These African youth objected to the inferior education they were receiving, an education that continually reinforced their status in society. For example, as late as 1980, one Cape Town school used an Afrikaans dictionary that defined baas (boss) as "the name of a white man" while meit (maid) was defined as "the name of a black or coloured woman." Further, terms like swartgoed ("black thing") was defined as "black labourer" (Finnegan, 274).
Though anti-apartheid activists around the world applauded the schoolchildren's objections to such racist indoctrination, nobody appeared to object per se to the truth that propaganda is an integral part of public education, whether that public education is in South Africa, England, the United States, or Mexico. Though anti-apartheid activists were incensed by these particular ideas sold without apology to white and black kids alike, nobody argued that all education systems are somehow flawed by this same systemic approach to society.
One of the major advantages to public education is that it allows a society to incubate citizens. Education theorists in nations around the world have long understood the necessity of public education for creating citizens who "fit" into the society and government of that nation.
Shortly after the American Revolution, for example, education specialists in the United States articulated the idea that the "American youth was to be taught only by American teachers, who were thought to be in better cultural frames to transmit American nationalistic ideals, principles, and values" (Marah, 461). Nations, they argued, only worked when the individuals living within them shared an "in-group feeling," a feeling that is cultivated when people begin to identify with a particular social group and is manifested in so-called "national character," which can easily be developed via the school system (Marah, 462).
Likewise, shortly after Independence, African politicians in nations from Ghana to Ethiopia argued for a new education system that didn't rely on the colonial education structures that had been left in place. They argued for universities established on African principles that would create nationalism and loyalty to Africa while diminishing the effects of "tribalism" (Marah, 466).
We all agree that an education system that reinforces the ideals of a racist society is unconscionable. But is it really so different when the message is different but the methods of indoctrination are the same?
