General Jan Smuts Appeals For Peace

(2 Feb 1931) "If the nations of the world could see and speak to each other there would be no more war"... General Jan Smuts, appeals for faith in the World peace influence of League of Nations. ® ® EDITOR'S NOTE: Seated in his South African home, his small grandchild on his knee, the great Empire Patriot makes for British Movietone its second utterance on the policy initiated by Signor Mussolini, Pioneer of the League of Nations, framer of its Constitution, General Smuts' plea in removing the causes and occasions of war.
Find out more about AP Archive: www.aparchive.com/HowWeWork
Twitter: / ap_archive
Facebook: / aparchives ​​
Instagram: / apnews
You can license this story through AP Archive: www.aparchive.com/metadata/you...

[@alanvanveen3097]

Ironically, no South African leader in the last 100 years had a comparable command of the English language. Some of his views were clearly wrong, but there is much we can learn from the true statesman and military pioneer that was Genl. Smuts.
As jy hom name wil noem, word groot.

[@albertarthurparsnips5141]

Interesting observation. I wonder why that would be ?

[@vnlpat001]

@@albertarthurparsnips5141 Because pre 1994 the white population who could only vote was ~ 62% Afrikaans and 38% English and post 1994 where everyone could vote - English first language speakers were and are (really hasn't changed much is only 8 - 9% (and only 6th largest out of 11 official languages as a first language at home)

[@kylepuncheswalls8548]

Hy is my oupa groeitjie groeitjie.

[@adrianablaza4814]

His english sounds british but you can hear dutch as well

[@gerhardgrabietz1965]

When was this broadcasted?

[@conroymcquade497]

he is mu oupa`s oupa`s cousin

[@karenessauthor]

Hah! My great, great uncle.

[@nwofoe2866]

handkhaki

[@greywolf9676]

Wit hans kakie,verraaier van die Boerevolk.Hy het meer in Engeland belang gestel as die Boerevolk in S.Afrika.

[@nwofoe2866]

@@greywolf9676 ek stem daarmee saam

[@vnlpat001]

Praat kak

[@ronrice1931]

"These children of nature [i.e., black Africans] have not the inner toughness and persistence of the European, nor those social and moral incentives to progress which have built up European civilization in a comparatively short period…. It is clear that a race so unique, and so different in its mentality and its cultures from those of Europe, requires a policy very unlike that which suits Europeans." Jan Smuts, "Africa and Some World Problems", 1929

[@k-nerdproductions4130]

Damn!

[@gerhardgrabietz1965]

Wisely spoken, it is a correct statement and by bi means racist.

[@denkedeligekanal9059]

he was a great man and loyal to his king.

[@splashafrica]

Only after giving the empire a good hiding. He packed a train full of explosives and sent it downhill into a British garrison the train failed to hit its target but smuts have proven his point. He left the United Kingdom with no choice but to offer a ceasefire and a peace conference, to be held at Vereeniging. Although he admitted that, from a purely military perspective, the war could continue, he stressed the importance of not sacrificing the Afrikaner people for that independence. General Botha and General Smuts made sure that a British military Victory would not be a political victory birthing The Union of South Africa. He would be the only person to sign the charters of both the League of Nations and the UN both organizations being his legacy to the the world today.

[@vnlpat001]

No bro. He was loyal to the AFRIKANER people. He fought against the British in the Boer war of 1899 - 1902. He ensured at the treaty of Vereeniging that the British only had a military victory and NOT A POLITICAL VICTORY. Hence the birth of the Union of South Africa was ushered in in 1910 and with the statute of Westminster in the 1930's we were completely free of British imperial rule once and for all. Smuts was loyal to the Afrikaner. He used the British for Afrikaner interests and when WW2 hit took South Africa into the allies side. However, he was 100% Afrikaner and loyal to only the Boer. Finish.

[@penelopehunt2371]

He truly wasted his time on the UK

[@henrygluckmanpartiuni3261]

I préfère malan

[@ronrice1931]

He coined the term "holism" and wrote about ecology. He also coined the term "apartheid" and was one of its architects. An intelligent racist and paternalistic facist. A truly awful man.

[@thesoundofthesuburbs]

Smuts was a progressive liberal for his time. What are you even talking about?

[@ronrice1931]

@@thesoundofthesuburbs Really? Would a "progressive liberal" say this?
"If there was to be equal manhood suffrage the whites would be swamped all over South Africa by the blacks and the whole position for which whites have striven for 200 years or more would be given up." Jan Smuts, 1921
Sounds like a fascist to me.

[@thesoundofthesuburbs]

@@ronrice1931 Are you South African? You do realize that many progressive luminaries like Helen Suzman did not support a universal suffrage either and did not support handover to the black majority "per se." Most progressives prior to the 1980s viewed a qualified franchise as the most acceptable option due to the stark societal stratification in South Africa relative to other functioning democracies. The rate of illiteracy and levels of educational attainment among black Africans particularly are staggeringly low relative to South Africa's minorities. That has allowed the ANC to enjoy an enormous amount of ongoing and dangerous support that would never occur in a functioning democracy.

[@ronrice1931]

@@thesoundofthesuburbs I am not South African, no. Why, do they define "progressive" differently there? Are literacy tests for voting considered "progressive" where you are from? Is rationalizing the racism of Jan Smuts a hobby of yours?

[@thesoundofthesuburbs]

@@ronrice1931 Progressives and liberals aren't defined any differently in South Africa than anywhere else. All politics exist on a spectrum and that spectrum is different in each society and each time period. In the Apartheid era, and the era before that, the era in which Jan Smuts governed the Union, supporters of a universal franchise were few and far between. A universal, non-racial franchise was widely viewed as a gateway to a communist revolution in South Africa both domestically and internationally. Often people make the mistake of believing that South Africa was a land of equality when the tribes, both European and African, began arriving in the 1600s, but this just simply isn't so. European and African societies were highly unequal with European society being far more advanced across the board. When the Europeans and their descendants began building the national framework for South Africa, there were no Mandelas, no educated black Africans of any sort. This posed a massive conundrum that was and is impossible to ignore.
Smuts' United Party was behind the Fagan Commission that advocated greater integration of races in South Africa. This contrasted with the Afrikaner nationalist National Party's Sauer Commission that would lead to Apartheid following Smuts' party's undemocratic defeat in the 1948 election.
I currently live in a country where there is diversity, but historically significantly more equality. Even so, poll taxes and tests have been a feature of U.S. democracy historically-and most certainly during the time of Jan Smuts. Likewise, similar restrictions and obstacles to a universal franchise were present in Britain and other liberal societies during the time of Smuts. It is important to view his positions within that contemporary lens.
I am not rationalizing Jan Smuts racial views by any stretch. But, the fact is, Jan Smuts was and is widely viewed as a moderate or progressive figure within South African politics and his name remains splattered on roadways, schools, and institutions throughout South Africa, especially in historically liberal locales like Johannesburg's northern suburbs and elsewhere.