ABSTRACT

This article makes an intervention into the historiography which has positioned Afrikaner sociology as an unambiguous instrument of the apartheid state. In doing so, the article examines how leading Afrikaner sociologists used Parsonian structural functionalism to engage with the coloured question in the 1970s – articulated as the conundrum of where to position coloureds politically in the absence of direct representation in parliament. The primary argument is that this form of differentiated knowledge production was ‘alternative’ in the context of Afrikaner sociology’s early ties to Afrikaner nationalism because it challenged Verwoerdian separate development and replaced it with the idea that coloureds shared ‘common values’ with white society. This argument is made by tracing how Afrikaner sociologists’ calls for coloured representation gained momentum in the early 1970s, initiating a set of reforms which may be viewed as a resolution to the coloured question through the establishment of the Tricameral Parliament in 1984.

摘要

本文对将南非荷兰语社会学定位为种族隔离国家的明确工具的史学进行了干预。在这样做的过程中，本文研究了领先的南非荷兰语社会学家如何使用帕森式结构功能主义来解决 1970 年代的有色人种问题——这被阐明为在议会中没有直接代表的情况下，在政治上将有色人种定位在哪里的难题。主要论点是，这种差异化的知识生产形式在南非荷兰语社会学与南非荷兰语民族主义的早期联系的背景下是“另类的”，因为它挑战了 Verwoerdian 的独立发展，取而代之的是有色人种与白人社会共享“共同价值观”的想法。