Comment from a consultant at work, who is from South Africa.

Carleton

 

  _____  

From: Meston, Andrew 
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 09:16
To: MacDonald, Carleton
Subject: RE: [USMA:46609] Re: Conversions

 

Hi

 

There is a political aspect to the metrication process.  When the National
Party government came to power in 1948, they began to implement apartheid.
The commonwealth nations reacted very badly to this.  Ultimately South
Africa left the commonwealth in 1961 and became a Republic.  Dropping the
"English" measures was part of this overall process of breaking from the
disapproving English.  

 

A

 

  _____  

From: MacDonald, Carleton 
Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2010 9:56 PM
To: Meston, Andrew
Subject: FW: [USMA:46609] Re: Conversions

 

More about the previous item sent.

 

Carleton MacDonald

Policies and Procedures Officer

777-2341/202-906-2341

 

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Martin Vlietstra
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 14:50
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:46609] Re: Conversions

 

John,

 

I received most of my schooling in South Africa.  

 

By the 1950's the only aspect of life where Dutch measures were used was in
land surveying in three of South Africa's four provinces - the fourth,
Natal, used English measures. South West Africa (now Namibia) which was
formerly a German colony and then a de facto fifth province used metric
units for land surveying.

 

The aggressive approach was more one of Teutonic thoroughness - the
Government, having had a successful decimalisation of coinage a decade
earlier,  realized that the country could not afford to live with two
systems of measure and along with the rest of the English-speaking world
adopted the metric system.  They also realized that in order for the
conversion to succeed, a "critical mass" of metric users had to be obtained
and that those who were at the forefront of metrication should not be
penalized.

 

It is noteworthy that although the Government had a very bad press over
Apartheid, the country generally supported the metrication process as they
were "benevolent dictators" in ensuring that there was no profiteering. 

 

  _____  

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of John M. Steele
Sent: 12 February 2010 14:28
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:46605] Re: Conversions

 

The article shows some obvious problems in trying to merge Dutch and British
traditional measures.  That is probably significant in why South Africa was
so aggressive in its approach to metric conversion.

 

I wonder if we would find similarities in other colonies the British "took
over" rather than where they were the first colonial power.

However, in the US and Canada, non-British areas (French Canada, "New
Holland", the Louisiana Purchase territories, the American Southwest) don't
seem appreciably more metric than the rest of the countries (except maybe
I-19 in Arizona).


 

 

  _____  

From: Pat Naughtin <[email protected]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, February 12, 2010 1:44:21 AM
Subject: [USMA:46599] Conversions

Oh how I minds we do pervert, 

When first we practice to convert.

 

See http://ancestry24.com/learning-centre/weights-and-measures 

 

Cheers,

 

Pat Naughtin

Reply via email to