My Review of Larry Bond's 1991 Anti-Apartheid Novel "Vortex"

In a book report (it wasn’t very analytical) I did in 2022 about a sort of sci-fi/sort of techno-thriller novel with a left-wing message, I admitted that a big chunk of the fiction I read is by Tom Clancy or authors like Tom Clancy (1989-2009 it was about 70% and since 2009 it’s been about 25% (hopefully I won’t go to Socialist Hell)). As far as I can tell, the author of the book I just referred to (David Mace) is progressive. If you look at the books I’ve read in the Tom Clancy genre there’s a handful with some stuff that is liberal or even progressive. It’s usually a small island of progressive viewpoints (by characters you’re supposed to like) with an ocean of center/center-right politics. There is one book which is written by someone much more right-wing than left-wing but which can nonetheless be greatly enjoyed politically by progressives, if you think about it the right way. I’m talking about Larry Bond’s 1991 novel “Vortex.”

“Vortex” is about Apartheid South Africa, and a “last gasp” attempt by hardliners to maintain Apartheid and Afrikaner colonialism. I believe the story starts in May of 1992, although it’s not clear what the year is. I am not sure how much or how little progress was made in the Peace Process between Mandela’s release and May of 1992 (in reality). Towards the very beginning of the book the President of SA talks about significant progress being made, which prompts the main villain (Karl Vorster, a Cabinet member) to carry out something which is basically a coup, but which appears to be the ANC’s military wing (MK) assassinating the rest of the cabinet (although this is known by almost no one until the last 1/3 of the book, the MK operation was manipulated by Vorster and the Intelligence agency he runs). He then reverses the small number of reforms that had been made to Apartheid, invades neighboring Namibia, and turns the security forces loose against Blacks and any dissent by whites.

The situation becomes chaotic. The leader of the Zulu population (who, in reality, may not have been as militant as the ANC was during the anti-Apartheid struggle) calls for the rest of the world to take action against the new regime and his people take up armed struggle. A large chunk of the military in Cape Town refuses to massacre white civilian protestors and rebels against the government.

Things also start to fall apart for Vorster in Namibia, whose government asks the Cuban Army in Angola to help repel the invasion. Although this is more complicated, to one extent or another during most of the book you can root for the Cuban Army. The head of the Cuban Army in Africa (General Antonio Vega) convinces Castro that Cuba should resolve the conflict by invading South Africa and overthrowing Apartheid. With some help from other “anti-Imperialist” countries (including three Libyan units probably the size of battalions) three columns (probably around 2,000-3,000 men in each) enter SA from the east, north and west. Because the Cubans hid their preparations for the invasion the SA military is still focused on Namibia and rapid progress is made, especially the column approaching Pretoria from the West. Because it is a desert and a sparely populated area (and because he is psychotic) Vorster eradicates that column with a nuclear bomb. SA is on the verge of using two more nukes to attack strategic targets when the US military captures them and removes them from the country in a massive airborne operation. Shortly after that the US military lands something like a division on the east coast of SA (at Durban) and starts fighting the SA Army on it’s way to Pretoria. Naval aircraft start attacking the East column of Cubans.

As you might guess, the US military stops the Cubans from reaching Pretoria until they (the US) can get there first. The aftermath of this victory for the US is largely a GOP fantasy. Because of some significant friction with the Cubans (see below), the ANC abandons it’s commitment to socialism. There IS something about recognition of the trade-unions, something proposed by the occupying US military, but I think we’re talking about something that is probably engineered to foster a pretty centrist labor movement.

There are two large aspects of this story relevant to how close it is to being a progressive book.

First, the US government moves very slowly at each stage of the crisis and are usually far behind Cuba. And they (characters who are officials of the US government) are pretty honest about why they are initially very slow and behind Cuba, and they’re also very honest about why they DO send their own invasion force after Cuba invades- they don’t want Cuba to get credit for overthrowing Apartheid. I will add a lot of details to this in about a year when I read this book (for the 6th or 7th time) and take some notes, but in general, Cuba looks better than the US government.

On the other hand, there are some things Bond has the Cubans do that A) usually involve quite a bit of imagination on Bond’s part and B) make Cuba look bad. After one of his columns is wiped out by a nuke, Vega decides to compensate for that by using chemical weapons. In all fairness to Vega and in all fairness to Bond who was probably tempted to really slander Cuba at this point, they use NON-PERSISTENT chemical weapons which become impotent pretty quickly after they are released into the air. This means they’re not quite as indiscriminate as they would be if they were persistent. We don’t know how many battles involved Cuban chemical weapons, but there was at least one. And some small part of the nearby black population was affected, with some deaths.

Those black deaths contribute to the erosion of congeniality between the Cuban Army and the ANC’s military wing, Spear of the Nation. There is one bizarre incident that was a pretty good example of Bond trying to reassure most of his readers that he did not go commie while writing this book. The Cubans ask the black population in one town to help them make an airfield they took over functional again. There weren’t enough volunteers so a small number of Blacks were forced to help. This of course contributes to the conflict developing between the Cubans and the ANC. Bond does sort zig-zag a bit and quotes Vega’s thoughts, pointing out that he has Black officers on his staff- who he describes as brave and competent.

There is something I really need to say about Bond. Vortex is his second book. His first and third books are politically fairly centrist overall. His fourth and fifth books, I thought were racist towards Muslims and I will never read them again and I haven’t read anything he wrote after book five. (see this and this (and look for my name)). (I lost track of those two novels in my collection for several years but in the end I made a decision about 5 years ago to throw them away instead of taking them to a thrift store (I’m not totally okay with that, because it resembles book burning, but throwing them away was probably the right thing to do))

There is one last thing I need to get out of the way. In the very first sentence of the book, in a section that includes maybe 500 words, it sounds like Bond is saying that rural, uneducated Zimbabweans think that helicopters flying at night are “demons.”  There’s a bit more to that short first section, and I also think after I explain this next part, progressive readers will feel comfortable assuming that Bond is not racist towards Black people. In his first book (about a second Korean War), one of the main characters is an Air Force pilot who gets shot down behind enemy lines, and is rescued at night by a helicopter. This character does say that the helicopter appears like a demon.

It’s a massive book- 896 pages in paperback. If you’re not totally against anything military and you hate Apartheid, you will probably like this book. In about a year I will probably read it again and take some notes and have more to say.

Movie Reviews B

Emperor (IMDB Wikipedia)

I’m not sure how historically accurate it is, but overall it’s a fairly good movie. I’m glad that we defeated Japan in that war and it’s great that afterwards we became friends with Japan.  I also liked how one character, a senior Japanese politician who got along with the allies, pointed out that the British and Americans were roughly as imperialistic as Imperial Japan was.

I give it 2 stars out of 5.

Dr. Strange (IMDB Wikipedia)

Not anything political in this movie, but I do like super-hero stuff. I focus mostly on DC Comics stuff, but I also watch the live action movies about Marvel super-heroes.

I give it 2 stars out of five.

The Best of Enemies (IMDB Wikipedia)

This is an amazing movie. It’s a true story about a KKK leader rejecting racism. I missed the very ending when I saw it in the theater, but when I watched it at home recently, I learned that after CP Ellis transformed, he worked as a union organizer for the AFL-CIO. In general I was a little surprised at how class-conscious the Klan leader is but not that surprised. Obviously we have plenty of reasons to fight racism, but there’s one more- a lot of racists will become progressives when they reject their racist beliefs. And we need to recognize the role that unions have to play in fighting racism, as I’ve written elsewhere on this blog. We need to convince fiscally moderate and conservative Dems to support unions as a way to combat racism.

I give it 5 stars out of 5.

Easy A (IMDB Wikipedia)

This movie is about a teenage girl who lies about having sex for various reasons- for example a gay boy gets her to lie about them having sex so that he won’t be outed. She  kind of enjoys having an (inaccurate) reputation as a promiscuous young woman, but she also says towards the end that she doesn’t know when she’ll lose her virginity- but that it might be the next day or it might be on her wedding night or somewhere in between.

I give it 5 stars out of 5.

The Color of Freedom (also known as “Goodbye Bafana") (IMDB Wikipedia)

It’s based on a true story, although I’m not sure how historically accurate it is. It’s inspirational to see a racist journey through life to a point where he is friends with Nelson Mandela. This movie also highlighted the fact that Mandela was a driving force behind the armed part of the ANC’s strategy. In all honesty, the ANC’s military wing did a better job of not killing civilians than the IRA did, but the IRA wasn’t too far behind the ANC as I explain here.

No Surrender!!

Below are two new poems (for more on my poetry see this). They're both based on the same original and are both about the same thing.

For the rest of the poems, click the "Lyrics" label at the bottom.

“No Surrender (to the BA)” based on “No Surrender (to the IRA)” by Strikeforce UK, original lyrics are here.

1. This is basically set in the 80s, or the late 70s. and is about the IRA (it could be about other mainstream republicans also but I prefer to limit it to the IRA).
2. The BA is the British Army.
3. Westmacott was the highest-ranking British officer killed by the IRA and was with the elite SAS.
4. I give this poem four stars out of five.
**5. 43% of this version is me, 57% is the original.
6. UPDATED 1/15/16 Based on what might be called a fairly scientific look, only about .2% of the IRA's operations intentionally resulted in civilian death.

No surrender!

No surrender to the BA
Those evil bastards had better not stay
We stand within the nationalist community
We show the scum they cannot act with impunity

chorus
No surrender, no surrender, no surrender to the BA
No surrender, no surrender, no longer will they keep our freedom at bay
No surrender, no surrender, no surrender to the the British Army
No surrender, no surrender, we will drive them into the sea

loyalist terror attacks are going on still
And London don't give a fuck who they maim and kill
Herbert Westmacott went bye bye
And all you SAS fuckers are gonna die

chorus

No surrender!

We will smash that imperialist scum
No time to lose cos the battle's begun
We are of the global working-class
We won't back down and we’ll always kick ass

***********

“No Surrender (to the British Army)” based on “No Surrender (to the IRA)” by Strikeforce UK, original lyrics are here. (that gets the first line of the second verse wrong- it's what I have below)

1. This is basically set in the 80s, or the late 70s. and is about the IRA. (it could be about other mainstream republicans also but I prefer to limit it to the IRA).
2. The Rand was and is the currency of of South Africa.
3. During that 1.3 decade period, they were definitely pursuing revolution (ignoring conflict with the British state, I think what they probably had in mind was almost totally bloodless compared to most revolutions).
4. The Dail is the Irish Parliament. The second one was the first after the War of Independence. During it’s life there was the split which lead to the civil war and for decades until recently most (or almost all) republicans looked to it‘s surviving republican members for legitimacy. (It was only gradually, considering the violence and bitterness of the civil war, that many and then most and now almost all republicans recognize(d) the legitimacy of the Parliament and Government in Dublin in the last seven decades). (I think that mainstream republicans were a little slow to mostly and now totally or almost totally recognize the legitimacy of the state in the South)
5. I give this poem 4 stars out of five.
**6. 32% of this version is me, 68% is the original.
7. UPDATED 1/15/16 Based on what might be called a fairly scientific look, only about .2% of the IRA's operations intentionally resulted in civilian death.
8. Che is Che Gueverra, who has been credited with developing rural guerrilla warfare.

No surrender!

No surrender to the BA
We battle those bastards in the spirit of Che
Inspired by those who fight against the rand
We show the British scum that it's our land

No surrender, no surrender, no surrender to the BA
No surrender, no surrender, our revolution is underway
No surrender, no surrender, no surrender to the Brits
No surrender, no surrender, hit them with the blitz

Their terrorist attacks are going on still
And they don’t give a fuck who they maim and kill
Margaret Thatcher better wave bye bye
Cos Brit imperialists are gonna die

chorus
No surrender!

We will smash that British scum
No time to lose as the battle’s begun
We're loyal,to the second dail
We won't back down and we will never run

chorus

The anti-Apartheid Struggle and Republicans

I have mentioned Apartheid S. Africa several times on my blog in some connection to the Republican Movement. I've been aware of four connections between the two groups in recent decades, and a couple more connections between the two have just surfaced, which I’ll get to soon (I'm not sure they are as confirmed as I would like them, but the source for the new info seems like a good source).

First, here are the four connections I’ve been aware of for some number of years

1) A plaque remembering the sacrifice of both anti-Apartheid and Irish Republican Prisoners of war, is on Robben Island, which is kind of a monument to the anti-Apartheid struggle. That info was found here.
UPDATE 1/27/17  If that link is dead for some reason, I did a search of http://www.independent.co.uk using google and found a link to the article. It should show up here and is head-lined "Adams pays tribute to detainees' suffering." One quote from the article is:

The ANC changed its mind after Mr Adams's meeting with Mr Mandela who described Sinn Fein as "an old friend and ally''.

2) In 1981, as IRA (and INLA) prisoners went on hunger-strike, there was talk among ANC Prisoners of War of going on a solidarity hunger-strike. That's taken from an on-line only article in The Nation, by Tom Hayden- it was published some time in 2004, or 2005, or 2006. I can't find it online. When I do I'll update this.

3) In 2005 the Minister of Intelligence for South Africa visited Ireland as a guest of Sinn Fein and compared what he did as a member of the ANC's military wing during the anti-Apartheid struggle with what IRA members did during the Troubles. He spoke at republiccan events and at one point, according to the Irish Times said: "I could never accept that Sinn Féin has debased republicanism. They carried the flag of republicanism in the most difficult of times. ... The Irish struggle is a particularly heroic one." You can read at least a little of an Irish Times article about this here. If all you read there is the brief free paragraph, reading this from a Sinn Fein publication will make it clear what the Minister meant with his comments in that brief intro of the Irish Times article. I now have the text of the article and can email it to you if you want

4) In 1992 Nelson Mandela was on a British political talk-show and said that he supported the IRA. That information is found here (it's towards the bottom, says "mandela. and. ira").


There are some more pieces of information about this relationship. Those are found here, here, and here.

UPDATE 4/25/15 Another one here.

Tom