Appraisal: Suzman’s Courage Failed Her

By Denis Goldberg

Published January 08, 2009, issue of January 16, 2009.
  • Print
  • Share Share

Cape Town — Helen Suzman has died, and the praise for her is deafening — deafening and uncritical. She was indeed a courageous person who, for 13 of her 36 years in South Africa’s whites-only parliament, was a lone voice of opposition to the brutality of apartheid.

She had come a long way from the days when she was elected as a member of the then United Party, which was firmly racist in its policies and had been the governing party for many years, until 1948, when the white electorate brought the (Afrikaner) National Party to power. To better oppose the increasingly oppressive apartheid laws, Suzman and 10 others broke away to form the Progressive Party–though she intially did not support universal, one-man-one-vote sufferage. She and her party stood for liberal policies that ultimately would maintain the social and economic status quo, but in a way that was more humane. For that, the ruling party vilified her.

At a personal level, it is quite difficult to be critical of Suzman in the face of the adulation heaped upon her. Those of us imprisoned for our committed opposition to apartheid and for one-person-one-vote in a fully equal system of political rights are grateful to her for her determination to see that our prison conditions were improved.

Official Jewry in South Africa now claims Jews who opposed apartheid as campaigners for justice TO BE the models of righteous Jewry! Such opportunism! During the years of apartheid, the Jewish establishment either actively supported it or refused to take a stand against it. As far as I know, Suzman was a secular Jew who made little of her Jewishness. Yet it must be noted that her electoral constituency consisted of many well-off Jewish families.

Nevertheless, for all of Suzman’s efforts, she and other members of her party did not ever take a stand against big business, which fully supported apartheid. For this group, apartheid was the basis of a system of exceptionally low wages and, therefore, high profit margins. Big business was deeply engaged in the military-industrial sector that directly maintained apartheid and was the channel for foreign capital, technology and diplomatic support to maintain the system.

Adept as Suzman was at exposing the inhumanity of apartheid, she spoke nationally and internationally against the the liberation movement led by Nelson Mandela and other great leaders. She also campaigned activelly against the movement’s call for international economic, cultural, academic and sporting sanctions, and against its call for the boycott of South African goods.

In 1971, during the African National Congress’s long struggle for international sanctions, Oliver Tambo, the ANC’s legendary exiled leader went so far as to group her with leaders of South Africa’s apartheid government as “agents of colonialism”–though 18 years later he would celebrate her as “the parliament’s unfading star.”

Suzman could not bring herself to accept that it would be the mass movement for liberation that would force big business to realize that the old system could not continue. Yet ultimately, that is what happened. Big business’s profitable system of cheap labor became steadily less so, due to continual unrest, strikes, passive resistance, armed actions and international sanctions. By the time apartheid ended, the country was technically bankrupt. The mass movement had succeeded.

It is my opinion that Suzman, with her opposition to this mass movement and to the ANC, and her support of the anti-sanctions campaign, prolonged our struggle for liberation and caused serious loss of life. In the end, she and her party would rather have seen apartheid continue than see the ANC come to power, because, for them, it embodied both the black and Red dangers through its alliance with the Communist Party.

Yet, in a sense, Suzman has won this ideological battle. South Africa has a wonderful constitution that guarantees all the rights our people could possibly want to enjoy — except that they cannot be realized in a world system that prevents people from earning a living and prevents developing countries from creating jobs and equity. In a sense, that ideology is represented by Suzman sitting at the right knee of Mandela at many public events. One wonders who has captured who, as so many of the leaders of the liberation movement have been co-opted by big business and they enjoy the perks of having arrived. Their praise for Helen Suzman is unstinted.

Denis Goldberg was convicted of armed rebellion with Nelson Mandela and 10 others in 1964 for his membership in Spear of the Nation, the military wing of the African National Congress. He served 22 years in a South African prison.






Find us on Facebook!
  • "Despite the great pain and sadness surrounding a captured soldier, this should not shape the face of this particular conflict – not in making concessions and not in negotiations, not in sobering assessments of this operation’s achievements or the need to either retreat or move forward." Do you agree?
  • Why genocide is always wrong, period. And the fact that some are talking about it shows just how much damage the war in Gaza has already done.
  • Construction workers found a 75-year-old deli sign behind a closing Harlem bodega earlier this month. Should it be preserved?
  • "The painful irony in Israel’s current dilemma is that it has been here before." Read J.J. Goldberg's latest analysis of the conflict:
  • Law professor Dan Markel waited a shocking 19 minutes for an ambulance as he lay dying after being ambushed in his driveway. Read the stunning 911 transcript as neighbor pleaded for help.
  • Happy birthday to the Boy Who Lived! July 31 marks the day that Harry Potter — and his creator, J.K. Rowling — first entered the world. Harry is a loyal Gryffindorian, a matchless wizard, a native Parseltongue speaker, and…a Jew?
  • "Orwell would side with Israel for building a flourishing democracy, rather than Hamas, which imposed a floundering dictatorship. He would applaud the IDF, which warns civilians before bombing them in a justified war, not Hamas terrorists who cower behind their own civilians, target neighboring civilians, and planned to swarm civilian settlements on the Jewish New Year." Read Gil Troy's response to Daniel May's opinion piece:
  • "My dear Penelope, when you accuse Israel of committing 'genocide,' do you actually know what you are talking about?"
  • What's for #Shabbat dinner? Try Molly Yeh's coconut quinoa with dates and nuts. Recipe here:
  • Can animals suffer from PTSD?
  • Is anti-Zionism the new anti-Semitism?
  • "I thought I was the only Jew on a Harley Davidson, but I was wrong." — Gil Paul, member of the Hillel's Angels. http://jd.fo/g4cjH
  • “This is a dangerous region, even for people who don’t live there and say, merely express the mildest of concern about the humanitarian tragedy of civilians who have nothing to do with the warring factions, only to catch a rash of *** (bleeped) from everyone who went to your bar mitzvah! Statute of limitations! Look, a $50 savings bond does not buy you a lifetime of criticism.”
  • That sound you hear? That's your childhood going up in smoke.
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?




















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.