The Origins, Development and Ideology of Local Manufacturing in South Africa¶
Belinda Bozzoli (1975). The Origins, Development and Ideology of Local Manufacturing in South Africa. Journal of Southern African Studies, Vol. 1, No. 2. Taylor & Francis.
| Type | journal article |
| Scope | Economics and economic history of apartheid |
| Method | archival narrative |
| Period studied | 1904–1925 |
| Regions | South Africa, Cape Colony, Transvaal, Natal |
| Themes | origins segregation, manufacturing industrial policy, business and state, politics ideology elections, labour markets wages |
| Citation key | bozzoli1975 |
Argument¶
Bozzoli argues that local manufacturers were not passive beneficiaries of the 1924-25 Pact government's protection. They fought for it for two decades, using a petit-bourgeois ideology of pioneering individualism, progress, mutual interdependence and conciliation. Ideologists such as W. J. Laite mobilised manufacturers, countered the Free Trade ideology of commerce and the opposition of imperial mining, and won access to the state. The war and the decline of financial dominance in British imperialism made protection acceptable. She separates the political victory of protectionism from the economic shift from imperially dominated to locally oriented capitalism, with ideology as the link between the two. The method reads the journal South African Commerce and Manufacturers' Record, plus speeches, for ideologist, audience and ideas together.
Evidence and method¶
Manufacturers' journals (South African Commerce and Manufacturers' Record, later Industrial South Africa; South African Journal of Industries), speeches and addresses to manufacturers' associations and the Federated Chamber of Industries, Laite's pamphlet and biography, commission reports (Cullinan 1912, Dominions Royal Commission 1917), Union Statistics for Fifty Years, and parliamentary speeches by Smuts.
Place in the debates¶
- Origins of local capitalism and protection: conventional view that the 1925 Pact government introduced protection vs. manufacturers as active agents (see Industrialisation, protection and industrial structure). Rejects the conventional view. Manufacturers existed before 1925 and lobbied actively for protection, and Pact protection was less in conflict with imperial interests than its rhetoric suggested.
- Relationship between capital and the state / economic base and ideological superstructure (see The state and capital: instrumentalism, autonomy and fractions of capital). Argues that analysis must go beyond economic determinants. Ideologies are the means by which capitalists relate to and gain access to the state, and the political and economic processes should be kept distinct.
- Imperial (mining and financial) capital vs. local capital (see The state and capital: instrumentalism, autonomy and fractions of capital). Mining and finance opposed protection before the war. The decline of financial dominance in British imperialism during and after the war removed this opposition, though she calls the explanation partial and tentative.
Findings¶
-
Manufacturers existed and agitated long before the Pact, contrary to the conventional view that they were passive recipients of protection. (p. 4)
However, local manufacturers existed long before 1925, and themselves fought actively and hard for the protection they required if they were to expand and become stable.
-
Early manufacturing was already sizeable in 1904, though small-scale and undercapitalised. (p. 4)
there were 4,778 factories in the four colonies of South Africa which together produced goods valued at the high, and probably inflated, figure of £19.3m.
-
Manufacturers were a petit-bourgeoisie of artisan immigrants and small traders, which their ideologists emphasised. (p. 7)
Most of them were either immigrants who possessed artisan skills, or Colonials who had accumulated a little capital from trading.
-
The Cape-Transvaal split over cheap Coloured labour vs. expensive white labour prevented unified action by manufacturers. (p. 8)
the latter resented the former's use of 'cheap Coloured labour', while they had to use expensive whites.
-
Imperial mining opposed protection because British imperialism was financier-dominated, and the war removed this opposition. (p. 11)
The first world war saw the decline of financial domination of British imperialism and hence the removal of a major force opposing protection in a region such as South Africa.
-
Manufacturers adopted an ideology of conciliation toward white workers, who were also consumers, voters and potential allies, in contrast to mining's fear of a large white working class. (p. 11)
White workers were also consumers, voters and potential political allies.
-
The racial ideology of manufacturers reconciled appeasement of white workers with reliance on black workers and consumers, resembling modern racism. (p. 13)
It had to be reconciled with the ideology of appeasing whites, and the result was a conception of society which resembled modern racism.
-
Wartime protection produced rapid growth in factories and output. (p. 16)
From 1915-16 to 1917-18, 1,700 new factories were opened; between 1915-16 and 1919-20, the gross value of manufacturing output increased from £35m. to £76.8m.
-
The manufacturing workforce grew sharply during the war, shifting concerns toward labour relations and the 'role of the native'. (p. 16)
In 1915-16 the number of manufacturing employees totalled 101,178; this rose to 155,008 in 1919-20.
-
Despite support from Smuts and the growing acceptance of protection, the pre-1924 government did not introduce it, and the Pact did. (p. 21)
It was ironic for the manufacturing ideologist that the 1924 government-a pact between Labour and Nationalist Parties-should finally introduce protection.
-
The conclusion separates the political victory of protectionism from the economic transformation to local capitalism. (p. 22)
on the one hand, there is the rise and eventual victory of protectionism; and, on the other, there is the transformation of South Africa from imperially-dominated to locally- orientated capitalism.
Evidence ledger¶
Sources used¶
| Source | Kind | Period | How used |
|---|---|---|---|
| South African Commerce and Manufacturers' Record (SAC), 1907-1918, later Industrial South Africa and Industrial and Commercial South Africa | newspapers periodicals | 1907-1925 | Main source for the manufacturing ideology: editorials, speeches and articles show who the ideologists were and what ideas they offered manufacturers. |
| South African Journal of Industries (SAJI), from 1917 | newspapers periodicals | 1917-1924 | Provides state and manufacturer ideological statements (Trevor, Reynolds, King, editorials) on industrial development and state-capital relations. |
| Union Statistics for Fifty Years, Jubilee Issue, 1910-1960 | official statistical series | 1915-16 to 1921 | Supplies factory numbers, output value and manufacturing employment by race to show wartime expansion of manufacturing. |
| W. J. Laite, The Union Tariff and its Relation to Industrial and Agricultural Development: The Case for Manufacturers (Cape Town, 1913) | secondary literature compilation | 1904-1913 | Source of 1904 figures on factories, output value and sectoral shares of production, and also a primary ideological text. |
| The Commission on Trade and Industries (Cullinan Commission), U.G. 10, 1912 | commission or official report | 1912 | Shows the official response to manufacturers' lobbying: a minority report opposed to industry and a half-hearted majority report for protection. |
| Dominions Royal Commission final report, Cd. 8462 (London, 1917) | commission or official report | 1917 | Cited as evidence that British imperial opinion had begun to favour South African manufacturing. |
| Report of the Select Committee on Colonial Agriculture and Industries, 1883 (Cape), via Knowles | parliamentary debates | 1883 | Evidence of early Cape protection pressure from infant industries after a slump. |
| Parliamentary speech by Smuts, 17 September 1919 | parliamentary debates | 1919 | Shows Smuts's rhetorical support for industrialization as a cure for political ills. |
| Speeches and addresses to manufacturers' bodies (Reid 1911 and 1912; Buckland 1908; FCI conventions 1918-1920; Warington-Smyth 1918-1919; Gibaud 1922; Fremantle 1924 lecture) | employer association records | 1908-1924 | Speeches supply the content of the ideology of mutual interdependence, protection as patriotism, and state-industry relations. |
| Biographical work: Harold J. Laite, Portrait of a Pioneer: the life and work of William James Laite, 1863-1942 (Cape Town, 1943) | secondary literature compilation | 1863-1942 | Supplies biographical detail on Laite and anecdotes on the social status of manufacturers. |
| Other early works: M. H. de Kock, Selected Subjects in the Economic History of South Africa (1924); L. C. A. Knowles, Economic Development of the British Overseas Empire; Marks, Reluctant Rebellion | secondary literature compilation | 1883-1908 | Used for the origins of Cape protectionism and for the 1905 Natal commission and the organisation of Natal manufacturers. |
Inference¶
Quantification: Illustrative figures.
Qualitative historical and content analysis of manufacturers' journals, speeches and pamphlets, tracing the ideologist, audience and ideas over time. A few official statistics give context. Claims about ideology are built on selected quotations and theoretical argument, not systematic sampling.
Key claims¶
| Claim | Basis | Strength |
|---|---|---|
| Local manufacturers existed and lobbied actively for protection long before the 1925 Pact government, and were not passive recipients of protection. (p. 196) | Manufacturers' journal (SAC), association formation, the Cullinan Commission and Laite's pamphlet. | Partial data |
| Early manufacturers were a petit-bourgeoisie of artisan immigrants and small traders, and their ideologists built a 'pioneer' self-image from their life histories. (p. 199) | Biographical sketches in SAC, Rothes's article and Laite's biography. | Illustrative or anecdotal |
| Manufacturers developed distinct ideologies towards commerce, mining, agriculture, white labour, black labour and the state, unified by the idea of evolutionary progress and mutual interdependence. (p. 206) | Quotations from SAC editorials, speeches (Reid, Buckland) and Laite's pamphlet. | Illustrative or anecdotal |
| Imperial mining opposed protection before the war because British imperialism was financier-dominated, and the war weakened that opposition. (p. 202) | Mine-owner statements in SAC, Hobson's theory and the author's interpretation. The author calls the explanation tentative. | Asserted |
| The First World War produced rapid manufacturing growth, in factories, output and employment, and enlarged an industrial working class. (p. 208) | Union Statistics for Fifty Years (factories, gross and net output, employment by race). | Partial data |
| After the war protectionism gained acceptance among commerce, academics, British opinion and state officials, though the Smuts government did not introduce it, and the manufacturers' ideology then shifted to collective responsibility and laissez faire. (p. 211) | Speeches by Smuts, Beck and Warington-Smyth, the Dominions Royal Commission, SAJI and Industrial South Africa. | Illustrative or anecdotal |
The author's caveats¶
The author calls the explanation for imperial mining's opposition to protection and its later decline 'only partial and tentative'. She notes that the 1904 output figure is 'probably inflated' and that mineowners do not reveal how far their capital was tied up in British manufacturing. She also says the detailed examination of the post-war structural change is not pursued.
Gaps in the evidence¶
The argument leans on one sector's journals and speeches without testing how representative or influential they were, for example through membership rolls, circulation, association minutes or the records of firms and Chamber of Mines houses. Claims about the state's conversion to protection and the decline of imperial opposition would be better tested with cabinet papers, Hansard, tariff board and Treasury files, and mining-house investment records, all of which exist in archives. Factory census data by sector, firm size and ownership would show whether the 'petit-bourgeois' character of manufacturers is typical.
Replicability: Data poorly documented.