The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
The Contradictions of Mandela - NYTimes.com
It is ironic that in today's South Africa, there is an increasingly vocal segment of black South Africans who feel that Mandela sold out the liberation struggle to white interests. This will come as a surprise to the international community, which informally canonized him and thinks he enjoyed universal adoration in his country. After he initiated negotiations for the end of apartheid and led South Africa into a new era of freedom with a progressive Constitution that recognizes the rights of everyone (including homosexuals, another admirable contradiction for an African aristocrat), there was, of course, euphoria in the country. But that was a long time ago. With the rampant corruption of the current ruling elite, and the fact that very little has changed for a majority of black people, the euphoria has been replaced with disillusionment. The new order that Mandela brought about, this argument goes, did not fundamentally change the economic arrangements in the country. It ushered in prosperity, but the distribution of that prosperity was skewed in favor of the white establishment and its dependent new black elite. Today the political apparatchiks are the new billionaires, led by a president -- Jacob Zuma -- who blatantly used millions of taxpayer dollars to upgrade his private residence to accommodate his expanding harem and a phalanx of children. The blame-Mandela movement is not by any means a groundswell, but it is loud enough in its vehemence to warrant attention. It is led by individual activists whose main platforms are Facebook, Twitter and other social media, and in its formal sense by such organizations as the September National Imbizo, which believes that "South Africa is an anti-black white supremacist country managed by the A.N.C. in the interests of white people. Only blacks can liberate themselves." The claim is that the settlement reached between the A.N.C. and the white apartheid government was a fraud perpetrated on the black people, who have yet to get back the land stolen by whites during colonialism. Mandela's government, critics say, focused on the cosmetics of reconciliation, while nothing materially changed in the lives of a majority of South Africans. But I fear that, for Mandela, loyalty went too far. The corruption that we see today did not just suddenly erupt after his term in office; it took root during his time. He was loyal to his comrades to a fault, and was therefore blind to some of their misdeeds.
It is ironic that in today's South Africa, there is an increasingly vocal segment of black South Africans who feel that Mandela sold out the liberation struggle to white interests. This will come as a surprise to the international community, which informally canonized him and thinks he enjoyed universal adoration in his country. After he initiated negotiations for the end of apartheid and led South Africa into a new era of freedom with a progressive Constitution that recognizes the rights of everyone (including homosexuals, another admirable contradiction for an African aristocrat), there was, of course, euphoria in the country. But that was a long time ago. With the rampant corruption of the current ruling elite, and the fact that very little has changed for a majority of black people, the euphoria has been replaced with disillusionment.
The new order that Mandela brought about, this argument goes, did not fundamentally change the economic arrangements in the country. It ushered in prosperity, but the distribution of that prosperity was skewed in favor of the white establishment and its dependent new black elite. Today the political apparatchiks are the new billionaires, led by a president -- Jacob Zuma -- who blatantly used millions of taxpayer dollars to upgrade his private residence to accommodate his expanding harem and a phalanx of children.
The blame-Mandela movement is not by any means a groundswell, but it is loud enough in its vehemence to warrant attention. It is led by individual activists whose main platforms are Facebook, Twitter and other social media, and in its formal sense by such organizations as the September National Imbizo, which believes that "South Africa is an anti-black white supremacist country managed by the A.N.C. in the interests of white people. Only blacks can liberate themselves." The claim is that the settlement reached between the A.N.C. and the white apartheid government was a fraud perpetrated on the black people, who have yet to get back the land stolen by whites during colonialism. Mandela's government, critics say, focused on the cosmetics of reconciliation, while nothing materially changed in the lives of a majority of South Africans.
But I fear that, for Mandela, loyalty went too far. The corruption that we see today did not just suddenly erupt after his term in office; it took root during his time. He was loyal to his comrades to a fault, and was therefore blind to some of their misdeeds.
h/tip stormy present
Under the radar - Nkandla report: Jacob Zuma in the deep end.
○ Mandela and Apartheid Have a peaceful cultural summer
I can recommend to you the obituary by Bram Vermeulen, which is as glowing as it is sobering about Mandela as politician, who used conciliation also as a winning stratagem for politics. You'll also find Vermeulen writes:
Necrologie: Mandela, universeel symbool van de menselijke veerkracht - nrc.nl
Mandela schrapte kort daarna het nationalisatieprincipe uit het Vrijheidshandvest van de partij. De linkse vleugel noemde het verraad, investeerders verstandig. De verandering van gedachte was geen mythische metamorfose, maar een praktische keuze.
Mandela's choice to abandon the notion of economic nationalisation is one of the (many) reasons why movements like SNI currently have gained some traction in SA. Not unrelated, populist and loudmouth Julius Malema has used similar rhetoric and the odds are looking decent that Malema will enter parliament next year with his own party. That segment of the new generation in SA is putting blame on choices made after 1994, that is, under Mandela's presidency. It quickly gets weirder from there, with people intent to finish the revolution as Mandela would want to.
Mandela gebruikte zijn statuur als icoon, en leefde het als een acteur die zijn rol wordt. "Mandela's politieke acties waren onderdeel van een voorstelling", schreef politicoloog Tom Lodge in Mandela, a critical life. "Zelfbewust gepland en gescript om aan publieke verwachtingen te voldoen." [Tom Lodge Professor of Peace and Conflict Studies Dean, Faculty of Arts Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Limerick - see more thorough essay below]
... De Klerk heeft het debat minutieus voorbereid en is een uur lang de meerdere van Mandela. Maar als het debat op het einde loopt, leunt Mandela voorover en vraagt om de hand van De Klerk. "De problemen van dit land zullen we samen wel oplossen", glimlacht Mandela. Met die handdruk en die warme lach, vloerde hij De Klerk genadeloos. Dit was de stijl-Mandela. Verzoening als machtspolitiek.
Of course, during his lifetime his image was larger than reality. His incarceration and freedom was more than symbolism of an oppressed people who gained hope of a free society. Compare SA with the Soviet Union during the first decade after the fall of Communism. Those years were an extreme challenge for society and government. Mandela had to start from scratch and could not have mirrored Mugabe and Rhodesia by nationalizing farms, corporations or mines. Just as in Europe, the Third Way gave away union and labor rights, what would you expect from South Africa and Mandela. A Cuban Revolution?
South Africa is divided by tribal loyalties besides the black-white split in population. Apartheid also meant living in townships and travel bans. Having suffered under colonial rule, a decade is much too short to judge the effort by Mandela as first president of a new SA.
○ Nelson Mandela And The Virtue Of Compromise ○ Nelson Mandela: assessing the icon by Tom Lodge (2008) Have a peaceful cultural summer
by gmoke - Jun 19
by gmoke - Jun 6
by Oui - Jun 21
by Oui - Jun 206 comments
by Oui - Jun 207 comments
by Oui - Jun 19
by Oui - Jun 191 comment
by Oui - Jun 184 comments
by Oui - Jun 181 comment
by Oui - Jun 1710 comments
by Oui - Jun 166 comments
by Oui - Jun 16
by Oui - Jun 162 comments
by Oui - Jun 1515 comments
by Oui - Jun 141 comment
by Oui - Jun 14
by Oui - Jun 13