On July 4th, 1776 the United States declared itself independent from Great Britain. It broke away because it believed Britain was behaving like a dictatorship, and that the colonists were not being represented in Parliament. Americans didn’t want to be exploited, they desired to rule themselves so they wouldn’t have to pay tribute, or life and limb, to a foreign power an entire ocean away. About 200 hundred years later, another colony (South Africa) broke away from The Crown. In both countries laws were created to ensure security and a piece of mind, at least, they were supposed to. Interestingly though, in less than 50 years, American society saw a trend that lead to a wider gap between the “‘Haves’” and the “Have-nots’’. A trend that persists …show more content…
This tactic is called Gerrymandering. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, “Gerrymandering has been condemned because it violates two basic tenets of electoral apportionment—compactness and equality of size of constituencies.” Ironically, this defeats the entire purpose of having a democracy or a republic. and the consequences result in a reduction of productivity in government which slows the development of the entire nation. Matthew Frankel, an author for the news article website Brookings, argues that “Without having to fear a competitive electoral fight, there is little incentive for members of Congress to moderate their positions and the country suffers as a result.” He argues that there’s no need for lawmakers to modify their policies to better suit the needs of the population. Gerrymandering is still widely practiced in America though not many people realize this; and, although Gerrymandering was first officially used in the late 1700s, (ironically around the time the United States broke away from Great Britain for fear of exploitation) it was used in a different manner much earlier, and it’s basic principles would be utilized in various places around the world to this day (like South Africa in the 1940s). The essence of gerrymandering is to instill ruthless tactics to secure power, power that is …show more content…
In South Africa, especially in the 1940s, gerrymandering was used for the white minority to secure power. They used methods that purposely made natives poor and flock to Johannesburg to run white businesses where they can work menial tasks and make a minimum wage. They “set aside one-tenth of the land for four-fifths of the people. thus, [making] it inevitable, that labor would come to the towns” (Arthur 178). This way, whites eliminate any threat of natives gaining influence or power of their own. The white minority can also make a profit off of their labor. Advocates like Arthur Jarvis were aware of this issue and realized the dangers of keeping labor poor or unrepresented; he understood the consequences and the struggles South Africa faced because of gerrymandering. “I say we shall always have native crime to fear until the native people of this country have worthy purposes to inspire them and worthy goals to work for” (Arthur 107). He argues that as long as the white minority keep trying to stay in power by sequestering the voice of the natives, there will be high rates of crime. The same can be seen here in the United States where we have “5% of the world's populations, but 25% of its criminals”. According to Thinkspot Sociology, a copyright of Pearson Education, the conflict theory as to why crime exists is because the “wealthy created laws that punish the poor,