The economic disparity in South African metropolises like Johannesburg points back to the apartheid, with one side of town obviously White and upper-middle class while the other is mostly Black and full of rundown, tottering homes.

The South African apartheid officially ended in 1994, abolishing the country’s long-standing policy of racial segregation across its social and economic relations. 26 years later, though, remnants of the apartheid are still apparent in the infrastructure of South Africa’s largest cities. As it stands, a majority of the country remains segregated as a result of systemic racism. 

South African cities Johannesburg, East Rand and East London have the greatest income inequality in the world; multimillionaires flock to luxurious homes in close proximity to overpopulated and underserved townships. It is clear that the dissolution of the apartheid state, although significant, represented more of a symbolic change than a material one. The notable rise of a Black middle class fails to overshadow the fact that almost two-thirds of South Africa’s Black population lives below the poverty line. 

A Brief History of the Apartheid

Beginning in 1948, the South African government attempted to shift its economic and political conditions through stringent racial segregation. Spearheaded by the White supremacist National Party, the apartheid separated South Africa into four “nations”: Black Africans, “Coloureds” (those of mixed ancestry), Asians and Whites. . Whites received preferential treatment in nearly every aspect of society, with Black Africans facing the most severe discrimination.

These enforcements impacted public spaces, but also regulated marital practices and sexual relations. Black and White people were banned from participating in romantic relationships with each other. One of the most visible actualizations of segregation, though, occurred decades before the apartheid began through a series of “Land Acts.” These discriminatory laws, passed in 1913, granted 86.5% of South Africa’s property to Whites and restricted nonwhite individuals from entering these sectors without proper documentation. 

Over the decades of apartheid, there existed a constant threat of violence against nonwhite individuals by the government. Rural regions newly designated as “Whites-only” led to Black South Africans being violently removed from their homes and displaced into remote and abjectly poor regions called “Bantustans.” From 1961 to 1994, up to 3.5 million Black people were forcibly removed from their homes. The state-sanctioned violence ended in the mid-1990s with the enfranchisement of nonwhite groups and the integration of all races. The decades of government-enforced violations of basic rights, however, have solidified the material and political disadvantages of South Africa’s Black majority. 

Glimpses of the Apartheid Today

The integration which occurred in 1994 proved to be ineffectual; the historically White neighborhoods remain the same while the districts for Black people are also still homogenous. These predominantly Black neighborhoods often suffer from high crime rates and debilitating unemployment rates. The legislation regarding South African race relations may have changed, but socioeconomically, Blacks are disproportionately unemployed and paid less when in the labor market. Johannesburg’s predominantly-White suburbs of Sandton and Sandhurst taunt the majority with $10 million homes, attracting the richest 20% of the country who hold 68% of all wealth. 

A South African citizen, Ntandoyenkosi Mlambo, shared her sentiments with The Guardian about the current state of Cape Town: “The constitutional right to movement has changed so people of color are able to move in different areas. However, the economic and land ownership disadvantages which are still linked to people of color make cities inaccessible for most to live and thrive in. Also, the criminalization of homelessness further entrenches the lived reality that only a few have the right to the city.”

The lifting of the apartheid did significantly increase the size of the Black middle class and allowed some to attain wealth. However, the diversification of the suburbs can hardly be considered progress when the top 10% of Black South Africans own nearly 50% of the group’s income. The state provided grants to members of the lower class in an attempt to decrease income inequality, but the policy has so far fallen short of substantial change.