This study investigates the management of the conflict and struggles that arise when a variety
of cultural groups reside in one society, under one political system (plurality).
As various groups endeavour to establish their particular value system as the prevailing value
system of the society, the value system of one or more of the other groups is compromised.
Tension, conflict and struggle ensue. Where this struggle becomes violent, hundreds of
thousands of lives can be lost.
During the middle of the twentieth century, the idea emerged that plurality can be
accommodated in a positive manner. Over time, this idea crystallized into the theory (or
ideology) of Pluralism.
The purpose of this study was to identify measures that were applied over a period of more
than three centuries (1652 to 1962) in three different areas (currently known as the USA,
South Africa and Australia) to manage plurality; and to determine how such measures
influenced these societies in the long-term.
A theory (more accurately, an ideology) like Pluralism is not the ideal instrument for objective
analysis, because of its inherent value bias. This study therefore developed an empirical
analytical framework through which to analyse the measures employed to handle plurality, and
the effects thereof.
It was felt that using this framework to conduct a comparative analysis would shed more light
on both the measures that were applied over a long period in various societies, and the longterm
effect of the various measures on these societies. It would also assist in projecting the
probable effect of certain measures if applied to a specific society, under specific
circumstances. However, the emphasis of this study is on the development of the analytical
framework and the application thereof on the historical data of the chosen areas and societies
from the beginning of the seventeenth century to just after the middle of the twentieth century,
with a cut-off date of 1962.
Although the framework was not applied to other societies, in other periods, due to the
colossal nature of such an exercise, the results of this historical analysis indicate that the analytical framework developed in this study could open perspectives that could not be
obtained through other methods.
In the course of applying the framework illustratively to the chosen historical data, this study
describes the various cultural groups involved, as well as their differences regarding numbers,
language and culture. Conflicts that arose are noted, as well as the measures employed to
deal with the plurality. Furthermore, from the methods that were used in various time frames,
deductions are made regarding the morality that was current in those times.
From an ideologically pluralistic perspective, some of the identified measures employed to
cope with plurality could be regarded as negative, in that they were intended to suppress or
eliminate plurality â mostly accompanied by some form of violence â whereas others could be
regarded as positive, in their attempt to take plurality into consideration when determining the
overarching values of the society, and even to strengthen and broaden the plurality.
Finally, the morality of the actions of the various governments was judged against the
prevailing morality of their times.
In this study it was established that the governments of the three territories applied more or
less the same methods in more or less the same periods to handle plurality under the
influence of the contemporary international morality.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:ufs/oai:etd.uovs.ac.za:etd-08072014-121911 |
| Date | 07 August 2014 |
| Creators | van der Merwe, Jacobus Hercules |
| Contributors | Dr JEH Grobler, Dr CJ van der Merwe |
| Publisher | University of the Free State |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | en-uk |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | http://etd.uovs.ac.za//theses/available/etd-08072014-121911/restricted/ |
| Rights | unrestricted, I hereby certify that, if appropriate, I have obtained and attached hereto a written permission statement from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis, dissertation, or project report, allowing distribution as specified below. I certify that the version I submitted is the same as that approved by my advisory committee. I hereby grant to University Free State or its agents the non-exclusive license to archive and make accessible, under the conditions specified below, my thesis, dissertation, or project report in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of the thesis, dissertation or project report. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis, dissertation, or project report. |
Page generated in 0.0031 seconds