wing Boer politician and farmer, Eugene TerreBlanche. who was brutally murdered by his African employees over wage disputes. Just to summarize, TerreBlance's murder was of significance because the foundation of this act was based in the old song, “Ayesab’ Amagwala,” where the lyrics speak of "Shooting the Boer". "Boer" is the Dutch word for farmer, specifically, a white farmer.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/05/world/africa/05iht-saf.html?ref=world
If you don't already know, South Africa endured brutal racial struggles from the mid 1980's to 1994, known as Apartheid. Nelson Mandela, a key figure in this movement, followed in the non-violent practice of Gandhi, and was imprisoned for a large portion of his life, due to his involvement in ending racial segregation. Essentially, similar to the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s and 70s in the US, the Boers and Afrikans (white Dutch colonists) attempted to segregate the blacks and other colored people living in South Africa, by the usual means: depriving them of education, attaining better employment opportunities, and of course, political participation.
Since the end of the Apartheid, South Africa has incorporated positive economic and political changes, and is now one of the world's leading developing countries. However, as the New York Times article aptly points out, racial tensions are still very real and an ongoing challenge for an emerging South Africa. However, the eventual point encompasses the subject of South Africa as the host of World Cup 2010, the world's largest sporting event. Why did the New York Times decide to feature this story? Simply because it's a good, important story that needed worldly attention; or because it was a convenient pitch in the midst of World Cup fever, as we are just two months away from the opening ceremonies in Johannesburg?
