I have recently been interested in Cape Town, mainly because I was fortunate enough to spend last weekend in the company one of its former mayors who welcomed Nelson Mandela when he was released from prison, at a Unitarian conference/retreat in Germany. Unfortunately, I had to share that company with about 100 other people, so I wasn't able to ask him all the questions I'd have liked to.
I was going to call this thread 'Demographics of Cape Town', but since I imagine that it will probably turn into a discussion about Cape Town in general, I've named it accordingly. Anyway, I was reading demographics section of the Wikipedia article about Cape Town, and what struck me was how diverse the city seems to be — so much so that there seems to be no real dominant ethnicity or language.
So, André (am I right in thinking that you used to live there?), or anyone else who might know — could you please explain (assuming you know, which I'm sure you do ) what corresponds to what? As in, which ethnic groups tend to speak which languages and which religions in Cape Town? And also, which language is used as a universal language in Cape Town, if any? Thanks!
Here are a simplified set of the demographics of Cape Town, interpreted from the very precise figures on the Wikipedia article:
Ethnicity:
48% Coloured
31% Black
19% White
_2% Asian
Language:
41% Afrikaans
29% Xhosa
28% English
_1% Sesotho
_1% others
Religion:
77% Christian
11% no religion
10% Muslim
_2% others (Jewish, Hindu, undetermined and others)
André in Zuid-Afrika
Re: Cape Town
Benjamin wrote:
Anyway, I was reading demographics section of the Wikipedia article about Cape Town, and what struck me was how diverse the city seems to be — so much so that there seems to be no real dominant ethnicity or language.
So, André (am I right in thinking that you used to live there?), or anyone else who might know — could you please explain (assuming you know, which I'm sure you do ) what corresponds to what? As in, which ethnic groups tend to speak which languages and which religions in Cape Town? And also, which language is used as a universal language in Cape Town, if any? Thanks!
Here are a simplified set of the demographics of Cape Town, interpreted from the very precise figures on the Wikipedia article:
Ethnicity:
48% Coloured
31% Black
19% White
_2% Asian
Language:
41% Afrikaans
29% Xhosa
28% English
_1% Sesotho
_1% others
Religion:
77% Christian
11% no religion
10% Muslim
_2% others (Jewish, Hindu, undetermined and others)
I lived in Cape Town for three years, yes.
Ethnicity:
48% Coloured (Mainly Afrikaans, Christian [Protestant, Catholic minority], Muslim)
31% Black (Xhosa, Christian [Protestant, Catholic minority], Zionist)
19% White (English majority in Cape Town proper, large Afrikaans minority - Afrikaans majority in greater Cape Town, Christian, mainly Protestant)
_2% Asian (English, Muslim)
Language:
41% Afrikaans (Christian, Muslim minority)
29% Xhosa (Christian, Zionist)
28% English (Christian)
_1% Sesotho (Christian, Zionist)
_1% others (Muslim)
Religion:
77% Christian (Afrikaans, English, Xhosa)
11% no religion (all three major language groups - Afrikaans speakers most probably the smallest group)
10% Muslim (Afrikaans mainly)
_2% others (English)
André in Zuid-Afrika
You might be interested to know that Cape Town is the only major city in SA not under ANC control.
Benjamin [inactive]
Very interesting, thank you!
André in Zuid-Afrika wrote:
You might be interested to know that Cape Town is the only major city in SA not under ANC control.
Yes — the Rev Gordon Oliver (the man I was talking about) mentioned something about that in his presentation. From what I gather, the ANC were rather unhappy about it. He said that he was still a strong supporter of the ANC though.
André in Zuid-Afrika
Benjamin wrote:
Very interesting, thank you!
André in Zuid-Afrika wrote:
You might be interested to know that Cape Town is the only major city in SA not under ANC control.
Yes — the Rev Gordon Oliver (the man I was talking about) mentioned something about that in his presentation. From what I gather, the ANC were rather unhappy about it. He said that he was still a strong supporter of the ANC though.
Yes, they tried their best to bring down the elected city government. They backed down earlier this week, when threatened with a court case. Gordon Oliver - that's right, he was the mayor of Cape Town back then, I remember him. He represented the Democratic Party then (which now rules the city - renamed the Democratic Alliance). I'll refrain from commenting on him...
Benjamin [inactive]
André in Zuid-Afrika wrote:
Gordon Oliver - that's right, he was the mayor of Cape Town back then, I remember him. He represented the Democratic Party then (which now rules the city - renamed the Democratic Alliance). I'll refrain from commenting on him...
Well, in that case, I will. I think he's an amazing man. It was funny, actually, meeting this small and fairly quiet man who was able to take such an active role in the anti-apartheid campaigns as mayor of Cape Town. I spoke to him afterwards, but I found that I didn't really quite know what to say, so I congratulated him on his presentation and asked him about a conference next year — very unoriginal, I know. He's now the minister at the Unitarian Church in Cape Town, and is the current present of the International Council of Unitarians and Universalists — not exactly our pope as such, but you get the idea. He's definitely very 'South African' as well, which I think is good.
André in Zuid-Afrika
Benjamin wrote:
Well, in that case, I will. I think he's an amazing man. It was funny, actually, meeting this small and fairly quiet man who was able to take such an active role in the anti-apartheid campaigns as mayor of Cape Town.
As I said, I'll refrain from commenting...
André in Zuid-Afrika
André in Zuid-Afrika wrote:
Benjamin wrote:
Well, in that case, I will. I think he's an amazing man. It was funny, actually, meeting this small and fairly quiet man who was able to take such an active role in the anti-apartheid campaigns as mayor of Cape Town.
As I said, I'll refrain from commenting...
Except to say I disagree...
Benjamin [inactive]
André in Zuid-Afrika wrote:
Quote:
As I said, I'll refrain from commenting...
Except to say I disagree...
That's absolutely fine. I admit that I probably have a rather inflated view of him, for obvious reasons, given that all I know about him is what he does in his current role as the ICUU president (I assume that your disagreement with him is not about this), how he is in person and his support for the anti-apartheid campaigns (told from his point of view which is probably biased). I don't know about anything else he may have done which might be less agreeable. The other problem is that it seems to be difficult finding non-Unitarian sources about him on the internet.
Seriously though, I would be interested to know some of the criticisms which unbiased people make of him — it wouldn't offend me in any way. (At least I assume that you don't have any personal bias towards him like I do). But I'd fully understand if you didn't want to share those with me.
André in Zuid-Afrika
Benjamin wrote:
André in Zuid-Afrika wrote:
Quote:
As I said, I'll refrain from commenting...
Except to say I disagree...
That's absolutely fine. I admit that I probably have a rather inflated view of him, for obvious reasons, given that all I know about him is what he does in his current role as the ICUU president (I assume that your disagreement with him is not about this), how he is in person and his support for the anti-apartheid campaigns (told from his point of view which is probably biased). I don't know about anything else he may have done which might be less agreeable. The other problem is that it seems to be difficult finding non-Unitarian sources about him on the internet.
Seriously though, I would be interested to know some of the criticisms which unbiased people make of him — it wouldn't offend me in any way. (At least I assume that you don't have any personal bias towards him like I do). But I'd fully understand if you didn't want to share those with me.
I'm just not a fan, I wouldn't say he's a bad person, so there's no reason why you shouldn't admire him. He was the mayor of Cape Town when I lived there, and I remember he made no secret of the fact that he disliked the Afrikaners (not just for apartheid, merely for the fact that we are Afrikaners). He refused to speak Afrikaans, even when he was mayor and it was expected of him. And to tell the truth, I think his part in the anti-apartheid campaign was really very minor. He took part in a few marches (I remember one very big one onvolving thousands of people), but that was about it. Otherwise he enjoyed the privileges of apartheid...
Quite frankly, I'm rather cynical about the role English South Africans played, or supposedly played, in bringing down apartheid. It is often claimed that the English community opposed apartheid, that apartheid was only supported and kept intact by the Afrikaners. That's simply not true. By the eighties the majority of English speakers were voting for the National Party. Before that they mainly voted for the United Party, which was even more conservative on racial issues that the NP. (While it officially opposed apartheid, its racial policies had the aim of keeping SA under permanent white rule.)
Oliver was a member of the then Democratic Party, which opposed apartheid, and which was indeed anti-racism, and proposed a black government (and incidently the party I supported then and still support in its new form as the Democratic Alliance - so Oliver and I were in the same party at the time). The predecessor of the Democratic Party, the Progressive Federal Party (of which Oliver was also a member), was generally perceived to be anti-Afrikaans, and to be a party of rich English speakers, people who could afford to oppose apartheid, yet "buy" their apartheid. It was to change that perception that the PFP merged in 1989 with the predominantly Afrikaans (anti-apartheid) Independent Party of Dennis Worrall and the National Democratic Movement of Wynand Malan, which had both broken away from the National Party in the previous year or two.
The Democrats remained almost exclusively English (after the merger they lost most of the Afrikaans support the IP and the NDM had, and Worrall and Malan left shortly after the merger) Only during the late nineties, when their new leader, Tony Leon, made an all out attempt to win Afrikaans support (his efforts included learning Afrikaans ), did the party gain significant Afrikaans support, and is today the predominant party amongst Afrikaners (the demise of the (New) National Party helped them in this respect).
But hey, that's all in the past, and shouldn't concern you, so I can understand that you admire him for what he does now. For me, I can't admire a man who probably still despises me simply because I'm Afrikaans.
Benjamin [inactive]
André in Zuid-Afrika wrote:
He was the mayor of Cape Town when I lived there, and I remember he made no secret of the fact that he disliked the Afrikaners (not just for apartheid, merely for the fact that we are Afrikaners). He refused to speak Afrikaans, even when he was mayor and it was expected of him.
That's quite strange actually, because when I overheard him talking about languages (German, I think) in the bar, I said to him:
'Kan jy ook Afrikaans praat?'
To which he responded, in quite natural and fluent sounding Afrikaans, that he did. He then said to me (in English), 'so, what do you know about Afrikaans?' But he was then distracted by something else, so our conversation went no further.
I have to go now, so I'll respond to the rest of your comments later.
Benjamin [inactive]
André in Zuid-Afrika wrote:
I'm just not a fan, I wouldn't say he's a bad person, so there's no reason why you shouldn't admire him. He was the mayor of Cape Town when I lived there, and I remember he made no secret of the fact that he disliked the Afrikaners (not just for apartheid, merely for the fact that we are Afrikaners).
That's interesting. The only time that might possibly have come through during his presentation was when he said that he believed that Frederik Willem de Klerk was probably still racist, but was pragmatic enough to realise that the apartheid system was unsustainable. (But perhaps that's true, I don't know). Anyway, I should be meeting him again next year, so I'll listen out for any subtle anti-Afrikaner sentiments.
Quote:
And to tell the truth, I think his part in the anti-apartheid campaign was really very minor. He took part in a few marches (I remember one very big one onvolving thousands of people), but that was about it.
It's true that we (Unitarians) probably like to play up his role. As you say, his main role was with helping the Cape Town peace marches to run more smoothly, and participating in some of them. This was probably unintentional, but the structure of his presentation sort of gave the impression that it was these marches which brought the end of apartheid — but they were obviously only a small part of it.
Quote:
Otherwise he enjoyed the privileges of apartheid...
Oh, absolutely. He actually admitted this himself.
Quote:
Quite frankly, I'm rather cynical about the role English South Africans played, or supposedly played, in bringing down apartheid. It is often claimed that the English community opposed apartheid, that apartheid was only supported and kept intact by the Afrikaners. That's simply not true. By the eighties the majority of English speakers were voting for the National Party. Before that they mainly voted for the United Party, which was even more conservative on racial issues that the NP. (While it officially opposed apartheid, its racial policies had the aim of keeping SA under permanent white rule.)
I actually find it quite amusing that people would think that the English South Africans were largely opposed to apartheid, and that the white Afrikaners were keeping it against their will. Is it mainly English South Africans who claim this, or?
Interestingly, Gordon mentioned that it was the support for apartheid and the fear of black majority rule which brought the white English-speaking and white Afrikaans-speaking South Africans together in the 1960s, which, he said, was when the past tensions between the two groups largely ended.
Quote:
Oliver was a member of the then Democratic Party, which opposed apartheid, and which was indeed anti-racism, and proposed a black government (and incidently the party I supported then and still support in its new form as the Democratic Alliance - so Oliver and I were in the same party at the time). The predecessor of the Democratic Party, the Progressive Federal Party (of which Oliver was also a member), was generally perceived to be anti-Afrikaans, and to be a party of rich English speakers, people who could afford to oppose apartheid, yet "buy" their apartheid. It was to change that perception that the PFP merged in 1989 with the predominantly Afrikaans (anti-apartheid) Independent Party of Dennis Worrall and the National Democratic Movement of Wynand Malan, which had both broken away from the National Party in the previous year or two.
The Democrats remained almost exclusively English (after the merger they lost most of the Afrikaans support the IP and the NDM had, and Worrall and Malan left shortly after the merger) Only during the late nineties, when their new leader, Tony Leon, made an all out attempt to win Afrikaans support (his efforts included learning Afrikaans ), did the party gain significant Afrikaans support, and is today the predominant party amongst Afrikaners (the demise of the (New) National Party helped them in this respect).
Very interesting, thank you! You mentioned that this is the main party amongst Afrikaners; is it also the main party amongst English-speaking South Africans?
Quote:
But hey, that's all in the past, and shouldn't concern you, so I can understand that you admire him for what he does now. For me, I can't admire a man who probably still despises me simply because I'm Afrikaans.
I have to say that I find it very hard to believe that he really (still) despises Afrikaners, as that would be going fundamentally against Unitarian principles. (I should mention that he's only been actively involved within Unitarianism for perhaps 12 years or so). Here is the preamble to the constitution of the International Council of Unitarians and Universalists, of which he is the president:
We, the member groups of the International Council of Unitarians and Universalists, affirming our belief in religious community based on:
— liberty of conscience and individual thought in matters of faith,
— liberty of conscience and individual thought in matters of faith,
— justice and compassion in human relations,
— responsible stewardship of earth's living system
— and our commitment to democratic principles,
declare our purposes to be:
— to serve the Infinite Spirit of Life and the human community, by strengthening the worldwide Unitarian and Universalist faith,
— to affirm the variety and richness of our living traditions,
— to facilitate mutual support among member organizations,
— to promote our ideals and principles around the world,
— to provide models of liberal religious response,
— to the human condition which upholds our common values.
But then again, perhaps I'm being rather naďve for thinking that leaders of religious organisations necessarily uphold the principles which they preach themselves all of the time. All I can say is that I hope that his attitudes towards Afrikaners have changed since when he was mayor of Cape Town.
André in Zuid-Afrika
It's going to take me a while to answer all your questions, Ben, so I'll do it tomorrow (I'm just too tired now, it's three in the morning! ) Meanwhile, I appreciate your interest (and insight).
I'd rather write a proper answer tomorrow, than a hurried one now.
André in Zuid-Afrika
Benjamin wrote:
André in Zuid-Afrika wrote:
I'm just not a fan, I wouldn't say he's a bad person, so there's no reason why you shouldn't admire him. He was the mayor of Cape Town when I lived there, and I remember he made no secret of the fact that he disliked the Afrikaners (not just for apartheid, merely for the fact that we are Afrikaners).
That's interesting. The only time that might possibly have come through during his presentation was when he said that he believed that Frederik Willem de Klerk was probably still racist, but was pragmatic enough to realise that the apartheid system was unsustainable. (But perhaps that's true, I don't know). Anyway, I should be meeting him again next year, so I'll listen out for any subtle anti-Afrikaner sentiments.
It might be that he's changed his views over the past 12 years. Lots of people have. If he has, that's excellent.
Quote:
Quote:
And to tell the truth, I think his part in the anti-apartheid campaign was really very minor. He took part in a few marches (I remember one very big one onvolving thousands of people), but that was about it.
It's true that we (Unitarians) probably like to play up his role. As you say, his main role was with helping the Cape Town peace marches to run more smoothly, and participating in some of them. This was probably unintentional, but the structure of his presentation sort of gave the impression that it was these marches which brought the end of apartheid — but they were obviously only a small part of it.
Certainly. The marches played little or no part in bringing down apartheid.
Quote:
Quote:
Quite frankly, I'm rather cynical about the role English South Africans played, or supposedly played, in bringing down apartheid. It is often claimed that the English community opposed apartheid, that apartheid was only supported and kept intact by the Afrikaners. That's simply not true. By the eighties the majority of English speakers were voting for the National Party. Before that they mainly voted for the United Party, which was even more conservative on racial issues that the NP. (While it officially opposed apartheid, its racial policies had the aim of keeping SA under permanent white rule.)
I actually find it quite amusing that people would think that the English South Africans were largely opposed to apartheid, and that the white Afrikaners were keeping it against their will. Is it mainly English South Africans who claim this, or?
This is the image portrayed by many English speakers, and certainly the English media. To be fair, many English speakers have admitted their part in apartheid. About a year ago an internal document of the ANC was revealed in which it was stated that Afrikaners have adapted to the "new South Africa" much better than the English speakers, and have accepted the changes better. In the sixties the editor of a major Afrikaans newspaper was asked by a foreign visitor about the political position of the English speakers. His answer was: "They vote for the United Party, they say they support the Progressive Party, and they thank God that the National Party is in power."
Quote:
Interestingly, Gordon mentioned that it was the support for apartheid and the fear of black majority rule which brought the white English-speaking and white Afrikaans-speaking South Africans together in the 1960s, which, he said, was when the past tensions between the two groups largely ended.
Partly true. The English speakers before the sixties mostly considered themselves to be "British South Africans", and referred to Britain as "Home". They feared a republic, which would be totally independent from Britain. When the republic happened in 1961, and it turned out than none of their fears were realised, many started to vote for the National Party, and closer ties between the two language groups developed. But that was a minority. Joyce Waring, wife of the first English speaking minister in the National Party cabinet, wrote a book in which she mentioned how she was rejected by many of her English friends when she and her husband joined the National Party (in 1964) - not because of apartheid, but because they worked with the Afrikaners. Closer political ties only really came in the seventies (anc certainly because of the reasons Oliver mentioned) when the United Party collapsed. In 1977 the majority of English speakers voted for the National Party for the first time, and continued to do so until the last all white election in 1989. Real "unity" came in the eighties and nineties, with new generations growing up, unaware of the divisions of the past.
Quote:
Quote:
Oliver was a member of the then Democratic Party, which opposed aiartheid, and which was indeed anti-racism, and proposed a black government (and incidently the party I supported then and still support in its new form as the Democratic Alliance - so Oliver and I were in the same party at the time). The predecessor of the Democratic Party, the Progressive Federal Party (of which Oliver was also a member), was generally perceived to be anti-Afrikaans, and to be a party of rich English speakers, people who could afford to oppose apartheid, yet "buy" their apartheid. It was to change that perception that the PFP merged in 1989 with the predominantly Afrikaans (anti-apartheid) Independent Party of Dennis Worrall and the National Democratic Movement of Wynand Malan, which had both broken away from the National Party in the previous year or two.
The Democrats remained almost exclusively English (after the merger they lost most of the Afrikaans support the IP and the NDM had, and Worrall and Malan left shortly after the merger) Only during the late nineties, when their new leader, Tony Leon, made an all out attempt to win Afrikaans support (his efforts included learning Afrikaans ), did the party gain significant Afrikaans support, and is today the predominant party amongst Afrikaners (the demise of the (New) National Party helped them in this respect).
Very interesting, thank you! You mentioned that this is the main party amongst Afrikaners; is it also the main party amongst English-speaking South Africans?
Yes. The Democratic Alliance was formed in 2000, when the Democratic Party and the (New) National Party merged. Due to our electoral system (PR), both parties had to formally continue to exist in order to retain their seats. However, after only a few months, the NNP faction led by Marthinus van Schalkwyk walked out and revived the NNP. The majority of NNP supporters remained with the DA. In the 2004 election the NNP was smashed at the polls, getting less that two percent (compared to 22% in 1994). The party shortly thereafter disappeared when Van Schalkwyk and his followers joined the ANC, and the remaining NNP supporters joined the DA.
Quote:
Quote:
But hey, that's all in the past, and shouldn't concern you, so I can understand that you admire him for what he does now. For me, I can't admire a man who probably still despises me simply because I'm Afrikaans.
I have to say that I find it very hard to believe that he really (still) despises Afrikaners, as that would be going fundamentally against Unitarian principles.
Well, from how you experienced him, it would seem he has changed his views on Afrikaners. If that is the case, it's wonderful, and I'll respect him for that.
BTW, don't get me wrong, I like the English (South Africans). Relations are fairly good between the two groups these days. Especially the young generation have no ill feelings, and young English speakers speak fluent Afrikaans, and vice versa.
André in Zuid-Afrika
Thought you might enjoy this, Benjamin.
Benjamin [inactive]
LOL -- very funny!
Quote:
This is the image portrayed by many English speakers, and certainly the English media. To be fair, many English speakers have admitted their part in apartheid. About a year ago an internal document of the ANC was revealed in which it was stated that Afrikaners have adapted to the "new South Africa" much better than the English speakers, and have accepted the changes better.
That's very interesting. Did it offer any comments or observations as to how and/or why the English-speaking South Africans might not have adapted so well?
Quote:
In the sixties the editor of a major Afrikaans newspaper was asked by a foreign visitor about the political position of the English speakers. His answer was: "They vote for the United Party, they say they support the Progressive Party, and they thank God that the National Party is in power."
Haha -- that actually doesn't surprise me.
Quote:
Partly true. The English speakers before the sixties mostly considered themselves to be "British South Africans", and referred to Britain as "Home". They feared a republic, which would be totally independent from Britain. When the republic happened in 1961, and it turned out than none of their fears were realised, many started to vote for the National Party, and closer ties between the two language groups developed. But that was a minority. Joyce Waring, wife of the first English speaking minister in the National Party cabinet, wrote a book in which she mentioned how she was rejected by many of her English friends when she and her husband joined the National Party (in 1964) - not because of apartheid, but because they worked with the Afrikaners. Closer political ties only really came in the seventies (anc certainly because of the reasons Oliver mentioned) when the United Party collapsed. In 1977 the majority of English speakers voted for the National Party for the first time, and continued to do so until the last all white election in 1989. Real "unity" came in the eighties and nineties, with new generations growing up, unaware of the divisions of the past.
Interesting -- thank you!
Quote:
BTW, don't get me wrong, I like the English (South Africans). Relations are fairly good between the two groups these days. Especially the young generation have no ill feelings, and young English speakers speak fluent Afrikaans, and vice versa.
Just of interest... do white Afrikaners (today) generally identify more with 'coloured' Afrikaners or with white English-speaking South Africans? I can see how it could be either. Or would it be about the same now?
Loic
Another question: Is it possible for a competent white South African to be President again?
André in Zuid-Afrika
loic wrote:
Another question: Is it possible for a competent white South African to be President again?
Possible, yes. Very unlikely for many years to come.
André in Zuid-Afrika
Benjamin wrote:
Quote:
This is the image portrayed by many English speakers, and certainly the English media. To be fair, many English speakers have admitted their part in apartheid. About a year ago an internal document of the ANC was revealed in which it was stated that Afrikaners have adapted to the "new South Africa" much better than the English speakers, and have accepted the changes better.
That's very interesting. Did it offer any comments or observations as to how and/or why the English-speaking South Africans might not have adapted so well?
No, but it did state that Afrikaners regard SA as their home, whereas many English speakers don't.
Quote:
Quote:
BTW, don't get me wrong, I like the English (South Africans). Relations are fairly good between the two groups these days. Especially the young generation have no ill feelings, and young English speakers speak fluent Afrikaans, and vice versa.
Just of interest... do white Afrikaners (today) generally identify more with 'coloured' Afrikaners or with white English-speaking South Africans? I can see how it could be either. Or would it be about the same now?
Interesting question. White and coloured Afrikaans speakers have become a lot closer in the past few years, and the language is becoming an increasingly strong binding factor. Personally I feel closer to coloured Afrikaans speakers than to white English speakers.
Porthos
Are the black Afrikaans speaking people of a Dutch culture like you, or are they very native and traditional?
André in Zuid-Afrika
Porthos wrote:
Are the black Afrikaans speaking people of a Dutch culture like you, or are they very native and traditional?
OK, first of all, we're not Dutch (culturally). Nothing wrong with being Dutch, but we're not. While the language mainly evolved from Dutch, our ancestors consisted of (roughly) 40% Dutch, 35% German, 14% French and 2% English, with a lot of other European groups making up the rest. So the Afrikaans culture carries characterics from all these cultures, with local influences.
Secondly,there are very few black (native) Afrikaans speakers. When I refer to coloured people (not an offensive term here, unlike the US), I mean people of mixed race. Culturally they're close to white Afrikaans speakers. If you mean if the coloureds are Westerised, the answer is yes. They do differ culturally somewhat due to Eastern (Malaysian) influences (which explains why many are not Protestants, whereas white Afrikaners are 99% Protestant). It should also be mentioned that the "coloured group" are a diverse group, with cultural differences within the group. There are the Cape Coloureds, the Maleiers, the Griquas, and several more.
From Wikipedia
Quote:
Coloured
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the term for an ethnic group used in Southern Africa. For other meanings, see Colored or colour.
Coloureds
Total population
Regions with significant populations South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe
Language Afrikaans, English
Religion Christian, Muslim
Related ethnic groups Khoikhoi, Afrikaners, Cape Coloureds, Cape Malay
In the South African and Namibian context, the term Coloured (also known as Bruinmense, Kleurlinge or Bruin Afrikaners in Afrikaans) refers to a heterogeneous group of people of "mixed race," many of whom claim ancestry from Europe, Indonesia, South India, Ceylon, Madagascar, Mozambique, Mauritius, St. Helena, and from across southern Africa. Besides the extensive combining of these diverse heritages in the Western Cape--in which a distinctive Cape Coloured and affiliated Cape Malay culture developed--in other parts of southern Africa, their development has usually been the result of the meeting of two distinct groups. Thus, in KwaZulu-Natal, most coloureds come from British and Zulu stock, while Zimbabwean coloureds come from Shona or Ndebele mixing with British and Afrikaner settlers. Griqua, on the other hand, are descendants of Khoisan and Afrikaner trekboers. Despite these major differences, the fact that they draw parentage from more than one "naturalized" racial group means that they are "coloured" in the southern African context. This is not to say that they identify themselves as such--perhaps preferring to call themselves "black" or "Khoisan" or just "South African"--but the history of racial segregation and labelling has placed all such "mixed race" people in a certain relationship together by virtue of the fact that the imperial and apartheid governments categorized them as coloureds and because, for the most part, Africans, Indians, and Whites continue to view them through such a lens.
Extended Coloured family with roots in Cape Town, Kimberley & PretoriaDuring the apartheid era, in order to keep divisions and maintain a race-focused society, the term Coloureds was used as one of the four main racial groups identified by law: Blacks, Whites, Coloureds and Indians. (All four terms were capitalised in apartheid era law.) Coloured people constitute a majority of the population in Western Cape and Northern Cape provinces. Most of them speak Afrikaans, while about ten percent of Coloureds speak English as their mother tongue, mostly in the Eastern Cape and Natal. However, virtually all Cape Town coloureds are bilingual, comfortably codeswitching between "Kaapse taal" (a creolized dialect of Afrikaans spoken mostly in the Cape Flats), "suiwer Afrikaans" (formal Afrikaans, as taught at school), and English.
) what corresponds to what? As in, which ethnic groups tend to speak which languages and which religions in Cape Town? And also, which language is used as a universal language in Cape Town, if any? Thanks! 
), did the party gain significant Afrikaans support, and is today the predominant party amongst Afrikaners (the demise of the (New) National Party helped them in this respect).
