top of page
Search

The People vs. Amazon

This piece was originally published in the August 2025 issue of Pandora Curated.


Person holding a sign saying "Our heritage is not for sale" surrounded by puzzle pieces and hands against a teal background.
Illustration by Swetha Prabakaran

On 8th November 2022, the Western Cape High Court in South Africa lifted an interdict. The interdict, filed by the GKKITC and the Observatory Civic Association, had halted the construction of a 700,000-square-meter development at the centre of which is tech-giant Amazon’s new Africa headquarters. The construction, which started in 2021 on a 14.7 hectare plot of land in Cape Town, was contested by the Goringhaicona Khoi Khoin Indigenous Traditional Council (GKKITC), who claimed that Amazon had not sufficiently consulted with indigenous people before beginning construction.


The Khoisan people are the indigenous people of South Africa, and linguistically and genetically one of the oldest people groups in the world, according to Kunnie, acting director and associate professor of Africana Studies at the University of Arizona. They are made up of the Khoikhoi and the San tribes among others, who share an ancestry but differ in cultural practices. Khoikhoi (or Khoekhoe) means ‘men of men’ or ‘the real people’, and have historically been nomadic pastoralists, while the San have been hunter-gatherers. Even though the presence of the Khoisan in Southern Africa can be traced back tens of thousands of years, over time, they have been pushed to the periphery of South African politics, culture and society, and economics.


According to Chebane and Dlali, the Khoisan were a linguistic minority and hunter-gatherers during a time when other language communities lived differently and had settled down after Bantu migrations. Because of this, “they were easily subdued and exploited by other language communities for cheap and serf labour.” By the time colonisation officially started, they had already begun to bear the burden of linguistic, social, and economic isolation and marginalisation.


The development of the Amazon Africa headquarters is the most recent event that reflects a long history of cultural disregard. The land on which the development is taking place is considered historically significant by the Khoisan, partly stemming from the 1510 Battle of Gorinhaiqua in which the Gorinhaiqua Khoi battled against and prevailed over Portuguese traders who had tried to steal their cattle. It is also at the confluence of the Liesbeek and Black rivers, which are sacred to many Khoisan. 


Partly, this is due to their witness to Khoisan resilience over the centuries. However, the Khoisan have been present in Southern Africa for a long time before they had to be resilient and the sacredness of the rivers comes from a deeper place. Like many indigenous communities across the world, the Khoisan never viewed land as something to be owned, but rather something to be shared—a gift from nature, alive and capable of healing. To the Khoisan, natural elements such as rivers are not just part of the landscape, but active members of their spiritual and community lives. 


The site would continue to be the venue of many battles over the years. After the Battle of Gorinhaiqua, it would be the beginning of the Khoi-Dutch war in 1659 and the battleground on which the Khoisan people would recurrently fight against dispossession and socio-political and economic erasure.


Today, the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA) reports that the Khoikhoi and San groups make up approximately 1% of South Africa’s 60 million-person population (now 64 million). Moreover, Khoekhoe languages are spoken by only 200,000 people across Namibia, South Africa, and Botswana, according to language researcher Josephine Campbell. While no definitive data exists on the matter (a tell-tale sign of the neglect of Khoisan communities in research), the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung notes that “the Nama and San people are some of the poorest population groups in South Africa.”


To be clear: Amazon is only the most recent adversary in the Khoisan’s long battle against cultural, socio-political, and economic erasure. By the time the interdict was lifted in 2022, the Khoisan people had been fighting for the memory and cultural significance of their language and their land for centuries.


Both Amazon and the judicial system of South Africa have acted as neocolonial powers, employing colonial tactics to further dispossess the Khoisan people. In this case, Amazon as neocolonial infrastructure is supported by the divide and conquer strategy and by the South African post-apartheid legislature and judiciary, which ensures the systemic erasure of the Khoisan people.


Expansion and Gentrification 


Amazon is already under public scrutiny for multiple pressing issues, including its exploitative labour practices, contribution to environmental degradation, and complicity in the ongoing ethnic cleansing and apartheid in Gaza. 


However, Amazon positions itself as a neocolonial power in more ways than just these. According to Marshall Education, Amazon Web Services (AWS) controls 32% of global cloud infrastructure, providing services to many businesses and governments, which are predominantly in the Global South. 


The new development in the Capetonian neighbourhood of Observatory is a physical manifestation of Amazon’s constant expansion, and we have to be clear about this expansion and its very real implications. The cloud is not abstract—it runs on water, land, and energy, and cloud expansion is physical.


This consistent monopolisation is not a new trend from Amazon. According to The Washington Post, African Americans made up 21% of Seattle’s population when Amazon established its headquarters there in 2010. Nine years later, black people made up only 15% of the population. Meaghan O’Neill reports that “Once Amazon salaries begin averaging $150 000 […] longtime locals are at risk of being forced out.”


We’ve seen gentrification before: as large corporations and people and families of high income move into an area, people and families of low income are priced out of their neighbourhoods. It results in the displacement and increased homelessness of individuals and the closure of small local businesses. As a result, Seattle, which was once relatively affordable, has experienced a 41.7% increase in the rental rate in seven years, as reported by Robert McCartney for The Washington Post. 


What does this trend mean for the Khoisan, who have already been forced into the margins of politics, society, economy, and geography and now live at the very edges of the country?


Divide et Impera 


It is important to note that in the GKKITC’s fight against the development, opposition has come not only from Amazon but from other Khoisan groups. The First Nations Collective (FNC) is in support of the new Africa HQ, stating that “it could become a world-class heritage site”. 


Environmental journalist Onke Ngcuka reports that the development will include a medicinal herb garden, amphitheatre, and a media centre. The FNC maintains that “the First Nations will be empowered” in the facilities. 


The leaders of the two factions, Tauriq Jenkins and Zenzile Khoisan, have had bouts of public disagreements and have exchanged unpleasant words with each other, accusing each other of mimicking apartheid structures and disingenuousness. The infighting has fractured trust among Khoisan leaders and damaged unity among Khoisan communities. For the broader public, it has raised questions around who truly represents the Khoisan. Having splintered centres of authority dilutes and, to an extent, delegitimises Khoisan representation.


Divide and Conquer is not a new strategy to us. It is tried and tested military and political tactic previously employed by the Roman and British Empires. Esther Claudette Gittens writes for The Immigrant Journal that “the strategy involves breaking up large groups into smaller, weaker factions.” When the University of Minnesota’s College of Liberal Arts explains divide et impera concerning the Rwandan genocide, they assert that “[…] the Rwandan Genocide must first be seen as the product of Belgian colonialism. It was during colonial rule that Rwanda’s ethnic groups, Hutu, Tutsi, and Twa, became racialized. It was the rigidification of these identities and their relationship with political power that would lay the foundation for genocidal violence.” 


So, that these two factions are divided is almost to be expected. It is a necessary tool for colonial expansion and the upkeep of neocolonial infrastructure. 


But Amazon’s particular business model doesn’t just divide and conquer tribes; it also divides and conquers classes. In their essay “The Blur: Amazon and the Alienation of Labour”, Amazon workplace organiser Raya Dee writes that “the alienation of labour is the process by which workers are removed from control of our work, disconnected from the things we produce, and separated from each other.” 


As the working class spends $24.1 million on Prime Day in the United States alone, the workers at Amazon warehouses across that country and many others are expected to work at incredible speeds. Packing, unpacking, loading, unloading, delivering for 12 hours, an unpaid break, and possibly some injuries.


The strategy works, disconnecting us from our work and each other.


South African Land Laws and Cultural Memory


South Africa’s constitution is widely lauded for being one of the most progressive in the world. Built on the principles of non-discrimination, equality, and access to justice and drafted at the dawn of the new South Africa (1996), the Constitution exemplifies transformative constitutionalism. One can tell that it was drafted to directly counter the ills of apartheid. 


Part of the preamble says “We [the people of South Africa] […] adopt this Constitution as the Supreme law of the Republic so as to heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights”.


South Africa, like most of Africa, has long been plagued by the theft of land and resources and, as previously mentioned, the Khoisan had already started to experience dispossession and marginalisation to an extent when Bantu tribes migrated from central Africa, according to writer and anthropologist Willa Boezak.


Colonial contact intensified this reality, with Khoi and San land being permanently grabbed and demarcated, Khoi and San people being forced into labour systems, and cultural suppression and mobility restrictions through language, healthcare and labour policies such as the Hottentot Proclamation.


Initially dubbed the Caledon Code, the Hottentot Proclamation stated that ‘Hottentot servants’ (derogatory) were to “have a fixed place of abode” and were not to move from this place without a pass, which they could be required to provide at any time, according to Wayne Dooling of the University of London. The Caledon Code was passed in 1809, 149 years before the apartheid regime used the same tactics to restrict the movement of black people.


In 1913, the Natives Land Act was passed, prohibiting black people from buying or renting land in areas designated as white, which was then and still is now 87% of the land. This only further exacerbated the Khoisan struggle for land rights.


By the time apartheid was enshrined in the South African constitution in 1948, the Khoisan were almost a forgotten people. Yet, South African apartheid was so precise and thorough in its cruelty that the racist constitution managed to further oppress the Khoisan people by categorising them as “Coloured”. 


The Population Registration Act of 1950 categorised people into three racial groups, namely: Black, White, and Coloured. Anyone who was not ethnically African or of European descent was Coloured, including the Khoisan. This forced Khoisan tribes to assimilate and further erased their distinct identity. The Population Registration Act was crucial in deciding where people could live, work, and access social services such as healthcare and education, but also other services such as grocery stores.


Currently, four laws govern Khoisan land rights in South Africa: the Restitution of Land Rights Act of 1994, the Transformation of Certain Rural Areas Act  (TRANCRAA), the Traditional and Khoisan Leadership Act of 2019 (TKLA), and the Expropriation Act of 2024, all of which fall short in providing justice to the Khoisan. The Restitution Act offers restitution to “persons or communities who were dispossessed of property after 19 June 1913”. Since most dispossession of Khoisan land occurred well before this, the indigenous people groups face a historical exclusion clause and cannot use this Act to get their land back. 


The TRANCAA recognises 23 rural areas across four provinces as rightfully belonging to the Khoisan. The land is held in trust by the Minister of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development. According to Land Portal, “TRANCRAA enables land to be transferred to municipalities or a land-holding entity such as a Communal Property Association, controlled by the members.” 


The process of implementing TRANCAA has been incredibly slow, so much so that the progress is negligible. Land Portal also states that the TKLA has amassed critiques, as it “allows traditional councils to enter into deals with third parties without consulting the people” — an obvious deviation from its restitutive purpose.


Lastly, the Expropriation Act is for “marginalised people” and is not Khoisan-specific.


The lifting of the interdict against Amazon’s development on sacred Khoisan land is proof that South Africa’s transformative constitutional ideals, designed to reshape society to move away from the injustices of apartheid, have somehow forgotten its most historically oppressed peoples. It is this discord between policy and practice that has allowed the judicial system to maintain a neocolonial relationship with the Khoisan. 


Amazon has certainly taken its place as a modern-day colonial superpower, employing monopolisation, extractive expansion, divisiveness, and environmental racism to accomplish the accumulation of wealth, and the South African judicial system is complicit.


In the wake of Amazon’s continued, seemingly infinite expansion, we find ourselves face to face with a sick double entendre: “The People vs. Amazon” refers both to the Khoisan people’s fight against tech-Goliath Amazon Inc. and the climate warfare waged by corporations such as Amazon Inc. against more-than-human species and populations such as those housed in the Amazon Rainforest.


More than just land is at stake; the Khoisan war against the erasure of their history, cultural memory, and sovereignty. This development exposes just how easily neocolonialism slips into spaces, even those designed to work against it, and that the current iteration of progress is not accessible to nor is it meant for everyone.


Until we hold corporations like Amazon accountable for their global footprints—literal, digital, and environmental—and force our governments to stop being complicit in indigenous erasure and dispossession, we will continue to witness the replication of colonial violence disguised as innovation.




Edited by the Curated Editorial Team


Tatenda Dlali (she/her) is a student of Environmental Science and Associate Editor (Climate) at Political Pandora, where she leads the Climate Department. Her research focuses on conservation ecology, the intersections of gender, migration, and climate change, and decolonizing the climate justice movement.

 


Disclaimer


Any facts, views or opinions are not intended to malign, criticise and/or disrespect any religion, group, club, organisation, company, or individual.

This article published on this website is solely representative of the author. Neither the editorial staff nor the organisation (Political Pandora) are responsible for the content.


All illustrations in this piece are original works created exclusively by the Design Department of Political Pandora.


These illustrations are protected and are not available for replication, reproduction, or redistribution in any form without explicit written consent from Political Pandora. Unauthorized use, including but not limited to copying, modifying, or redistributing, is strictly prohibited.


Photographs in this particular article are taken from external sources and are not a property of Political Pandora. The use of these images are not meant for commercial purposes.


While we strive to present only reliable and accurate information, should you believe that any information present is incorrect or needs to be edited, please feel free to contact us.



References:






  • Kibet, Eric. “Transformative Constitutionalism and the Adjudication of Constitutional Rights in Africa.” African Human Rights Law Journal, vol. 17, no. 2, 2017, pp. 340–366, https://doi.org/10.17159/1996-2096/2017/v17n2a1.  Accessed 10 Oct. 2019.









  • Boezak, Willa. “The Cultural Heritage of South Africa’s Khoisan.” Indigenous Peoples’ Cultural Heritage, 21 Sept. 2017, pp. 253–272, https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004342194_013.  Accessed 17 Aug. 2025.








Keywords: Amazon Africa, Khoisan People, Cape Town, Indigenous Rights, Land Dispossession, Amazon Expansion, Cultural Erasure, South Africa, Sacred Land, Amazon Development, Neocolonial Power, Global South, Tech Giant, Labour Exploitation, Environmental Racism, Tribal Heritage, Cloud Services, Land Struggle, Apartheid Legacy, Traditional Leaders

Comments

Join the 
Pandora Community

Join Political Pandora! We offer exciting opportunities for passionate youth.

 

Publish your work on a global platform with an engaged audience, often cited in academic research. Your voice matters—be part of the conversation!

bottom of page