To me, it’s a no-brainer. There was never a pre-existing place called ‘Tshwane’ that Pretoria replaced. Instead, an entirely new population centre came into being, in due course assuming city status. It was named ‘Pretoria’ by its founders, and that it was what was called for over 140 years before it was arbitrarily renamed Tshwane by the new black majority government. The obvious intention of that change was not to restore a title that had been unjustly taken away by a usurper power, but impose an indigenous African-sounding name to disguise, and ultimately erase from popular memory, the city’s white European origins.
The very term ‘indigenous’ is itself debatable in this context. By the 1850s, white Afrikaners had been in South Africa for some two centuries already. Surely, by then they could claim to be authentically African? Certainly, they no longer regarded Europe as they home. Similarly, was not ‘Pretorius’, from which Pretoria is derived, not by then an African name in its own right? When right-wing white supremacists in the UK claim that blacks are not and can never be authentically British, no matter how many generations they have been in the country, they are rightly denounced as beyond-the-pale racists. Surely something similar should apply when it comes to this country, even if there are obvious differences between the two situations?
This is why I resist, and will continue to resist, referring to Pretoria as Tshwane. It may well end up being no more than a symbolic gesture, but that is no reason to tamely acquiesce in a process that effectively represents whites like myself as being an alien, illegitimate presence in South Africa, regardless of the passage of time.
All well and good. But then I thought it over and had the following interior dialogue with myself:
“That being your take, no doubt you would also, on principle, decline to refer to Salisbury as Harare?”
“Uh … well as it happens …”
“Hmmm. Odd that. Well certainly you don’t refer to Lourenco Marques as Maputo. After all, it was called Lourenco Marques for a lot longer than Pretoria was called Pretoria.”
“Um … right …”
In other words, I’m not quite so clear on the whole renaming thing. Why, then, do I regard the above two cases as being somehow different? It is not good enough, obviously, to say that it is because I have never lived in either Zimbabwe or Mozambique and therefore have no real stake in the matter. A principle is a principle, regardless of national boundaries.
After thinking further, I came up with two differences. The first is that in both the Zimbabwe and Mozambique cases, the white minority were essentially forced to capitulate. Once South Africa and Portugal had withdrawn their respective support, military defeat would have inevitably followed. Hence, the context of post-liberation was much more of a “to the victor, the spoils” nature, and consequently somewhat more justifiable. In South Africa, by contrast, whites struck a deal while they were still in a position of relative power and could reasonably expect not to be shunted aside by wholesale Africanisation.
A second difference relates to demographics. Following Mozambique’s independence, the white Portuguese population left almost en masse, whether through compulsion or by choice. Lourenco Marques thus became almost an entirely black city, and changing its name to something its residents (presumably at least) felt more comfortable with is understandable. It is also true that the old regime was very much more obviously a colonial set-up; there was no move by white Portuguese residents to establish their own independent breakaway country, as happened in the Transvaal and in Rhodesia. The name Lourenco Marques was therefore far more associated with the country’s recent colonial past, and hence had to go (along with most other Portuguese-era names).
In the Harare case, the post-independence white population was also proportionately much less than the white population of Pretoria today. It was also known as Salisbury for less time – about ninety years as opposed to over 140 in Pretoria’s case.
While these differences are not insignificant, they are not really sufficient to justify why I feel so different about the Pretoria name change as I do about name changes across the border. It also raises difficult questions. Did the fact, for example, that white Afrikaners and white Rhodesians had severed their ties with their respective mother countries in Europe thereby remove them from the category of coloniser and make them instead just another African people jostling for their place in the sun? Some would say not, especially in the Rhodesian case where white settlement was that much more recent. With regard to numbers, would I be reconciled to Tshwane replacing Pretoria were the white population to drop below a certain proportion of the total, say under 20%? I suppose I might do, but even then it would be with some reluctance.
In essence, I believe that Pretoria has been sufficiently long established under that name to justify its continuing to be called that, and that is regardless of what the racial composition might be, today or in the future. This should apply in general terms to all, or at least most, cities and towns in the country. Certainly, renaming streets, airports and the like is acceptable, indeed desirable, since these are generally named after personalities who for racial and/or political reasons have been excluded during the era of white minority rule. “Africanising” the name of an entire urban entity, on the other hand, sends a message that the white European input into building South Africa is somehow an historic aberration that needs to be effaced from the official record. If such changes are to take place at all, they should at least not be imposed from on high but come about through an appropriately democratic, consultative process amongst the inhabitants of that particular city, town or village itself.
Bet Mr Saks would not feel the same about Adolf Hitler Strasse? But us black africans must suck it up. After all, nobody did anything to us that was all that bad.
A major problem with this is that “Pretoria” was the identification code for the apartheid regime. Whenever anything bad happened, it was “Pretoria” that was doing it. (Whereas Lourenco Marques was just a sleepy colonial backwater doing Lisbon’s bidding.)
So there’s a certain political-moral significance to making the name-change. Whereas changing East London to Buffalo City has, to my mind, not been any significant improvement. (Though I admit buffaloes are not my favourite of the Big Five.)
Creator – East London to Buffalo City doesn’t bother me that much, partly because the first name so overtly derives from a foreign occupying country and partly because I’ve always found East Londoners to be a bit creepy. I don’t mean unpleasant – like Eastern Capies in general, they are quite friendly – but borderline deranged. That was my take as a Rhodes student, anyway, and it’s only fair to add that I tended to be stoned out of my head whenever I mixed with them.
Charles – I did state quite clearly that street name changes are not a problem. No need to throw the Jewish thing in my face.
@Charles:
With due respect, that is an entirely flawed analogy. See, there was already a street named something else, which was changed into Adolf Hitler Strasse, and then changed back. And many of Pretoria’s street names are older than apartheid.
There were no streets in a place called Tswhane, because there was no place called Tshwane. There was a chief Tshwane and his association with the place we know as Pretoria is sketchy at best.
While we are at it, why don’t we rename Soweto and Kliptown? These are not African names either, and they both pre-date apartheid too?
After all, nobody can imply to us that the ANC’s reich has been all good. It’s not like we can think of better things to spend money on, like service delivery that recently enjoyed a 25% hike. No, let’s make symbolic, cosmetic changes and be stubborn about it, instead of not hiking up service delivery prices and making Pretoria a more pleasant place for all its inhabitants.
@The Creator:
Pretoria was founded in 1855 and thus pre-dates the apartheid regime with nearly a century. Any association that apartheid and Pretoria has, is thus purely symbolic and not based on logic. Symbolically, post-apartheid negotiations also took place in Pretoria. What now?
What is “wholesale Africanisation”? Unless I have been smoking something for the 63 odd years of my life, this country is part of a continent known as Africa – and the white founders of any of this country’s cities and towns, never did it on their own – they used the backs of slaves (in the Cape) and labour which may as well have been enslaved given their treatment.
Renaming streets is not about who can call themselves African, but healing the wounds of apartheid.
Most Jews, around the world empathize with the oppressed and could be found on the front lines in the battle against racism and social justice causes. Many South African Jews however, did not feel that brunt of racism unleashed by apartheid, since they appeared white and were considered white by the SA regime, and also benefited enormously from the spoils of apartheid. Maybe that’s why you have such difficulty understanding the pain felt by black when they utter the name “Pretoria”.
so let me get this straight, how will name changing erase our “painful” past? How will our children learn about their history if every memory that is left of it is being renamed and changed? honestly i do understand the anger most people have about apartheid but that is South Africa’s history, including all blacks, whites, and indians. Pretoria belongs to no ethnic group nowadays, it belongs to all who can afford to live in it. If someone wants to make history, why dont they build new citiies, South Africa has millions of square kilometers available for that undertaking. when will people stop using the ‘i was hurt’ game and create new things? most of the people here probably have never experienced what real apartheid was like any ways
Thank you David for a very good read.
Just a pity, you are going to deal with the likes of the Charles’s with no rational thoughts backing up their arguments.
Perhaps the problems stems from the fact that the city is named after Pretorius himself. Pretorius, after all, led the Trekkers during the infamous Battle of Blood River.
3000 dead vs 3 wounded? Methinks this doesn’t sit too well with some people even to this day. The battle itself is an excellent example of using terrain, technology and tactics to maximum benefit.
Then again, we have the SAS Isandlwana – named after another brilliant battle in which the Zulus outmaneuvered the British. Brings a smile to my dial every time.
To the majority (democracy you so much like right) Pretoria represents evil. i would rather go without food and drink if it means the money is used for this change.its happening deal with it. thats what we the majority want. call it whatever name you like but you will love the new name in a few short years.
i do so enjoy your squrming about it though
Roberts’ Heights was renamed Voortrekker Hoogte, Arniston became Waenhuiskrans, Sophiatown became Triomf… Afrikaners decided to change names to make the country reflect them, why should it be any different now? Your comment that Afrikaners had been in the country for two hundred years by 1850 does not alter the fact that they had only recently moved into previously occupied territories, confiscated them, and created new names. Whether this was done under the moniker “apartheid” is irrelevant. I do not personally understand the need to change names (after all, London was named Londinium by Romans who invaded and colonised England, but there never was any official move to rename the town, similar with many Norman French names in England) but for some people these things are important. Ireland has renamed towns too, in the south: recently Dingle was renamed An Daingean as it sounds more Gaelic. However, when I think of Pretoria, I think of Ossewabrandwag, Malan, Vorster, PW Botha, et al which to me is merely distasteful; I cannot imagine how I would feel if I were black and had suffered as a consequence of their actions. If the renaming is delayed for long enough, impetus for doing so will cease, of course, as living memory dies. However, in general terms, as the National Party knew all too well in 1948 (and in more ways than simply renaming): to the victor the spoils.
@Haiwa Tigere,
You will go without food and water as lomg as the name change?
But then you wake up every day and go to work in ” add your new name here” and the city still looks they same, operate the same, and still have the same vibe about it.
Nothing has changed, its still all the same. If you want to starve for the cause then destoy the Union buildings and the Monument and so on.
But more you just sound like an angry individual who does not know why they angry about.
Some good points made here, but I think the most accurate has to do with the fact that in the minds of the majority, Pretoria is associated with their opression, irrespective of its longevity or actual links to apartheid. It is the legacy that Afrikaner children (in fact, all whites in South Africa) will have to live with for generations to come, just as, in the minds of Afrikaners, I (for example) and my children, will always be tarred with the brush of my English forebears who put theirs into concentration camps in the anglo-boer war. Believe it or not it still crops up regularly in conversations. It’s human and understandable. Today, decades after the second world war, new generations of Germans are still being tarred with the Nazi brush. We live in an imperfect world and the sins of the fathers are indeed visited on their children. Its pointless pontificating. If it hurts the majority change the name. You can rest assured that at some stage, long after we are dead, they will be changed again.
We can call it whatever we wish, but it makes no difference at all, since most folks cannot read anyway and even get lost with a garmin.
You know what’s really funny? They named a street in Durban “Che Guevara”. But he was a mass murderer and a racist. So I don’t think it has anything to do with hurt feelings, rather another way to spite the evil whites.
Lennon – I’m going to be very pedantic here, but anyway – re Blood River, there is no ways 3000 Zulus were killed. That figure has simply been repeated by subsequent historians, based on a typical exaggerated estimate (enemy casualties are always inflated by the other side – almost a cast-iron rule). I’m adamant on this point because at the battle of Kambula in 1879, where the Zulu dead were properly tallied up afterwards, the casualties were in the region of 2000-2500 dead. This was despite there having been 2000 British troops armed with modern Martini Henry rifles and a significant number of artillery pieces, as opposed to 365 Voortrekkers with slow-loading muskets (and of course, ‘Ou Grietjie’, which fired a small cannon ball). There is no ways the latter could have inflicted casualties even equivalent to what the British inflicted, let alone more. (What a pity the Zulus never learned their lessons from Blood River, by the way. All their major victories against white troops – Italeni, Isandlwana, Hlobane, Intombi and Holkrantz – were achieved through catching the enemy out in the open, not when they were comfortably ensconced behind strong fortifications as was the case at Rorke’s Drift, Kambula and Gingindhlovu).
south africa must change it’s-colonial name ,to being :AZANIA!
@ Universal what would you consider ‘real aparthed’? I was never arrested by the old government. But my father was. As a result he was absent for most of my youth. We still stuggle to reconnect. Is that not real enough? People who were directly and indirectly affected by apartheid are not hard to find Sir. I cannot imagine someone telling the Jewish community or Native Americans to get over it. Or playing the ‘I was hurt game’ as you put it.The effects of oppression last far beyond a single generaton.
@ Richard. I could not agree more with your statements.
Having said that, I have to say how deeply impressed I am by the level or humility and reason everyone has spoken with. The internet is not known for such rational debate. This is the kind of respectful dialogue which will see us floursh as a nation.
What is colonial about South Africa?
This is the continent of Africa and we are in the South!
Pettiness is so childish Laquachenn-Gabway.
I wonder why the ‘saviour’ government who changes names to their liking do not attend to the polluted streets (all over gauteng) . This is a reason why I do not actually care calling it Tshwane, sounds a lot like ‘Swiney’.
Pretoria is too much a classy name to be associated with slack disciplined taxi’s and dirty streets.
@universal and Mike Venter
I wonder why your views should be deemed “rational” or any other degree of worthy based solely on your say so. The vast majority of people in this country agree with name changes, which alone should be sufficient (subject to compliance with legal processes). It’s called democracy. Needless to state, this universally recognized right of people to change the names of their regions, countries, etc, will naturally be ignored by the likes of “venter”, “universal” and david saks because anything majoritarian is deemed to be illegitimate (because voters are unthinking “voting cattle”, unless they vote for the DA, in which case they are “rational”).
Then there’s David’s easy dismissal of the Nazi analogy, without any basis whatsoever. Apartheid was a crime against humanity (as much as Nazi genocide); it derived its legacy from colonialism and the racialist Boer republics (one of whose capital cities was Pretoria). I will contend again, unashamedly, that anybody who would suggest that Hitler Strasse should remain would be branded a lunatic (correctly so), anti-Semitic and (if in Germany) be liable for imprisonment. Indeed, a few weeks ago there was a display of WWII era German army regalia in a military show in RSA an there was an outcry. Why therefore should black Africans have to rationalize and justify why an equivalent crime against humanity and its associated regalia and names should be changed?
@Haiwa Tigere,
In fact, you would not go hungry. Costs as an argument against name changes was abandoned even by Agri-forum. The reality is that stationery, books, etc, that would have to be replaced, would in any event be replaced (they are by definition consumables). The tourism argument also fell apart ages ago with OR Tambo airport (and the zero impact of the change) and the advent of GPS. Opponents of name changes now rely on procedural review grounds because all substantive arguments against changes have fallen aside. Or the arguments advanced by David, which have no moral or logical basis whatsoever .
@ David: Considering the fortified postition and the fact that all attempts to storm the laager were successfully repulsed, along with the cavalry charge which ultimately led to the route which followed, why not? By the way, grapeshot turns people into strawberry jam – especially when they are in close formation. It wasn’t just 300-odd Trekkers. There were also some 200 servants assisting them. The estimate on the refire rate per shooter (with a team of people reloading for them) was around one shot per 5 seconds – faster than the longbow archers at the Battle of Agincourt.
But ok. Let’s say that only 500 or 1000 were killed. Compared to three wounded and being outnumbered? Still a good result for the Trekkers.
Perhaps if the Zulu had just charged in a single move, they might have carried the field. Same mistake (as you pointed out) as that made at Rorke’s Drift.
Then again, if the CO’s of the Zulu Army had used their heads, they would’ve attacked before the mist cleared – assuming they knew that gunpowder doesn’t work too well when its wet.
I just wonder when all these trolls here on TL always posing as historians and intellectuals will eventually become tired of these white vs black debates. I mean no matter how reasonable or unreasonable a curtain policy is created, if it’s meant to deface the historical apartheid identity, obviously a majority of the proudly volkly whites will come here and try to reasonably condemn it and ridicule some blacks along the way who seem to be supporting it and also the blacks here will do the same if they think the whites are being forgetful about apartheid and what not.
The debates here have become hopelessly predictable that it has become a joke.
@ David: They had a pair of cannon. Double trouble
NAME CHANGE
With the corruption
And thuggery
In the ANC
It’s from Polekwane
To Zuma-babwe
@Charles:
No, it’s simply not true that the majority of people in the country agree with name changes. On what do you base such an assertion?
And you neglect the costs of rezoning. In fact, the Pretoria street name changes alone cost R2,7 million. Shortly thereafter, the rates went up with a staggering 25%.
Ask yourself: Is a 25% price hike normal for a municipality with negligible cost concerns?
Lennon – points taken. The voortrekkers were also better shots than the Brits. At Kambula, though, the bulk of the slaughter likewise took place when the mounted men were unleashed against the retreating zulus
@ David: A classic Roman tactic as well, I believe.
Nothing quite finishes a fight like chasing your retreating opponents down.
Just Saying has it right. Durban (eThekwini) is prime ANC-ville with every mainish street re-named after some ANC “struggle” icon. Zulus were studiously ignored in favour of obscure killers like Che. I’m surprised Pol Pot and Josepg Stalin didn’t get a mention. In the “townships” of course we still have Road 218 etc.
My only objection to wholesale name changing as has happened in Durban, for instance, is that so many townships remain without street names and signs, making it difficult for police and medical emergency services to help the residents adequately.
Many of our locals have absolutely no idea who the people after whom streets have been renamed are, were or might have been. And street names are better kept shortish, for road safety purposes.
How Tshwane residents know whether others are talking about the city or the region, I don’t know, but then, I also have absolutely no idea where most of the renamed municipalities are, other than my own, which I gather is in the process of subdividing.
Pretoria or Tshwane? This question makes me think about the Mosi-oa-Tunya. For centuries, the Tonga and Toka-Leya people of the Zambezi valley named one of the most amazing natural waterfalls as the Mosi-oa-Tunya or Shungu Mutitima. In 1855 the first european “discovered” the falls and without any consultation or referendums, David Livingstone saw it fit to rename the falls in honour of his queen while seeming to ignore the centuries old name(s) that were widely known in the Zambezi valley area. Why did he do this?, because during that time British colonial power was at full strength, hence they used their influence and muscle to impose an imported name. Fast forward to the present day, the name Victoria Falls is still in use and is far more accepted and recognised as the “official name” for the Mosi-oa-Tunya.
In a nutshell, stop whining over petty things you cannot change, accept the name Tshwane as the new Pretoria and move on with your life. You can continue calling it Pretoria all you like but the Majority of South Africans are moving on with Tshwane leaving you and your Pretoria behind
My GPS is becoming seriously confused and pissed off!
Drove through the centre of Pretoria today and noticed how it was becoming more “Tshwanish” by the day.
It’s now a typical Afro-cesspool – entirely worthy of the new name.
Changing street names and town/city names is something that happens the world over, but not to the extent it happens here, which is why the issue comes up time and time again. Wholesale changes to names to be more reflective of where we are now is not a bad thing. What gets my goat is change for changes sake. Che Guevara Road in Durban? Give me a break. How does that resonate with South Africa, past or present? The sad thing is that if we experience a change in government in KZN (or indeed the country), I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s changed again. That’s the risk with being stupid rather than sensible with these changes.
Erasing history this. South Africans have taken the name changing business too far. Next you are going to change the name of your country to Kumwera kwa Africa ( Chewa Malawian).
I live in Blantyre Malawi. My city was named after a small village in Scotland where Dr David Livingstone came from.
Before the British colonised Malawi, Blantyre was called Kabula but we did not change the name of our city back to Kabula.
South Africans, get a life.
we must act honestly, unequivocally and in unity in trying to reinforce democracy and respect for human rights throughout South Africa and part of that is the ability to change our thinking , change our words , those we say in public and in the privacy of our friendships, homes & anonymously in sites such as these . It is important to note that this democracy 18 years in was achieved by hardship, in bloodshed, and our past is directly through the arrogance, viciousness and cunning of people. There are flaws in our humanity , when you look at the comments here and the arrogance of this article you see the flaws in fresh 18 year democracy. What should be easily forgotten? what should be easily left without correction … you see it as inconsequential street renaming , city renaming …the land under our feet was all belonging to black people. Think about the land under your feet and realize that a country is not sold anywhere, it can not be bought anywhere. This land under your feet is African how can you be so opposed to it sounding like what it is ? On some level can you not assume that the responsibility for the advancement of democracy wont be a comfortable journey for all South Africans. Is it so hard to realize that you hate the idea of change because you don’t respect what Africans had to go through because you fought them for their land , because you wanted to stand on their heads and have them like it. In all such instances we must expect that such interventions occur…
and you will see such responses. If you don’t understand it , be okay that you do not understand it. Do not shout high and loud because your history does not make you sensitive enough to rid yourself of hate and belittling of things that only surface as a direct aftermath of apartheid. There is this quote : “Yesterday is a foreign country – tomorrow belongs to us!” . This is the time for Africa and Africans in this South Africa that is broken , and if you can not understand because your position of privilege has come with a mind set that will always view the actions of the now African ruling party and “stupid “ and “pointless” understand that you choose to water your seed of hate. Understand that you are in need to honour the memory of one idea and others are in need to honour different memories. Part of intelligence is awareness.
Changing names is an idiotic pastime. Complete and utter chaos would ensue if every city in the world started to change their names and street names at some twit’s whim. Without continuity in names, history effectively becomes meaningless, and without history civilisation is unthinkable. Why stop at place names, what about the elements and other named objects? We could also change the numerical system from time to time. Get a life!
My grandmother was born in the town called Novi Sad by its Serbian majority and Újvidék by its Hungarian minority. Both names are in official use by the local administration.
Well I wonder about people sometimes, if we are born in Africa, we are Africans no matter our supposed colour, what is so difficult that we do not see obvious. This country belonged to the Ancient Ones long, long before the arrival of settlers, black and white. Actually let me re-phrase that, this wonderful land never has and never will belong to anyone, the Ancient Ones certainly never thought of it as their property. As with everything, it was a gift from the Gods to be shared by all, ants, antelopes, birds, humans, trees and all of the creations and creatures big and small.
I am African first, white second. We cannot change the past but we can shape the future if we get past the petty things we dwell on. Splitting hairs on the subject of expensive name changes when too many of our people are living in abject poverty and going to school and to bed with growing hunger pangs is just ludicrous.
Let’s get on with living before life passes us by. Our enemies are hunger and sickness, poverty and homelessness. Let’s build a nation we can all be proud of, after all, we’re in this together. Peace.
‘Lindi’ sounds remarkably like ‘Tofolux’ -with the marked resemblance in idiotic verbosity, illogical and inaccurate declarations and racist insolence;
and not only does ‘backward thinking’ refer to outlook, but to the constant raking up the past, refusal to look forward, or even at what is presently taking place.
Most importantly though, is the absolving responsibility from the ANC for every stupid decision, every wrong-doing and sheer greed and corruption, by laying blame anywhere and everywhere else.
This emotional and irrational ‘support’ places the country and all its people in the greatest jeopardy.
Whether Lindi and Tofolux are one and the same – or not – makes no matter. The rant is the same.
The name change of towns also does not change the nature of where the town is or what it has become.
What it does do, is demonstrate yet again the ridiculous waste of time and money – not to change the town for the better, but to create confusion and cater to the whims of ANC propaganda. Maps, books, signs, business letterheads etc. must be changed at tremendous cost to the taxpayer – and to what avail?
The obvious and sensible way to promote the ‘honouring of ANC hero’s', is to name NEW streets, NEW settlements, NEW libraries, schools, hospitals, airports etc with their chosen new names.
Show the world what progress is being made – not how much wastefulness, reversal and undoing they can apply to what already exists.
Does anybody actually realise how pathetic it is to justify renaming by saying “because the Apartheid government did it…” If I compare the goodwill that existed in the country circa 1994 and the race polarisation today, it is difficult not to blame the ANC for failing to build one (rainbow) nation. It seems as if the ANC local governments prefer to continuously provoke other race and religious groups – even if it might not be their (stated) intend. One can argue the merits of renaming something that is offensive, but the more productive thing would of course be to rename all those unnamed and non-descript street names in the traditionally black areas whilst upgrading and beautifying them. That would be a real contribution. Either way, it is a very sad way to get votes / majority support. It is almost as if they want to move the debate away from service delivery to presentation. …just talking the talk. What would be great is if the ANC government can break this mould and build new cities, business areas, streets, airports, railroads, subways, parks, ports, education centres, police stations and then name them after who or whatever reflects their contribution to the future of the country. Please, pretty please, stop being a reactionary movement and become a government: for the people, the land, our children. Build a nation. Leave a legacy. We (and the world) want you to succeed. It is still not too late. If the shoe fits…
Your last paragraph really griped and convince me of your views. I think that no matter how bad the relationship between two countries or cultures, There should be at least an acknowledge that one foreign culture has given another one an advantage or benefit. That should ever be forgotten.
In Eastern Europe under Soviet rule, lots of street names were changed to those of Communist “heroes” and such names persisted for more than 60 years. After the collapse of the Soviet Union all of such anmes, without an exception, were changed back to their original versions. The Amercian way of giving numbers to streets is more practical and non-offensive to any political faction.
My view on this is Pretoria is Pretoria . I was born 1991 in Pretoria , i grew up in Pretoria and the name Pretoria carries a lot of meaning for different reasons . Yes there are bad aspects as well , but changing a name doesnt change the past . Why does it need to change? Let it represent a mistake and lead to a futher we can be proud of. When you change a name you lose a lot of its meaning . Church street was renamed recently , and did we people consider what it means? It was the longest street in Africa , not anymore as its now 3 streets . When you speak of the church street bombing , can you say it happened here… No as it isnt church street . There are countless examples like this . What use is history if you dont learn from it ? And the legal implications as well as cost is that not to be considered? By changing a name you could instead improve the lives of the citizens of that country . And arent we as a nation ever going to ecxpand? Make new names reflect a new SA , but dont change a name . I wasnt part of apartheid and as such why do westill get seen as oppressors . Instead of changing a name build to a better Sa and then name the new areas whatever you want . But Pretoria is Pretoria , in my mind it will never change