Abstract:
This study explores the expression of agency by farmworkers in post-apartheid South Africa drawing from a case study in the Northern Cape province. This is within the context of modernized paternalistic labour relations that persist despite significant political and legislative changes since the end of apartheid. Using a qualitative case study methodology, specifically reflexive ethnography, and integrating Bourdieu’s (1987) theory of practice to Scott’s (1985) analysis of everyday resistance, the study examines how farmworkers navigate their daily lives under a managerial system that blends traditional paternalism with contemporary bureaucratic control-"Paternalism 2.0," The research postulates that “managerial paternalism’-, a mix of paternalism and managerialism in the Northern Cape, functions as a highly effective system of control. It employs both visible and subtle mechanisms to suppress overt worker resistance, while perpetuating racialized power dynamics and limiting genuine collective action. In this context farm workers exhibit various forms of resistance, such as slowing work or taking long breaks, which emerge as covert acts of defiance within the control system. However, these "weapons of the weak" are shaped by broader structural forces of race, gender, and economic dependency, which continue to influence workers' behavior. Consequently, the workers' habitus informs how they act (i.e., their agency) within the system of control, making these covert actions a small means of gaining symbolic capital within the field. Furthermore, the study proposes a revision of Scott’s division between "hidden" and "public" transcripts, arguing that in modern digitally monitored environments, acts of resistance are less concealed and more strategically managed. It also extends his notion of "troublemakers" by exploring the role of race, particularly the experiences of "Khalid" farmworkers, to better understand the intersection of culture, resistance, and labour dynamics in post-apartheid South Africa. The study concludes that the Northern Cape’s system of control, which combines managerialism and paternalism, severely undermines worker resistance and limits the means through which workers can express their collective demands.
