|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Mandela paradox
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
"Madiba" ( as South Africans reverence him) is on a life support machine.
During his lifetime he effected a racial reconciliation beyond all expectation.
Now, at the last, his own family are threatening to disabuse his lifetime work.
Question: how and why is it that a public ministry is so often called into question by private ( family) dissonance?
How much of it is due to the fact that his "public" persona meant that he was an absentee father/grandfather?
I find it a disturbing issue.
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
The thing is, he may be a personal disaster (I have no idea, but he may be), which should not detract from the fact that some of his achievements have been astounding.
We sometimes have the idea that people who do good things must be/should be perfect throughout. That is not true. Bad people can do good things. Good people can do bad things. People are not black and white.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Or the fallacy that good people necessarily produce good offspring.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
How does the fact that Nelson Mandela was a sinner call into question the good things that he accomplished?
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
I think what you are seeing at present is the result of the power vacuum that his death is creating in his family. Yes there are ill feelings going on and many may have been hidden for years but they were hidden because while he was active there was felt to be no advantage in venting them. It does not to me suggest an absent parent syndrome but rather the opposite, all the power has for a time resided with Mandela.
That said Mandela has never been a plaster saint, too complex for that. Yes a big man even a great man but one who has walked in paths of life which no persons walks and comes out with feet clean from the dung of human existence. To try and pretend otherwise is to be dishonest about what he has achieved.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
DouglasTheOtter
Ship's aquatic mammal
# 17681
|
Posted
All the people I admire were humans. Gandhi, MLK and Dietrich Bonhoffer had limitations and faults just like anyone else, but what sets them apart is that, in a very specific historical context, they transcended them and did something that was truly, unutterably great. And in their flawed nature is held out the possibility that you too can aspire to do something, however small, that changes your part of the world.
--------------------
Need writing or copywriting? Visit me at...
www.rjpmedia.net
Posts: 171 | From: Twickenham | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
I think "absentee father" often goes hand in hand with the kind of work Mandela did. MLK's kids I believe had similar issues. To me, it only adds to the poignancy of their sacrifice, knowing that it came at a cost not to them alone, but to their entire family. We like the myth that you can "have it all"-- give yourself to a cause, sacrifice your time and freedom and passion to do an extraordinary thing-- without any collateral damage. But I'm afraid that's just a myth.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
And - and this is no criticism - you will be corrupted by the power and its sexual power, like MLK and JFK - it doesn't mean you are not a saint.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398
|
Posted
Absentee father? Being stuck in prison for longer than most murderers in my country might have had an impact on his family!
--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.
Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
QLib
Bad Example
# 43
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DouglasTheOtter:
All the people I admire were humans. Gandhi, MLK and Dietrich Bonhoffer had limitations and faults just like anyone else, but what sets them apart is that, in a very specific historical context, they transcended them and did something that was truly, unutterably great. And in their flawed nature is held out the possibility that you too can aspire to do something, however small, that changes your part of the world.
Quite. People don't have feet of clay - they have feet of flesh and bllod.
--------------------
Tradition is the handing down of the flame, not the worship of the ashes Gustav Mahler.
Posts: 8913 | From: Page 28 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
And - and this is no criticism - you will be corrupted by the power and its sexual power, like MLK and JFK - it doesn't mean you are not a saint.
Both were probably corrupted well before they came into any power.
In Mandela's case no one disputes that he committed the crimes for which he was imprisoned, in the name of whatever cause. What picture will history have of him - I suspect that most will focus on his political achievement and airbrush his prison past (or romanticise it in the interests of a cause).
Ask around: most people are unaware of the prison years and the reasons it happened. When they do know, most people think it was imprisonment by virtue of his race alone.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jonah the Whale
Ship's pet cetacean
# 1244
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
People are not black and white.
Very true indeed.
Posts: 2799 | From: Nether Regions | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sylvander
Shipmate
# 12857
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
In Mandela's case no one disputes that he committed the crimes for which he was imprisoned, in the name of whatever cause. [...] Ask around: most people are unaware of the prison years and the reasons it happened.
You mean the 57 bombs on Dingaansdag 1961 which he condoned? Which damaged some telephone posts and barrack gates? In response to a dictatorship that allowed blacks no legal ways to strive for equality and justice. Mandela had tried the legal route for years, to no avail.
Wow! You're right, surely anyway would have been imprisoned for life for THAT. Colour of skin and political leadership had nothing to do with it, neither the original "crime" nor the later sentence.
Mandela was in prison for 38 years. Your statement: "Ask around: most people are unaware of the prison years" says more about the ignorant folk you appear to hang out with than about Mandela's public perception.
Posts: 1589 | From: Berlin | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Yes, I was wondering what 'most people' refers to, since Mandela's name is often mentioned in relation to debates over violence, and the 'armed struggle'.
It is pretty widely known that the ANC did eventually adopt a form of armed struggle, through their wing, Umkhonto weSizwe. I don't really know what the extent of this was, or whether they killed people.
This was why the slogan 'Hang Nelson Mandela' was used by some right-wingers, and the idea that he was a terrorist was widely touted.
Of course, the debate over armed struggle in different situations has never really gone away, yet probably off-topic here.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
This was why the slogan 'Hang Nelson Mandela' was used by some right-wingers, and the idea that he was a terrorist was widely touted.
Never has the phrase "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" been so appropriate. Yes, we all (AFAIK) agree with the man's cause, but let's not sugar coat some of the methods he used to further its aims. The only difference between him and the people who plant IEDs on Afghanstani roadsides is which side of the battle our sympathies happen to be on.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Well, that heads into an endless debate about violence, and who is entitled to use it. I suppose the conservative line is that only governments are; however, it's surprising how often a particular group is made an exception of!
[ 05. July 2013, 11:08: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
DouglasTheOtter
Ship's aquatic mammal
# 17681
|
Posted
Well, I'm glad I logged in.
Already I've learned that the only difference between the Taliban and someone who fights against an explicitly racist regime is what side our sympathies are on.
--------------------
Need writing or copywriting? Visit me at...
www.rjpmedia.net
Posts: 171 | From: Twickenham | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bax
Shipmate
# 16572
|
Posted
To be a Christian is not the same as "being right". It's not even the same as "being good".
It is to, as best we can, follow the promptings of the Holy spirit and follow after Christ despite our failing, despite being a sinner, and admitting and asking forgiveness for our faults.
As St Peter said "don't worship me, worship God" (paraphrased, from Act 10:26)
Posts: 108 | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sylvander
Shipmate
# 12857
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
The only difference between him and the people who plant IEDs on Afghanstani roadsides is which side of the battle our sympathies happen to be on.
Quite.
The role of the Taliban in Afghan history is quite comparable to the role of Blacks in SA history.
And of course lying in waiting to explode roadside bombs when soldiers come by is the same as planting bombs away from the proximity any humans and exploding them in the middle of the night in order to avoid human casualties.
And a child's tricycle is basically the same as Mark Cavendish's Tour bike.
PS:
To be fair I cannot now remember whether anybody got injured in MK's very brief spell of bombings, but their strategy was clear: No harm to people.
Posts: 1589 | From: Berlin | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
I think "absentee father" often goes hand in hand with the kind of work Mandela did. MLK's kids I believe had similar issues. To me, it only adds to the poignancy of their sacrifice, knowing that it came at a cost not to them alone, but to their entire family. We like the myth that you can "have it all"-- give yourself to a cause, sacrifice your time and freedom and passion to do an extraordinary thing-- without any collateral damage. But I'm afraid that's just a myth.
Quite so.
Having it all is a load of bull. Something always gives. It's a matter of priorities.
Are people right or wrong to sacrifice their families on the altar of whatever?
[ 05. July 2013, 13:20: Message edited by: Evensong ]
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
This was why the slogan 'Hang Nelson Mandela' was used by some right-wingers, and the idea that he was a terrorist was widely touted.
Never has the phrase "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" been so appropriate. Yes, we all (AFAIK) agree with the man's cause, but let's not sugar coat some of the methods he used to further its aims. The only difference between him and the people who plant IEDs on Afghanstani roadsides is which side of the battle our sympathies happen to be on.
Given Sylvander's response, would you care to substantiate this seemingly outrageous statement, Marvin?
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
DouglasTheOtter
Ship's aquatic mammal
# 17681
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
I think "absentee father" often goes hand in hand with the kind of work Mandela did. MLK's kids I believe had similar issues. To me, it only adds to the poignancy of their sacrifice, knowing that it came at a cost not to them alone, but to their entire family. We like the myth that you can "have it all"-- give yourself to a cause, sacrifice your time and freedom and passion to do an extraordinary thing-- without any collateral damage. But I'm afraid that's just a myth.
Quite so.
Having it all is a load of bull. Something always gives. It's a matter of priorities.
Are people right or wrong to sacrifice their families on the altar of whatever?
Was it really the Altar of Whatever?
--------------------
Need writing or copywriting? Visit me at...
www.rjpmedia.net
Posts: 171 | From: Twickenham | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DouglasTheOtter:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
I think "absentee father" often goes hand in hand with the kind of work Mandela did. MLK's kids I believe had similar issues. To me, it only adds to the poignancy of their sacrifice, knowing that it came at a cost not to them alone, but to their entire family. We like the myth that you can "have it all"-- give yourself to a cause, sacrifice your time and freedom and passion to do an extraordinary thing-- without any collateral damage. But I'm afraid that's just a myth.
Quite so.
Having it all is a load of bull. Something always gives. It's a matter of priorities.
Are people right or wrong to sacrifice their families on the altar of whatever?
Was it really the Altar of Whatever?
I think Evensong was just trying to generalize to include other examples. For Mandela and MLK it's the altar of "freedom and civil rights". For someone else it could be some other worthy cause-- freeing child slaves, ending sex trafficking, ending extreme poverty-- possibilities are endless. The point remains the same, that the great personal sacrifices and risks to the heroic leader are usually met with complementary sacrifices and risks by family. I don't hear Evensong using "whatever altar" flippantly here-- the "altar" we're talking about is significant, just, worthy. Just generalizing to include other important causes.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DouglasTheOtter:
Already I've learned that the only difference between the Taliban and someone who fights against an explicitly racist regime is what side our sympathies are on.
In terms of what we think of them? Yes, it is. That's the trouble with things like morality and politics - there's no such thing as an objective, impartial observer. We think we're right because we think we're right.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Knight:
Given Sylvander's response, would you care to substantiate this seemingly outrageous statement, Marvin?
My point was that comments like "he wasn't a terrorist because he was fighting for a worthy cause" are bullshit, because as far as they and their supporters are concerned every terrorist is fighting for a worthy cause.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
DouglasTheOtter
Ship's aquatic mammal
# 17681
|
Posted
Aren't we all here because we believe in a higher law?
--------------------
Need writing or copywriting? Visit me at...
www.rjpmedia.net
Posts: 171 | From: Twickenham | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DouglasTheOtter:
Aren't we all here because we believe in a higher law?
Yes, we believe we are serving a Higher Law. So do the Taliban.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
When you visit the Apartheid Museum in Jo'burg, there is an entire display about why the ANC chose to use violence, with photos of their weapons and sabotage acts etc.
I'm not sure if I'm entirely happy with it, but at least they're not trying to hide it.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
DouglasTheOtter
Ship's aquatic mammal
# 17681
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by DouglasTheOtter:
Aren't we all here because we believe in a higher law?
I have no problems condemning both the US and UK governments as well as the Taliban.
--------------------
Need writing or copywriting? Visit me at...
www.rjpmedia.net
Posts: 171 | From: Twickenham | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Haydee
Shipmate
# 14734
|
Posted
Madiba is revered here because he transcended race as the first democratic President.
He explicitly stood against revenge, despite the injuries falling overwhelming on the black population. Under his leadership the ANC confessed to (some) human rights abuses they committed under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission process, despite the view of many that as the victims of oppression their actions were justified.
The results of, and morality of, the armed struggle can be endlessly debated. As the (white, foreign) mother of black South African daughters I respect those who gave up so much. By most definitions of 'war' there was a thirty year civil war in South Africa. Mandela helped to end it, and gave voice to the principle that South Africa belongs to 'everyone who lives in it' rather than the pan-Africanists who believe that white people cannot be African.
He also acknowledged, at Joe Slovo's funeral, that the children of those involved had suffered for their parents commitment.
It is an incredibly complicated, mixed up, ambiguous situation.
Madiba promoted forgiveness, as did various other visionary leaders. That is why he is loved.
Posts: 433 | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Haydee: Madiba promoted forgiveness, as did various other visionary leaders. That is why he is loved.
Something that strikes me is that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission also looked at human rights violations committed by the ANC and by Umkhonto we Sizwe. For example the 'necklacing' of black people seen as traitors (putting a burning tyre around their necks).
Promoting forgiveness involves being prepared to admit your own mistakes as well.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437
|
Posted
I don't particularly see a paradox.
Firstly, I have no idea what the actual personal relationships between Nelson and Winnie Mandela were. But I get the sense that the assumption in this thread seems to be that whatever the cause of the breakup of their marriage, it was (or mostly was) Nelson's fault. It's not always the husband's fault.
If indeed the breakup of the Mandela marriage it was the fault of either of them. Was Winnie not aware of Nelson's activism when she married him? Surely the possibility of time in prison could not have been an unexpected possibility. And she herself was an activist, indeed at times more militant and less conciliatory activist (not that that's a bad thing).
As to the question of whether one should abandon the struggle for family reasons, if that was followed uniformly ISTM that that would suit oppressive regimes just fine. (Full disclosure -- I am single without a family to care.)
As to the question about incidents of violence -- this was a war for freedom! Gandhian pacifism is one approach, but not the only one. After all the U.S. war of independence was not an exercise in Gandhian pacifism, and arguably had less moral justification than the South African struggle (My latest sig speaks to that)
[ 05. July 2013, 16:43: Message edited by: malik3000 ]
--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.
Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by malik3000:
I am single without a family to care.
That should read "I am single without a family to care for."
--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.
Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
malik3000: Was Winnie not aware of Nelson's activism when she married him?
She most definitely was.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
shamwari
Shipmate
# 15556
|
Posted
At least Mandela was fighting for a cause.
Winnie was a monster who fought for nothing but Winnie and was prepared to murder in the process.
But it is the age old conundrum. Is violence ever justified? The ANC were not angels. The saintliness of Mandela is that, when in the same position as Mugabe, he did the opposite of what Mugabe did.
Posts: 1914 | From: from the abyss of misunderstanding | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by malik3000:
I don't particularly see a paradox.
Firstly, I have no idea what the actual personal relationships between Nelson and Winnie Mandela were. But I get the sense that the assumption in this thread seems to be that whatever the cause of the breakup of their marriage, it was (or mostly was) Nelson's fault. It's not always the husband's fault.
I don't see where you're getting that. I would say that one of several competing assumptions (and yes, of course, they are unfounded speculation-- we can't see inside someone else's marriage) on this thread has been that it was inevitable stress and strain of the long, enforced separation due to imprisonment, the heavy toll paid not just by Nelson but by the entire family, including children who didn't choose it. That's not blaming Nelson, it's acknowledging that even heroic, worthy endeavors come with heavy costs and collateral damage. I would not say he should have chosen differently, just would say he was not the only Mandela who sacrificed for the cause.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Nelson and Winnie are us. I feel very sorry for her in a completely different way. And no, violence is never justified. Never. And I'm off to a hot lions den where we'll see ...
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
LeRoc wrote:
quote:
Something that strikes me is that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission also looked at human rights violations committed by the ANC and by Umkhonto we Sizwe. For example the 'necklacing' of black people seen as traitors (putting a burning tyre around their necks).
And let's be honest here. In wartime, it is traditionally considered legitimate to execute people collaborating with the enemy.
I don't personally believe in that policy, but I don't see much of a difference between the necklacing of apartheid collaborators, and the execution of Union deserters during the Civil War(since we're remembering Getysburg these past few days), or for that matter the electrocution of the Rosenbergs(which couldn't even be justified with reference to an actual war, since there was none between the USA and Russia).
[ 05. July 2013, 17:35: Message edited by: Stetson ]
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
cliffdweller: I would not say he should have chosen differently, just would say he was not the only Mandela who sacrificed for the cause.
Although this may be true, sometimes I have trouble seeing his family as victims. The media seems to present them as hawks, fighting over his heritage before he's even dead. I don't trust the media 100% either, I just pray that peace can come to them.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
I must confess to finding the argument in this post difficult to identify because I’m ignorant of the customs of Nelson Mandela’s ethnic group. Until they are established we cannot have a clear opinion as to whether or not he has been morally deficient in his private life. One issue that intrigues me is why he found it necessary to get divorced.
The problems seem to arise from “same father different mother” relationships, which are not uncommon in polygamous or serially polygamous societies, especially where the inheritance of property and social status are involved. Nelson Mandela’s family problems are simply an exaggerated manifestation of the kinds of difficulties such societies engender. Avoiding the negative consequences are difficult to avoid whether the father is present or absent, as the classic biblical examples of Jacob and David illustrate.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
The divorces are irrelevant the warring factions are all descendants of Mandela's first wife see BBC family tree.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulBC
Shipmate
# 13712
|
Posted
Nelson Mandela has 3 periods of life first his ANC days then his term on Robbin Island then his time in leading a new SA , which seems to be a place where the evil of the period post 1948 has/is being dealt with and recociliation happens. This is the Iconic Mandela .
As for the behaviour of his family ? Does make one wonder whay people have children .
I hope his last days are more peaceful than his turbulent past.
--------------------
"He has told you O mortal,what is good;and what does the Lord require of youbut to do justice and to love kindness ,and to walk humbly with your God."Micah 6:8
Posts: 873 | From: Victoria B.C. Canada | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
Jengie John quote:
The divorces are irrelevant the warring factions are all descendants of Mandela's first wife see BBC family tree.
Thanks for that, Jengie John. I found the reference most informative. ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
LeRoc wrote:
quote:
Something that strikes me is that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission also looked at human rights violations committed by the ANC and by Umkhonto we Sizwe. For example the 'necklacing' of black people seen as traitors (putting a burning tyre around their necks).
And let's be honest here. In wartime, it is traditionally considered legitimate to execute people collaborating with the enemy.
I don't personally believe in that policy, but I don't see much of a difference between the necklacing of apartheid collaborators, and the execution of Union deserters during the Civil War(since we're remembering Getysburg these past few days), or for that matter the electrocution of the Rosenbergs(which couldn't even be justified with reference to an actual war, since there was none between the USA and Russia).
It would take a writer of the caliber of Orwell or maybe his disciple, Christopher Hitchens , to write an essay on that particularly terrible piece of rationalization of political terror
![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
The thing is, Mandela was fighting against something that we see as a wrong, fighting for the freedom of his people. He did this in ways that were not particularly pleasant or good.
There again, there is a tradition across a number of the African countries of torture and murder, of the most vicious atrocities. I am not meaning to be racist, as I think that there are cultural and historical reasons behind this, and the west are not guiltless.
We love to believe that those fighting on "our" side are the good guys, and never do anything wrong, while those fighting on the "other" side are the baddies and they do terrible and callous things. The truth is usually different - "our" side is also corrupt, malicious, cruel and unpleasant. "Our" troops - formally or otherwise - do unconscionable things. If we are prepared to be involved in fighting for any side in any battle, we have to accept this.
None of which should stop us fighting for right, and trying to do it in a moral and ethical way. But we also need to accept that there are others who fight the same battles with us with different moralities. There are people who are fighting the same battles that I fight that I don't agree with. But I believe in the battles I fight, because I believe in the things I am fighting for.
And yes, I also have to consider that I may be wrong, and that the ways that I fight may not be considered appropriate by others.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Our side created the nightmare of modern Africa. Christian - Western - Roman (all one thing) slaving on top of Muslim and in fact predating it by a thousand years is the norm. It became the main business of the West, sorry Christianity, 500 years ago. The compression of 10,000 kingdoms in to less than 100 took less than 100 years.
[ 07. July 2013, 10:49: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SeraphimSarov:
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
LeRoc wrote:
quote:
Something that strikes me is that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission also looked at human rights violations committed by the ANC and by Umkhonto we Sizwe. For example the 'necklacing' of black people seen as traitors (putting a burning tyre around their necks).
And let's be honest here. In wartime, it is traditionally considered legitimate to execute people collaborating with the enemy.
I don't personally believe in that policy, but I don't see much of a difference between the necklacing of apartheid collaborators, and the execution of Union deserters during the Civil War(since we're remembering Getysburg these past few days), or for that matter the electrocution of the Rosenbergs(which couldn't even be justified with reference to an actual war, since there was none between the USA and Russia).
It would take a writer of the caliber of Orwell or maybe his disciple, Christopher Hitchens , to write an essay on that particularly terrible piece of rationalization of political terror
Yes, I'm well-versed in Politics And The English Language(having read it in whole or in part about a dozen times), and am familiar with the parody of the Stalinist professer defending the purges in abstract disembodiments, in order to hide the horrors of what his hero was doing.
But you may also recall Orwell mentioning ideologues who get outraged at brutalities commited by one party(usually the people they don't like), while supporting the same sort of thing when it's done by someone else. I think he gives the example of British public reaction to British war atrocities vs. German war atrocities during WWI.
So, are you able to give me some rationale for viewing, say, the execution of a Union deserter during the Civil War(who was probably just afraid for his life, not trying to aid the south) as somehow less awful than the necklacing of a township collaborator during the war against apartheid?
Would it be that the necklacing is more painful? I can see that point, though, at the end of the day, both cross the line into murder, which is a pretty bad thing in and of itself(no one thinks Stalin was redeemed because he refrained from people alive).
I suppose there's also the argument that the Union was a legitimate state, whereas the ANC in the township was just a bunch of ragtag rebels. Which is true, but it's a pretty subjective distinction. Nazi Germany a legitimate state as well, and the people who put the bomb under Hitler's desk were a ragtag bunch of rebels.
If you're position is that the shooting of deserters and the necklacing of apartheid collaborators are equally wrong, I'd probably agree with that. And ask only that there be some consistency in our condemnations.
[ 07. July 2013, 15:05: Message edited by: Stetson ]
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Originally posted by Stetson:
quote:
Would it be that the necklacing is more painful? I can see that point, though, at the end of the day, both cross the line into murder, which is a pretty bad thing in and of itself(no one thinks Stalin was redeemed because he refrained from people alive).
The pain, and the mindset of those who would inflict torture, is difficult to see beyond and certainly colour our perception.
But, yes, the motives are often the same.
Though, I think Stalin goes beyond the argument as one could be exiled or executed for being associated with a group who might be considering an action which had the potential to view the state in a negative fashion.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
predating it by a thousand years is the norm. It became the main business of the West, sorry Christianity, 500 years ago.
Muslim slavers were operating in Africa in co-operation with indigenous slavers for centuries before the European trans-Atlantic slave trade, which tapped into this existing system, commenced in the sixteenth century.
What on earth does your “thousand years” refer to?
Are you genuinely trying to make a historical point, or just venting?
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
