View Single Post
Old December 11 2013, 06:53 AM   #50
Locutus of Bored
I Don't Need Your Civil War
Locutus of Bored's Avatar
Location: Huntington Beach, California
Re: Nelson Mandela has died

Ln X wrote: View Post
There is a rather interesting biography of Nelson Mandela by Dr Pieter Möller, the former deputy leader of the HNP -- a right wing party which supported Apartheid.
Aww, darn. I would read it, but I'm totally engrossed in not reading Barack Obama: An Unauthorized Biography by David Duke, and that's taking up all my not-reading books by racist assholes time.

The very fact that you chose to lead off your post by implying that an unrepentant former leader in the racist right-wing party that oppressed millions of blacks in South Africa is a credible source of information about Nelson Mandela doesn't bode well, but let's soldier on anyway.

A glimpse into Mandela's mindset can be found in his statement at the opening of the defence case in the Rivonia Trial (1963/1964). He admitted endorsing 'controlled violence' and how Marxism comprised a large part of the ANC
That last part is the key, isn't it? The ANC's Marxist leanings close the book on them being on the RIGHT side of history. Never mind the fact that the God-sanctioned forces of capitalism and democracy were actively aiding in their oppression by supporting the apartheid government for decades, Marxists and anyone working with Marxists are the "bad guys" every time, without any shades of gray, nuance, or consideration of the situation that led them there allowed. No big shock that your argument is completely black and white given the subject matter, though.

So, where does the leap from "controlled violence" to "terrorist" come in, exactly? Controlled violence, in the context it's being used in here, refers to acts of sabotage against government owned and affiliated facilities and infrastructure designed to minimize government and especially civilian casualties. It's the opposite of true terrorism (as opposed to the label we throw against those who happen to fight us with guerrilla tactics), which seeks to terrify the civilian populace by making them believe that they are vulnerable to an attack at any time, and that there is nowhere that they can not be reached.

Why is sabotage and controlled attacks wrong to use against a minority government that is violently oppressing you? Passive resistance is great when it works, but it's not the end all and be all answer to ending oppression. It requires that the oppressor you're facing actually gives a little bit of a damn about how they look on the world stage. I guess the French Resistance were just a bunch of terrorists too, huh?

The Rivonia Trial was brought about after Mandela and the ANC devised an armed coup of South Africa, in what was known as Operation Mayibuye. Had Operation Mayibuye occurred it would have splintered South Africa and probably led to years of civil war.
A civil war fought over racial inequality(*)? Inconceivable!!! Boy, I hope nothing like that ever happens here, and that if it does, we make sure the leaders fighting to free blacks from oppression are punished as the terrorists they clearly are. Perhaps with a bullet to the back of the head or something?

What? Too soon?

* Sorry, I meant "state's rights." States rights to perpetuate the institution of slavery, but state's rights nonetheless.

Mandela freely admitted to all the charges of sabotage during the Rivonia Trial, and that is why the Rivonia Trial occurred because at the time the ANC, MK, Mandela and his associates were the number one danger to South Africa's stability.
Stability? That's hilarious. It was a false sense of stability enforced with violence that exploited and excluded the vast majority of the population and was created entirely by the white minority to maintain their hold on power.

You've placed maintaining stability as the highest virtue even if that alleged stability is violently oppressive. And exactly how did that "stability" work out during the Sharpeville Massacre in 1960?

I suppose you would have told Rosa Parks to give up her seat lest it upset the stability of the segregated Montgomery bus system?

That's why the CIA still had Mandela on their terrorist lists even up to 2008 and why Margaret Thatcher thought very poorly of Mandela and the ANC.
Well, I'm sure the CIA is thought very highly of in Guatemala, Cuba, El Salvador, Bolivia, Chile, Iran, Vietnam, Yemen, Pakistan, etc. and has never done any terrorist-type activities themselves, because they're the good guys.

As for Nelson Mandela's record as President of South Africa it was pretty poor. The economy deteriorated, unemployment rose, inflation sharply increased and the only winners seemed to be the ANC. Ironically one type of Apartheid had been replaced with another; gone was racial Apartheid and in its stead was an even worse economic Apartheid.
So, he's unworthy of praise because after decades of neglect the South African government actually started having to take the needs of its black population into consideration, and there were some understandable economic growing pains as a result of that massive transition? I don't think anyone was claiming he was a miracle worker. You can't overcome decades of systemic economic, social, and legal inequality in a few years.

Finally Dr. Peter Hammond's (a South African missionary who worked with Frontline Fellowship; a non-profit organization which supports various churches in South Africa) meeting with Mandela (who was then president) concerning persecution of the countries Christians is another insight into Mandela's actions and thinking. After the meeting Frontline Fellowship received a lengthy tax audit, I guess Mandela had little tolerance for Peter Hammond.
Do you have any actual evidence of Mandela giving the order to audit them, because it doesn't seem all that unusual for a large NPO to be audited? And an audit is hardly horrendously oppressive government in action or indicative of anti-Christian bias. Frankly, I think NPOs and large religious institutions should be audited every year to make sure their finances are above board.

That's why I think it is unwise to place him on this pedestal which so many people have; he was no saint put it that way. At any rate omitting and altering history to portray the commonly held view of Mandela smacks of propaganda to me. If we're going to remember this man, let us not remember a false image of Nelson Mandela because that would be disrespectful.
No one here has called him a saint, nor has Mandela himself.

You quoted actual propaganda from an actual apartheid leader, so your admonition to refrain from it is hilariously misplaced. Physician, heal thyself.

Your call for respect is equally amusing after posting this apologist screed that labels the man fighting oppression as the real problem because he dared to upset the apartheid apple cart.
- There are stories about what happened.
- It's true. All of it. TNZ, Hulk, ModMan. They're real.
Locutus of Bored is offline   Reply With Quote