re: Why can’t people admit that Nelson Mandela was a terrorist?

History is always written by the winners.

This seems pretty much out of the blue. Not to mention it seems like a battle that was fought and lost years ago. Is there a talking point being disseminated about this?

Today of all days this upsets you enough to post?

You need to do some soul searching!

quote:

---

Every time I hear some idiot deep throating Nelson Mandela, I wonder if they’ve ever done enough research about his history

---

Did you do any research? If you had known his "I am prepared to die" he outlines very clearly his defense of taking up arms.

He says:

quote:

---

The African National Congress was formed in 1912 to defend the rights of the African people which had been seriously curtailed by the South Africa Act, and which were then being threatened by the Native Land Act. For thirty-seven years - that is until 1949 - it adhered strictly to a constitutional struggle. It put forward demands and resolutions; it sent delegations to the Government in the belief that African grievances could be settled through peaceful discussion and that Africans could advance gradually to full political rights. But white governments remained unmoved, and the rights of Africans became less instead of becoming greater. In the words of my leader, Chief Luthuli, who became President of the ANC, and who was later awarded the Nobel Peace Prize,

I quote: "Who will deny that thirty years of my life have been spent knocking in vain, patiently, moderately, and modestly at a closed and barred door? What have been the fruits of moderation? The past thirty years have seen the greatest number of laws restricting our rights and progress, until today we have reached a stage where we have almost no rights at all", unquote.

---

quote:

---

Even after 1949, the ANC remained determined to avoid violence. At this time, however, there was a change from the strictly constitutional means of protest which had been employed in the past. The change was embodied in a decision which was taken to protest against apartheid legislation by peaceful, but unlawful, demonstrations against certain laws. Pursuant to this policy the ANC launched the Defiance Campaign, in which I was placed in charge of volunteers. This campaign was based on the principles of passive resistance. More than 8,500 people defied apartheid laws and went to jail. Yet there was not a single instance of violence in the course of this campaign. I, and nineteen colleagues, were convicted for the role and this conviction was under the Suppression of Communism Act although our campaign had nothing to do with communism, but our sentences were suspended, mainly because the Judge found that discipline and non-violence had been stressed throughout. This was the time when the volunteer section of the ANC was established, and when the word 'Amadelakufa' was first used; this was the time when the volunteers were asked to take a pledge to uphold certain principles. Evidence dealing with volunteers and their pledges has been introduced into this case, but completely out of context. The volunteers were not, and are not, the soldiers of a Black army pledged to fight a civil war against whites. They were, and are, dedicated workers who are prepared to lead campaigns initiated by the ANC to distribute leaflets, to organise strikes, or to do whatever the particular campaign required. They are called volunteers because they volunteer to face the penalties of imprisonment and whipping which are now prescribed by the legislature for such acts.

---

quote:

---

In 1960 there was the shooting at Sharpeville, which resulted in the proclamation of a State of Emergency and the declaration of the ANC as an unlawful organisation. My colleagues and I, after careful consideration, decided that we would not obey this decree. The African people were not part of the Government and did not make the laws by which they were governed. We believed in the words of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that "the will of the people shall be the basis of authority of the Government", and for us to accept the banning was equivalent to accepting the silencing of the African people for all time. The ANC refused to dissolve, but instead went underground. We believed it was our duty to preserve this organisation which had been built up with almost fifty years of unremitting toil. I have no doubt that no self-respecting white political organisation would disband itself if declared illegal by a government in which it had no say.

---

quote:

---

At the beginning of June 1961, after a long and anxious assessment of the South African situation, I, and some colleagues, came to the conclusion that as violence [in this country - inaudible] was inevitable, it would be unrealistic and wrong for African leaders to continue preaching peace and non-violence at a time when the Government met our peaceful demands with force. This conclusion, My Lord, was not easily arrived at. It was when all, only when all else had failed, when all channels of peaceful protest had been barred to us, that the decision was made to embark on violent forms of struggle, and to form Umkhonto we Sizwe. We did so not because we desired such a course, but solely because the Government had left us with no other choice. In the Manifesto of Umkhonto published on the 16th of December 61, which is Exhibit AD, we said’, I quote:
"The time comes in the life of any nation when there remain only two choices - submit or fight. That time has now come to South Africa. We shall not submit and we have no choice but to hit back by all means in our power in defence of our people, our future, and our freedom", unquote

---

Mandela wasn't some bloodthirsty maniac. He and the ANC tried every avenue of peaceful protest and were rejected at every turn. It was after being inspired by the Cuban Revolution in 1961 that Mandela founded the militant wing of the ANC. If you had done your research and had at least read one of the more famous political speeches of the 20th century, you might have known that he didn't come to that decision easily. The Apartheid government had no intention of ever negotiating with the peaceful ANC, and after Sharpsville, the government made it obvious how mass protests would be dealt with.

That you think some meme can describe the utterly complex political situation in South Africa at the time is dishonest, and you should be ashamed that you pretend to "do research" when it seems clear that you haven't.

Here's the text of the speech in case anyone wants to actually "do research." LINK

People can believe what they like about Mandela, but it is clear from reading the speech that the ANC took up arms very reluctantly. Mandela actually had quite a bit of foresight. Here he says:

quote:

---

The avoidance of civil war had dominated our thinking for many years, but when we decided to adopt sabotage as part of our policy, we realised that we might one day have to face the prospect of such a war. This had to be taken into account in formulating our plans. We required a plan which was flexible, and which permitted us to act in accordance with the needs of the times; above all, the plan had to be one which recognized civil war as the last resort, and left the decision on this question to the future. We did not want to be committed to civil war, but we wanted to be ready if it became inevitable.

Four forms of violence are possible. There is sabotage, there is guerrilla warfare, there is terrorism, and there is open revolution. We chose to adopt the first method and to test it fully before taking any other decision.

n the light of our political background the choice was a logical one. Sabotage did not involve loss of life, and it offered the best hope for future race relations. Bitterness would be kept to a minimum and, if the policy bore fruit, democratic government could become a reality. This is what we felt at the time, and this is what we said in our Manifesto, Exhibit AD, I quote:

"We of Umkhonto we Sizwe have always sought to achieve liberation without bloodshed and civil clash. We hope, even at this late hour, that our first actions will awaken everyone to a realisation of the disastrous situation to which Nationalist policy is leading. We hope that we will bring the Government and its supporters to their senses before it is too late, so that both the Government and its policies can be changed before matters reach the desperate state of civil war", unquote

---

Their initial plan was to sabotage government buildings and infrastructure in the hopes that the the reprisals would turn the tide in the international community, and they chose sabotage with the specific purpose of avoiding a bloody civil war. In that regard, the militant wing of the ANC was successful, as there have been countless situations in history where oppressed people took up arms and fought a bloody war.

When Mandela finally came to power, he wanted to ensure that the white people of the country wouldn't be chased away, which is why he included members of the National Party in key positions in his cabinet, and his reconciliation efforts helped to avoid more political violence. I don't think you will find a more masterful job of the transfer of power in modern history, especially during the post-colonial history.

Also in case someone accuses him of being a communist, and writing him off completely, here is what he said in 1961 about communism:

quote:

---

Another of the allegations made by the State is that the aims and objects of the ANC and the Communist Party are the same. I wish to deal with this and with my own political position. The allegation as to the ANC is false. This is an old allegation which was disproved at the Treason Trial, and which has again reared its head. But since the allegation had been made again I shall deal with it as well as with the relationship between the ANC and the Communist Party and Umkhonto and that Party.

The ideological creed of the ANC is, and always has been, the creed of African Nationalism. It is not the concept of African Nationalism expressed in the cry, 'Drive the White man into the sea'. The African Nationalism for which the ANC stands is the concept of freedom and fulfilment for the African people in their own land. The most important political document ever adopted by the ANC is the Freedom Charter. It is by no means a blueprint for a socialist state. It calls for redistribution, but not nationalisation, of land; it provides for nationalisation of mines, banks, and monopoly industry, because monopolies, big monopolies are owned by one race only, and without such nationalisation racial domination would be perpetuated despite the spread of political power. It would be a hollow gesture to repeal the Gold Law prohibitions against Africans when all gold mines are owned by European companies. In this respect the ANC's policy corresponds with the old policy of the present Nationalist Party which, for many years, had as part of its programme the nationalisation of the gold mines which, at that time, were controlled by foreign capital. Under the Freedom Charter, nationalisation would take place in an economy based on private enterprise. The realisation of the Freedom Charter would open up fresh fields for a prosperous African population of all classes, including the middle class. The ANC has never at any period of its history advocated a revolutionary change in the economic structure of the country, nor has it, to the best of my recollection, ever condemned capitalist society.

As far as the Communist Party is concerned, and if I understand its policy correctly, it stands for the establishment of a State based on the principles of Marxism. Although it is prepared to work for the Freedom Charter, as a short term solution to the problems created by white supremacy, it regards the Freedom Charter as the beginning, and not the end, of its programme.

The ANC, unlike the Communist Party, admitted Africans only as members. Its chief goal was, and is, for the African people to win unity and full political rights. The Communist Party's main aim, on the other hand, was to remove the capitalists and to replace them with a working-class government. The Communist Party sought to emphasise class distinctions whilst the ANC seeks to harmonise them. This is, My Lord, a vital distinction.

It is true that there has often been close co-operation between the ANC and the Communist Party. But co-operation is merely proof of a common goal - in this case the removal of white supremacy - and is not proof of a complete community of interests.

My Lord, the history of the world is full of similar examples. Perhaps the most striking illustration is to be found in the co-operation between Great Britain, the United States of America, and the Soviet Union in the fight against Hitler. Nobody but Hitler would have dared to suggest that such co-operation turned Churchill or Roosevelt into communists or communist tools, or that Britain and America were working to bring about a communist world.

My Lord, I give these illustrations because they are relevant to the allegation that our sabotage was a communist plot or the work of so-called agitators. Because, My Lord, another instance of such co-operation is to be found precisely in Umkhonto. Shortly after Umkhonto was constituted, I was informed by some of its members that the Communist Party would support Umkhonto, and this then occurred. At a later stage the support was made openly.

---

Again, history, actual lived history, shouldn't be distilled to a meme. It is complicated, messy, and many times so morally ambiguous that discussing it without a deep knowledge of the events, the context, and why groups of people acted they way they did, will almost ensure silly and hasty generalizations which are couched in emotions, rather than facts. The zeitgeist of this era seems to promote the emotive response rather than the reasonable, and my only hope is that people actually read the speech (or listen to the audio of it) because Mandela comes off as someone who is deeply thoughtful of the actions of his organization, and the potential consequences of those actions.

quote:

---

A lot of people that are idolized today weren't really great people. Mandela. Mother Theresa. MLK

---

Remind me what the issue with Mother Theresa is?

Withholding care and allowing suffering. Missing funds. Travel and private lifestyle not in line with what she portrayed. Forcing conversions. There are a lot of allegations. I believe there are books on the subject. Not saying she was necessarily bad, but we tend to put people on these pedestals and make them saints (literally in her case) while ignoring the unsavory parts if their character.

quote:

---

The correct defense for him be accused as a killer is...

---

As far as I'm aware, Mandela didn't kill anyone directly. He was put in jail in 1962 on sabotage and conspiracy charges. The MK's hey day was after his arrest, and I haven't seen evidence that he was involved in their day to day operations. And there isn't any speculation that the South African government at the time did not want to negotiate with the ANC. Before Sharpsville, the movement was mostly peaceful. The government responded with mass arrests any time the ANC seemed to gain membership. The government seemingly didn't give any indication until civil war nearly broke out in the 80s that they were willing to negotiate. Mandela worked from prison to avoid the possibility of civil war. Indeed, the PAC broke off from the ANC in the 50s precisely because they didn't believe non-violent means would work.

I'm not suggesting Mandela was perfect, but given the situation at the time, with the communist party and the ANC outlawed, with no right to free assembly and 18000 demonstrators detained in the aftermath of Sharpsville without the right to a trial, his decision, as enumerated in "I Am Prepared to Die," doesn't read like a bloodthirsty maniac. I certainly don't think the attempt by the OP to paint Mandela as though he was a maniacal terrorist is an accurate depiction of what happened. I'm open to other interpretations based on the facts on hand, but you haven't provided any.

This is some retarded old person Facebook shite right here.