Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Why do so many people consider Nelson Mandela to have been saintly?
|
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418
|
Posted
This is something I've always found puzzling. Yes I know that he was the leading figure in the anti-Apartheid movement but there have been a whole number of leaders of 'liberation movements' in various African and Asia countries colonised by the west and most of them are not considered 'saintly'. Yes I know he was imprisoned by the South African government. The same was true of a number of 'liberation struggle' leaders in other countries and the same was true of a number of other anti-Apartheid leaders (such as present president Jacob Zuma) who were never assumed to be saintly.
It is said that his greatness lay in a peaceful transition to democracy but even that isn't true. The amount of political violence, much of it ANC violence, in the years of negotiation leading up to the 1994 elections was quite high.
Yes I can understand people agreeing with his opposition to apartheid, it was a terrible system, but I don't see any reason why Mandela is considered such an icon exceeding by far all other 'liberation struggle' leaders in Africa.
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
He didn't seek revenge. He was willing to countenance forgoing justice for the sake of truth and building a shared future, a "rainbow nation". He left power voluntarily and democratically. Compare with Mugabe, another southern African liberator, who continued to use violence even after liberation was achieved, and instead of building a shared, democratic future instituted a one party state and has kept himself in power ever since. How many times in history has an oppressed people risen up and taken power from their oppressors, and then held back from exacting vengeance? That choice in South Africa is largely down to the leadership of two men: Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu. [ 04. August 2015, 08:16: Message edited by: Arethosemyfeet ]
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643
|
Posted
I'm afraid this is such an elementary question it hardly deserves a response. You need to read up about the PAC, because they - and all out civil war - were the alternative.
For all their faults, that is why Nelson Mandela and the ANC are the good guys in all this.
-------------------- "I fart in your general direction." M Barnier
Posts: 4229 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Bibliophile: It is said that his greatness lay in a peaceful transition to democracy but even that isn't true. The amount of political violence, much of it ANC violence, in the years of negotiation leading up to the 1994 elections was quite high.
The ANC is not a saintly organisation and I well remember the ugly antics of Winnie Mandela, but the apartheid regime must bear the moral responsibility for a great deal of the blood and injustice. If you oppress a people for long enough, they WILL rise up against the regime that oppresses them and there WILL be violence. Human history proves this in spades.
I don't know how old you were in 1994, but I was 32. I will never forget seeing in the media those long, long, long lines of black South Africans peacefully waiting to cast their vote, the fruits of a long, hard campaign for them to have the same rights as white people. Many of us were dreading a bloodbath, a civil war in South Africa, at that time ... and it didn't happen. This is due in no small part to Mandela's attitude: during his long years in prison, for example, he put aside any desire for revenge he might have had against white people.
I don't regard Mandela as a saint. I regard very few people, past or present, as saints. But Arethosemyfeet has articulated excellently the reasons why Mandela is rightly regarded as an icon.
-------------------- "I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes - all of that. I do think that some of the adulation of Mandela has gone over-the-top at times, but the same might equally be said of some of those 'on the right' who are regarded as heroes ...
Given the almost idolatrous level of adulation that some Americans accord their Founding Fathers - particularly those on the 'religious right' - I must admit I find this question a bit rich coming from Bibliophile ...
-------------------- Let us with a gladsome mind Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
![](http://ship-of-fools.com/UBB/Avatars/admin.gif) Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Of course, Mandela had an iconic status before 1994. Just think of how many Student Union buildings in the UK had a bar or other room (or, indeed the entire building) named after him. There was just enough to lift him above the countless others who worked in opposition to apartheid for him to be lifted to that somewhat symbolic status, a face and a name for all the people imprisoned for their opposition to apartheid.
-------------------- Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Mandela was no saint but he was a real statesman, and that's a pretty good thing to be. But he also had enormous personal charisma and charm. Do think it's bit of a shame that FW de Klerk gets overlooked. He was South Africa's Gorbachev (another one seems to be a bit under-rated nowadays). I've always respected people who've been part of an unjust system and have the sense and balls to say 'enough is enough, we have to change'. [ 04. August 2015, 10:44: Message edited by: Albertus ]
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444
|
Posted
I wonder if any saint was a saint. I think they all had their dark side, even going back to those who accompanied Jesus.
-------------------- 'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.' Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner
Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
Mandela made his own journey of redemption from violence (however justified) to peaceful resolution. He lived a life of change, and as Blessed John Henry Newman said, to be perfect is to have changed often. [ 04. August 2015, 12:15: Message edited by: Erroneous Monk ]
-------------------- And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think those who go with Saints with a Big S tend to acknowledge that, Latchkey Kid, as well as those who go in for saints with a small s.
I'm wondering whether Bibliophile is responding or reacting to overly effusive coverage - or perceived over-effusiveness - which doesn't acknowledge shades of grey.
-------------------- Let us with a gladsome mind Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
![](http://ship-of-fools.com/UBB/custom_avatars/spigot.jpg) Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
It's very telling that the thankfully x Iron Lady regarded him as the leader of "a typical terrorist organisation"
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by George Spigot: It's very telling that the thankfully x Iron Lady regarded him as the leader of "a typical terrorist organisation"
She also lobbied the South African government for his release from prison.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
Hang Nelson Mandela, as the Federation of Conservative Students famously put it.
-------------------- arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Cod: I'm afraid this is such an elementary question it hardly deserves a response. You need to read up about the PAC, because they - and all out civil war - were the alternative.
Oh please, the PAC! And how might the PAC have come to power? They would have found it very difficult to come to a negotiated settlement with the apartheid government. Unlike the ANC they had no real financial, diplomatic or military support from outside South Africa and the idea that they could have defeated the South African state by force is an absolute joke. There was never any danger of the PAC coming to power.
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Laurelin: The ANC is not a saintly organisation and I well remember the ugly antics of Winnie Mandela, but the apartheid regime must bear the moral responsibility for a great deal of the blood and injustice. If you oppress a people for long enough, they WILL rise up against the regime that oppresses them and there WILL be violence. Human history proves this in spades.
Actually history proves nothing of the sort. Many oppressive governments have survived for long periods without any violent uprising. The violence tends to happen when the government in question has been weakened and is seen as vulnerable. The bulk of the violence in South Africa was between different black anti Apartheid groups the ANC, the IFP APAZO and the PAC fighting each other for power.
quote: Originally posted by Laurelin: I don't know how old you were in 1994, but I was 32. I will never forget seeing in the media those long, long, long lines of black South Africans peacefully waiting to cast their vote, the fruits of a long, hard campaign for them to have the same rights as white people. Many of us were dreading a bloodbath, a civil war in South Africa, at that time ... and it didn't happen. This is due in no small part to Mandela's attitude: during his long years in prison, for example, he put aside any desire for revenge he might have had against white people.
Right so you're saying that the reason for his greatness is that once he came to power he didn't launch a bloody ethnic conflict that would have resulted in carnage on all sides and would have completely wrecked the economy of South Africa, destroying the lives and livelihoods of those of his supporters who survived the conflict. In other words he didn't turn South Africa into the DRC. That's quite a low bar.
Mandela was one of the better post colonial African leaders but again that's a pretty low bar to pass and I've never understood all the hero worship of him.
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Bibliophile: The bulk of the violence in South Africa was between different black anti Apartheid groups the ANC, the IFP APAZO and the PAC fighting each other for power.
I don't suppose you'd like to prove this ridiculous statement, would you?
-------------------- arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Bibliophile: Right so you're saying that the reason for his greatness is that once he came to power he didn't launch a bloody ethnic conflict that would have resulted in carnage on all sides and would have completely wrecked the economy of South Africa, destroying the lives and livelihoods of those of his supporters who survived the conflict. In other words he didn't turn South Africa into the DRC. That's quite a low bar.
Mandela was one of the better post colonial African leaders but again that's a pretty low bar to pass and I've never understood all the hero worship of him.
You think refusing to give into your desire for vengeance is easy when you have the power and there are people who support you who would cheer to see it? You think it is easy to see the people who murdered friends and colleagues go free because they told the truth about their crimes? To give up on the hope of justice for the sake of truth and forgiveness, do you have any idea what that costs?
Mandela is not a Saint (in the colloquial sense), but he was a good man who made mistakes but ultimately did something no-one else has managed to my knowledge. I don't understand why you feel the need to belittle him and the his achievements, or indeed the achievements of the anti-apartheid movement. Is it just because he's popular and black or is there some other explanation?
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
![](http://forum.shipoffools.com/custom_avatars/0953.gif) Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Why do so many people start threads with a straw man?
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
hosting/
Your apology on the other thread is noted, but this one-liner is another pot-stirring remark that borders on a personal attack, or else positively invites one. Can you not serve yourself a Cooler™ or something?
/hosting [ 04. August 2015, 15:47: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
-------------------- Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
And while we're at it ...
quote: Posted by Bibliophile: Right so you're saying that the reason for his greatness is that once he came to power he didn't launch a bloody ethnic conflict that would have resulted in carnage on all sides and would have completely wrecked the economy of South Africa, destroying the lives and livelihoods of those of his supporters who survived the conflict. In other words he didn't turn South Africa into the DRC. That's quite a low bar.
Mandela was one of the better post colonial African leaders but again that's a pretty low bar to pass and I've never understood all the hero worship of him.
Bibliophile, I am beginning to be aware of an unfortunate pattern in your posting habits here. You begin with a controversial OP stating your own views and inviting comments. Then as the thread continues, you also seem to me to be more interested in stirring the pot (by provocative and dismissive responses such as above) than really engaging in discussion.
Now such behaviour, if it becomes a regular pattern in online discussions, has a name. It is called flame-baiting. And we actively discourage such patterns of behaviour here. Read Commandment 1.
So please watch your step re provocation - as opposed to genuine engagement. Else your behaviour will be referred to Admin for their view on the emerging pattern of posting.
Barnabas62 Purgatory Host
-------------------- Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Bibliophile: Right so you're saying that the reason for his greatness is that once he came to power he didn't launch a bloody ethnic conflict that would have resulted in carnage on all sides and would have completely wrecked the economy of South Africa, destroying the lives and livelihoods of those of his supporters who survived the conflict. In other words he didn't turn South Africa into the DRC. That's quite a low bar.
Mandela was a mighty unifying force, and talked to his enemies. That is no small accomplishment. Your interpretation of recent history seems astonishingly shallow.
quote: Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet: You think refusing to give into your desire for vengeance is easy when you have the power and there are people who support you who would cheer to see it? You think it is easy to see the people who murdered friends and colleagues go free because they told the truth about their crimes? To give up on the hope of justice for the sake of truth and forgiveness, do you have any idea what that costs?
This. ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
-------------------- "I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
That said, most people forget or overlook that he was in jail for armed robbery
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by ExclamationMark: That said, most people forget or overlook that he was in jail for armed robbery
Anyone who bothered to read his autobiography (which, admittedly, is quite long) would appreciate that the man who entered prison was an embittered guerilla warrior. I don't think one needs to "forget" that to appreciate that the guy chose to come out of prison and talk about leading a "rainbow" nation rather than leading a violent revolt. Which he could quite easily have done.
-------------------- arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by ExclamationMark: That said, most people forget or overlook that he was in jail for armed robbery
Yeah, not like anyone here belongs to a religion that believes in forgiveness or redemption.
-------------------- 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
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
There was definitely a strong championing of Mandela from certain quarters before his release from prison. Free Nelson Mandela (the song) etc.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
![](http://forum.shipoffools.com/custom_avatars/0953.gif) Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by lilBuddha: quote: Originally posted by ExclamationMark: That said, most people forget or overlook that he was in jail for armed robbery
Yeah, not like anyone here belongs to a religion that believes in forgiveness or redemption.
Exactly. I'm so glad there are no Christian saints who started life as evildoers, but ended up mending their ways. That would be inconvenient to certain strands of anti-Mandela bullshit, sorry rhetoric, and we can't have that.
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Barnabas62: And while we're at it ...
quote: Posted by Bibliophile: Right so you're saying that the reason for his greatness is that once he came to power he didn't launch a bloody ethnic conflict that would have resulted in carnage on all sides and would have completely wrecked the economy of South Africa, destroying the lives and livelihoods of those of his supporters who survived the conflict. In other words he didn't turn South Africa into the DRC. That's quite a low bar.
Mandela was one of the better post colonial African leaders but again that's a pretty low bar to pass and I've never understood all the hero worship of him.
Bibliophile, I am beginning to be aware of an unfortunate pattern in your posting habits here. You begin with a controversial OP stating your own views and inviting comments. Then as the thread continues, you also seem to me to be more interested in stirring the pot (by provocative and dismissive responses such as above) than really engaging in discussion.
Now such behaviour, if it becomes a regular pattern in online discussions, has a name. It is called flame-baiting. And we actively discourage such patterns of behaviour here. Read Commandment 1.
So please watch your step re provocation - as opposed to genuine engagement. Else your behaviour will be referred to Admin for their view on the emerging pattern of posting.
Barnabas62 Purgatory Host
I wrote the above comment because that is my genuine opinion. I sometimes start threads on controversial topics because those are often the most interesting ones to discuss.
Having said that I must respect the rules of this forum and accept your admonition. I will endeavour to moderate my tone accordingly.
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
That said, most people forget or overlook that he was in jail for armed robbery
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by ExclamationMark: That said, most people forget or overlook that he was in jail for armed robbery
Sorry but I don't quite see why it matters? Mandela wasn't Gandhi, people know he wasn't strictly pacifist.
-------------------- Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by mr cheesy: quote: Originally posted by ExclamationMark: That said, most people forget or overlook that he was in jail for armed robbery
Anyone who bothered to read his autobiography (which, admittedly, is quite long) would appreciate that the man who entered prison was an embittered guerilla warrior. I don't think one needs to "forget" that to appreciate that the guy chose to come out of prison and talk about leading a "rainbow" nation rather than leading a violent revolt. Which he could quite easily have done.
Yes he could have led a violent revolt. It would have resulted in carnage on all sides. The South African economy would have collapsed. The South African government would have been forced to the negotiating table and a negotiated settlement could then have followed. However since it was clear that the South African government wanted a negotiated settlement anyway I don't see what the point of launching such a violent revolt would be. Going straight to negotiations would have been by far the most expedient path.
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
![](http://forum.shipoffools.com/custom_avatars/0953.gif) Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by ExclamationMark: That said, most people forget or overlook that he was in jail for armed robbery
You're repeating yourself.
quote: Originally posted by ExclamationMark: That said, most people forget or overlook that he was in jail for armed robbery
You're repeating yourself.
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
![](http://forum.shipoffools.com/custom_avatars/11770.jpg) Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by ExclamationMark: That said, most people forget or overlook that he was in jail for armed robbery
Can you give a source for that, please? I can only find that he was charged for incitement, several times, and leaving the country illegally. And accusations of terrorism.
-------------------- Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Not sure what your point is, Bibliophile. History is replete with people doing the impractical to the detriment of their cause/people because they felt they were right. So doing the practical thing is not just meh. but it isn't that Mandela chose expediency. He could have chosen to negotiate but still hold a fire under those who committed wrong under apartheid. Instead, many walked free who strict justice would have in jail. There was plenty of room between absolute violence and the path Mandela chose. And most of the world would have not condemned a little retribution. He chose a higher path, one that many would not have. Pick any, verified, historical figure and I will show you their flaws. Doesn't mean they have no good.
-------------------- 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
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Bibliophile: Yes I can understand people agreeing with his opposition to apartheid, it was a terrible system, but I don't see any reason why Mandela is considered such an icon exceeding by far all other 'liberation struggle' leaders in Africa.
Success? What I'm perplexed by is your (claimed) confusion over hagiography of leaders of popular mass movements. It's commonplace enough throughout human history.
-------------------- Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Crœsos: quote: Originally posted by Bibliophile: Yes I can understand people agreeing with his opposition to apartheid, it was a terrible system, but I don't see any reason why Mandela is considered such an icon exceeding by far all other 'liberation struggle' leaders in Africa.
Success? What I'm perplexed by is your (claimed) confusion over hagiography of leaders of popular mass movements. It's commonplace enough throughout human history.
I'm not really a fan of George Washington either but I see the point you're making.
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by lilBuddha: Not sure what your point is, Bibliophile. History is replete with people doing the impractical to the detriment of their cause/people because they felt they were right. So doing the practical thing is not just meh. but it isn't that Mandela chose expediency. He could have chosen to negotiate but still hold a fire under those who committed wrong under apartheid. Instead, many walked free who strict justice would have in jail. There was plenty of room between absolute violence and the path Mandela chose. And most of the world would have not condemned a little retribution. He chose a higher path, one that many would not have. Pick any, verified, historical figure and I will show you their flaws. Doesn't mean they have no good.
My post was in response to mr cheesy who suggested that Mandela had the option of starting a violent revolt when he got out of prison. Now the ANC was at no point capable of an outright military victory against the South African security services so the only point of such a revolt would have been to force the government to the negotiating table. Now given that they were ready to negotiate anyway by that point then launching such a revolt would have been not just impractical but utterly senseless, not to mention highly dangerous. It was not really an option for the ANC at that stage.
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by lilBuddha: He could have chosen to negotiate but still hold a fire under those who committed wrong under apartheid. Instead, many walked free who strict justice would have in jail. There was plenty of room between absolute violence and the path Mandela chose. And most of the world would have not condemned a little retribution. He chose a higher path, one that many would not have. Pick any, verified, historical figure and I will show you their flaws. Doesn't mean they have no good.
Setting up some kind of tribunal to punish leading Apartheid politicians and security service members who had committed crimes wold hav had its own problems. Mandela and the rest of the ANC needed to negotiate with those politicians. He also needed the co operation of the security services, not least to keep order in the country after he came to power. The prospect of any such tribunal would also have made some big corporations nervous that they might be attacked for their role in the Apartheid years and those corporations pulled a lot of weight diplomatically, and the ANC also needed diplomatic support.
No revolutionary party can ever establish itself in power in a country without either the support of part of the ruling class of that country or the overt or covert support of foreign government(s). Preferably a revolutionary government that want's to establish power will want to have both. That's why the PAC (which had neither) never posed the slightest real danger to the apartheid government.
Agreeing to 'Truth and reconciliation' was part of the deal to get that. Its not that unusual. Ian Smith had Robert Mugabe put in prison. After Mugabe came to power Ian Smith lived peacefully on hi Zimbabwe farm for another 25 years. That was part of that deal.
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
![](http://forum.shipoffools.com/custom_avatars/15560.gif) Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
He was charismatic. It appealed to many. Gave them hope.
He also stuck to principles to the point of refusing freedom until it was his way.
His charisma may not appeal to all. I have found a distinct lack of charisma in others suggested to have it. It's all relative. Thatcher was suggested to have charisma but her principles and decisions depleted it. Bush II as well, but his lack of morality depleted his. Apparently some of the royals are thought to be charismatic, though it escapes me.
-------------------- Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety. \_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Once again, Bibliophile, simply and by itself to avoid confusion. Even if all he did was to handle the transition in a practical manner, that would be worthy of note. Don't know why you want to hate on Mandela when there are lauded politicians who did harm to their peoples. Such as Reagan and Thatcher.
-------------------- 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
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
Even the most saintly person is also a sinner. Consider Martin Luther. Now, I would consider him a saint. However, I fully understand he was an antisemitic.
Same with Madiba (Nelson Mendela), there were some things early in his political life I did not care for, but as has already been pointed out, he was somehow transformed and was even willing to take on the ANC when it came to transitioning from the apartheid government. The transition was far from perfect in many ways, but that is not the fault of just one man.
Madiba is a saint, loved and accepted by God, who used his clay pot to bring about change in South Africa, and the world.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
![](http://ship-of-fools.com/UBB/custom_avatars/spigot.jpg) Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Anglican't: quote: Originally posted by George Spigot: It's very telling that the thankfully x Iron Lady regarded him as the leader of "a typical terrorist organisation"
She also lobbied the South African government for his release from prison.
No she didn't. It looks like that was a little white lie spread by Norman Tebbit and Charles Moore.
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Phantom Flan Flinger
Shipmate
# 8891
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Alan Cresswell: Of course, Mandela had an iconic status before 1994. Just think of how many Student Union buildings in the UK had a bar or other room (or, indeed the entire building) named after him. There was just enough to lift him above the countless others who worked in opposition to apartheid for him to be lifted to that somewhat symbolic status, a face and a name for all the people imprisoned for their opposition to apartheid.
From my office - if I stand at the correct window and crane my neck a bit - I can see Nelson Mandela Park - so named in the early 1980s.
I never fully understood why it was given that name?
-------------------- http://www.faith-hope-and-confusion.com/
Posts: 1020 | From: Leicester, England | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Easy bit of anti-apartheid branding.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by lilBuddha: Once again, Bibliophile, simply and by itself to avoid confusion. Even if all he did was to handle the transition in a practical manner, that would be worthy of note. Don't know why you want to hate on Mandela when there are lauded politicians who did harm to their peoples. Such as Reagan and Thatcher.
I'm not interested n 'hating on' Mandela. As I said earlier he was one of the better post colonial African leaders.
What I am objecting to is the over the top hagiography that has attached to him for decades. Many people have this fantasy that he could easily have chosen the path of 'vengeance' against the former supporters of the Apartheid government but magnanimously chose not to. The reality was that such a course was never an option for him if he wanted to win power.
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
![](http://ship-of-fools.com/UBB/Avatars/admin.gif) Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
That's a bit of a stupid argument. Of course he had options. They may not have been good options, but he could have gone down alternative roads to running post-apartheid South Africa. Political life is not some form of deterministic process where there is only one choice, for better or worse all of our political leaders have considerable freedom to choose different paths.
They may have left the people worse off, they may have led to the type of tyranny we see in Zimbabwe. But, there were plenty of other options open to him, and if De Klerk hadn't been so reasonable in negotiating for a peaceful transition from apartheid things may also have worked out differently (as Albertus said FW de Klerk - and indeed many others on both sides - often get lost in the shadow cast by Mandela). Mandela also had a strong and wise ally in Desmond Tutu who helped to steer his course.
-------------------- Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Bibliophile: I'm not interested n 'hating on' Mandela.
I find that hard to believe. This is the third thread where you've gotten a bee in your bonnet about this particular subject. Most of your assertions seem geared towards denigrating the agency of black South Africans or asserting that the only effort needed to end Apartheid was for black South Africans to sit back and wait for their benevolent white overlords to do the right thing. As the black South African most identified with taking an active role (rather than the passive one you prefer) in ending Apartheid Mandela seems to have come in for particular sanction (pun intended). That's a lot of hating on something you say you're not really interested in hating on.
Your focus on "saintliness" made me think of a recent incident of less international significance but related theme. Fox News commentator Megyn Kelly made the observation that a 14 year old victim of police brutality was "no saint", which seems to come up a lot when discussing black people being confronted with white authority figures. It seems to be some understood pre-requisite that any black person confronting a white power structure, no matter how abusive, is doing so illegitimately unless they're a saint. Non-sainthood seems to be seen a disqualifying factor for any action taken by anyone with dark skin.
-------------------- Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Alan Cresswell: That's a bit of a stupid argument. Of course he had options. They may not have been good options, but he could have gone down alternative roads to running post-apartheid South Africa. Political life is not some form of deterministic process where there is only one choice, for better or worse all of our political leaders have considerable freedom to choose different paths.
They may have left the people worse off, they may have led to the type of tyranny we see in Zimbabwe. But, there were plenty of other options open to him.
What other options do you think he had then? As I pointed out earlier no revolutionary party can ever establish itself in power in a country without either the support of part of the ruling class of that country or the overt or covert support of foreign government(s). Every successful revolutionary movement in history has had either one or both of those things.
Now given that those people whose support he needed wanted him to go down the path of negotiation and 'truth and reconciliation' then what other options did he have?
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bibliophile
Shipmate
# 18418
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Crœsos: quote: Originally posted by Bibliophile: I'm not interested n 'hating on' Mandela.
I find that hard to believe. This is the third thread where you've gotten a bee in your bonnet about this particular subject. Most of your assertions seem geared towards denigrating the agency of black South Africans or asserting that the only effort needed to end Apartheid was for black South Africans to sit back and wait for their benevolent white overlords to do the right thing. As the black South African most identified with taking an active role (rather than the passive one you prefer) in ending Apartheid Mandela seems to have come in for particular sanction (pun intended). That's a lot of hating on something you say you're not really interested in hating on.
Your focus on "saintliness" made me think of a recent incident of less international significance but related theme. Fox News commentator Megyn Kelly made the observation that a 14 year old victim of police brutality was "no saint", which seems to come up a lot when discussing black people being confronted with white authority figures. It seems to be some understood pre-requisite that any black person confronting a white power structure, no matter how abusive, is doing so illegitimately unless they're a saint. Non-sainthood seems to be seen a disqualifying factor for any action taken by anyone with dark skin.
My focus here on 'saintliness' is an observation of the way so many people view him. Concerning 'benevolent white overlords' there was nothing 'benevolent' about the motives of those in power who sought to end apartheid, they were motivated by economic self interest. Also I don't think its 'denigrating' to point out if someone is in error.
Posts: 635 | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Bibliophile: My focus here on 'saintliness' is an observation of the way so many people view him.
Who are these 'many people'? If there were 'many people', you ought to be able to find at least one on this thread who won't have anything said against Mandela.
Instead, everyone is giving a nuanced appraisal of his life and work, acknowledging the bad and praising the good. Sorry for disappointing you.
-------------------- Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Bibliophile: What other options do you think he had then? As I pointed out earlier no revolutionary party can ever establish itself in power in a country without either the support of part of the ruling class of that country or the overt or covert support of foreign government(s). Every successful revolutionary movement in history has had either one or both of those things.
Which foreign governments supported the Bolsheviks?
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|