Nelson Mandella has died

[Dave]

http://news.yahoo.com/video/abc-news-plus-special-report-220000361.html

If you're white in South Africa I'd be getting out ASAP. He was the major reason blacks in that that country weren't avenging apartheid with genocide.

[ChuckNorris]

I can't believe he lived as long as he did.

That was one tough old man!

[Dryfli]

The real mandella http://americanfreepress.net/?p=11873

[davsel]

The real mandella http://americanfreepress.net/?p=11873

My best African American friend was a Recce and had to leave South Africa when Apartheid ended.
His account of Mandella and South African History is much in line with this article.

Good riddance to Mandella.

[Bunny]

Yep, dead

[ChunkyMonkey]

he dead!

[generalmeow]

Terrorist

[RMAC757]

The real mandella http://americanfreepress.net/?p=11873

You've got to be shitting me. I'm guessing if you were forced to live under a 2nd class oppressive society you'd just lay down your arms and comply. One mans terrorist is another's freedom fighter. I guess it's ok for people in another country to be oppressed....as long as it's not here. Wasn't our country founded by a bunch of terrorists?

[roberth]

[Pop]

Replacing one form of racism with another form of racism isn't a solution. Mandela, leader of the communist African National Congress, was no better than the white apartheid racists that he replaced. I will always and forever applaud the death of a communist.

[RMAC757]

[Pop]

Replacing one form of racism with another form of racism isn't a solution. Mandela, leader of the communist African National Congress, was no better than the white apartheid racists that he replaced. I will always and forever applaud the death of a communist.

From what I can tell SA isn't a communist nation. It's a long the same lines as Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh wanted help from Truman but he never responded so he turned to the Soviets for help. Imagine how that would've turned out if we would of intervened earlier. This board is full of hypocrites. Mandela is no better than the people he replaced ? YHGTBSM.

[RMAC757]

So HBAR, what does that have to do with Apartheid ?

[roberth]

From what I can tell SA isn't a communist nation. It's a long the same lines as Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh wanted help from Truman but he never responded so he turned to the Soviets for help. Imagine how that would've turned out if we would of intervened earlier. This board is full of hypocrites. Mandela is no better than the people he replaced ? YHGTBSM.

I didn't say South Africa was communist, I said the ANC the organization that Mandela led was communist.

MOD EDIT, NO PERSONAL ATTACKS

[RMAC757]

the crime rate soared since then? we all know you get all offensive and defensive when anyone talks about anything to do with this type of topic. but it really isnt becoming.

What topic is that HBAR....? And I'm not sure I care if it's "becoming". Mandela never sought retribution against anyone after he was elected. He even brought about Truth and Reconciliation so the country could start healing and certain criminals were given a get out of jail free card. Extreme poverty and lack of opportunity creates a monster. You don't need to be a sociologist to know that. It would of happened anywhere, in any country.

[brianakell]

Interesting the story you get from people who lived, or still live there. Mandela being gone is a good thing. And yeah, serious issues blacks/whites for sure.

[Skip]

http://news.yahoo.com/video/abc-news-plus-special-report-220000361.html

If you're white in South Africa I'd be getting out ASAP. He was the major reason blacks in that that country weren't avenging apartheid with genocide.

There has been a quiet genocide going on for years. And the police do nothing.

But I agree, folks have a reason to be concerned, and not just "whites." Look at Zimbabwe--the country can't feed itself after forcing whites out (and killing the ones who wouldn't leave).

[Skip]

What topic is that HBAR....? And I'm not sure I care if it's "becoming". Mandela never sought retribution against anyone after he was elected. He even brought about Truth and Reconciliation so the country could start healing and certain criminals were given a get out of jail free card. Extreme poverty and lack of opportunity creates a monster. You don't need to be a sociologist to know that. It would of happened anywhere, in any country.

http://www.genocidewatch.org/southafrica.html


Since 1994, the end of the so-called Apartheid, white people, especially white farmers, have been subject to extremely brutal and racist murders. About 50 people on average are murdered in South-Africa per day, of which at least 20 of them are whites(95+ % black on white murder rate).

This is a genocide.

And Apartheid was evil. But it was no genocide.

[sniper7]

I know very little of the man, just what the media presents and a few posters I have seen here and there along the likes of several liberals and their causes which I dislike.

[streetglideok]

Another term with Obama, and that all will be the reality in this country.

[Great-Kazoo]

My best African American friend was a Recce and had to leave South Africa when Apartheid ended.
His account of Mandella and South African History is much in line with this article.

Good riddance to Mandella.

Guys i know in Joberg , Pretoria and cape town NEVER went out unarmed. When my nephew and neice were down there they never went out UNARMED. Sun goes down, whites are in. Now the more "progressive" SA's like their nightlife. HOWEVER as with Detroit, Philly, Chi-town, BMoe and other "urban areas" If you're white, stay in at night.

[Bailey Guns]

Regardless of the history of South Africa, I won't miss Mandela at all. I doubt there are many angels singing over him. Unfortunately, someone worse is probably in line behind him.

[ANADRILL]

And?

[davsel]

http://news.yahoo.com/video/abc-news-plus-special-report-220000361.html

If you're white in South Africa I'd be getting out ASAP. He was the major reason blacks in that that country weren't avenging apartheid with genocide.

From: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2351339/Mandelas-passing-looming-threat-race-war-South-Africas-whites-widow-mourns-latest-murdered-white-farmer-chilling-dispatch-nation-holding-breath.html

‘It is definitely coming down to a race thing,’ Laura du Plessis told me as she was comforted by her family. ‘They hate white people. We have never had a fight with any black people. I always stop and give others a lift. We employ black people.

‘My husband fought for me. I am grateful that he wasn’t tied up and forced to watch me being raped before he was killed. He was an amazing man. He was my life.’

[jerrymrc]

I have friends from SA and Rhodesia. SA will just turn into Zimbabwe. Sad how a place that was so prosperous can wind up a shit hole. [Bang] Kind of like Detroit on a much larger scale. [beatdeadhorse]

[ZERO THEORY]

http://www.miscupload.com/upload/214907872498238246989080.gif

[davsel]

pResident orders US Flag to be flown at half staff for Mandella
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/SAfrica-Mandela-US-flags/2013/12/05/id/540353


WHAT?


http://i1100.photobucket.com/albums/g418/betterpics_41/mantweet_zpsbaed4061.png

[XC700116]

You've got to be shitting me. I'm guessing if you were forced to live under a 2nd class oppressive society you'd just lay down your arms and comply. One mans terrorist is another's freedom fighter. I guess it's ok for people in another country to be oppressed....as long as it's not here. Wasn't our country founded by a bunch of terrorists?

Nope, they weren't bombing citizen owned private establishments targeting non combatant innocents.

[sniper7]

Regardless of the history of South Africa, I won't miss Mandela at all. I doubt there are many angels singing over him. Unfortunately, someone worse is probably in line behind him.

Wait....this coukd be great news! This means Obama is moving to south Africa?

[BPTactical]

well...bye.

[Bailey Guns]

Wasn't our country founded by a bunch of terrorists?

I was inclined to at least consider your opinions until you wrote that. Did the colonists commit acts of barbarism on occasion? Sure. It always happens during war. But to equate the colonists and founders to terrorists in general (especially how we interpret the word today) is ridiculous and nothing more than a distortion of history. If anything the British army conducted far more "acts of terror" (probably more accurately described as war crimes) against the colonists than did the colonists against the British.

When was the last time a terror organization (as we commonly use the word) achieved their political goals and used their victory to:

Produce a document as profound as the Declaration of Independence?
Produce a system of gov't and laws that recognized equality of man and his natural rights?
Develop a system of gov't that endures and has become the epitome of freedom around the world?
Lay the groundwork for a country that people from around the world will literally die trying to reach?
Occasional amended their system of gov't, laws and Constitution to recognize that there were flaws in the originals?
Encouraged individual achievement in order to better the person rather than the state?
Freed others from the oppressive, tyrannical governments under which they live in order to restore their freedom, not just enslave them under another tyrannical gov't, and asked nothing in return?

That's right. Never. I would argue that the further away our elected leaders of our federal gov't get from it's founding ideals the closer it's becoming to a tyrannical state, but in a general, overall sense it's not really there yet.

(I'm not arguing our federal gov't hasn't over-reached in it's power in the slightest. But we still don't live in a country run by a true tyrant in the sense of the tyrants we've seen in the past. Might not be too far away...but we're not there yet.)

[Mick-Boy]

Pretty balanced look at Mr. Mandela's life from Breitbart.



http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/12/05/Nelson-Mandela-1918-2013

“I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.” - Nelson Mandela, speech from the dock, Rivonia Trial, Pretoria, South Africa, April 20, 1964


Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, former president of South Africa and one of the most revered leaders of his time, has passed away at the age of 95 in Johannesburg, South Africa.

To black South Africans, Mandela was a liberator. To white South Africans, he was a symbol of reconciliation. To the world, he was a moral example--both of the courage to fight for freedom, and the wisdom to make compromises for the sake of lasting peace.

Mandela was born in Mvezo, in the Xhosa tribal hinterland of the Eastern Cape, in 1918, into a family that cultivated its sons as advisors to the local chief. He grew up steeped in the decorous ritual of that pastoral culture, and his clan name, Madiba, is affectionately used to refer to him by South Africans of all backgrounds. He attended mission schools and studied briefly at Fort Hare, alongside many of the country’s future black leaders.

Life in South Africa’s booming industrial metropolis, Johannesburg--eGoli, or City of Gold, in Xhosa--attracted the young Mandela, and after a few abortive efforts in the mining industry he found his way to the legal profession. Together with O.R. Tambo, Mandela formed the first black law firm in South Africa.
Both would later lead the African National Congress (ANC), the movement that is South Africa’s ruling party today.

Mandela became involved in politics through the ANC’s Youth League, which spurned the ANC’s then-reformist culture and urged a more aggressive campaign for full racial equality. Along the way he befriended many of the major cultural figures of his time, and became acquainted with whites who shared his goal of equality. Though many of the latter were communists, Mandela never embraced communism as a political philosophy.

After the rise of apartheid in 1948, the ANC and other organizations launched the non-violent Defiance Campaign, similar to the civil rights movement in the United States. Mandela, together with dozens of other leaders, was rounded up and prosecuted in the infamous Treason Trial, and eventually acquitted. But with the Sharpeville Massacre of 1960, the ANC’s leaders became convinced that non-violence would not be effective.

Mandela and other ANC leaders then launched a military wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation), which carried out a sabotage campaign. In 1962, Mandela and several other leaders were arrested and, after the Rivonia Trial, sentenced to prison on Robben Island in 1964.

The ANC remained banned in the country, but its military wing continued to operate within Southern Africa, with assistance from the Soviet Union. The decision to align with the Soviet Union would later haunt the ANC, as it alienated the United States and Great Britain, which were otherwise inclined to support the anti-apartheid movement (and did so, albeit in limited fashion). While Mandela was in prison, the Soviet-trained leaders of the ANC's army committed human rights abuses in military camps outside the country, and used terror attacks on civilians inside South Africa.

Though some parliamentary opposition to apartheid remained, notably in Helen Suzman’s Progressive Party (the antecedent of today’s leading opposition party, the Democratic Alliance), political opposition to apartheid was suppressed until the Soweto riots of June 1976. New movements started, such as the United Democratic Front, and as international sanctions and protests mounted, the regime began negotiating quietly with Mandela.

After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the impending collapse of the Soviet Union, then-President F. W. de Klerk made a surprise announcement in February 1990 that Mandela would be released. Following his jubilant march from the Pollsmoor prison gates to the chaos of Cape Town City Hall, Mandela and the ANC began a long negotiating process with the government as well as other political parties, including newly “unbanned” ones.

Early on, Mandela agreed to suspend the ANC's “armed struggle.” That did not end political violence--which became worse--but the decision helped strip violence of its political legitimacy. White voters soon approved the talks in a 1992 referendum, and the country’s first democratic election took place on April 27, 1994, electing Mandela as president and de Klerk as his deputy. Both had shared the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize.

Mandela’s five-year term in office was moderately successful. The country approved a new constitution, and embarked on a painful reckoning with its past through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The ANC reluctantly agreed to a fiscally conservative, market-oriented economic strategy--yet also passed strict labor laws and affirmative action policies, leading to weakly positive growth but also persistently high unemployment.

While in office, Mandela took pains to honor the letter and spirit of the new constitution, and embodied the country’s new “Rainbow Nation” self-image. He accepted famously donned a Springbok jersey--once a symbol of apartheid--during the 1995 Rugby World Cup. And by serving only a single term, Mandela sought to send a signal about the strength of South Africa’s new democracy, as well as to set an example for other African leaders.

However, Mandela’s term was marked by a dramatic rise in violent crime, which has only subsided slightly since. He also--as he later admitted--ignored the emergence of HIV/Aids. His former wife Winnie, already implicated in human rights abuses, became embroiled in corruption. Mandela also approved a controversial arms deal that kicked off an era of cronyism, while the ANC-dominated parliament refused to investigate.

In retirement, Mandela remained active in the country’s political and cultural life. He retained his good health partly due to an abstemious physical regime he had adopted during his imprisonment, and was frequently seen taking walks along public thoroughfares. His comfortable home in Houghton, an upscale neighborhood of Johannesburg, rapidly became a pilgrimage site for Hollywood celebrities and international sports stars.

Mandela cultivated friendships with opposition leaders, though he remained a party man to the last. He was reluctant to criticize his successor, Thabo Mbeki, but increasingly opposed Mbeki’s denialist policies on HIV/Aids.

Mandela also continued to play an international role, supporting the early stages of the U.S.-led war against terror but later criticizing the Iraq War, suggesting that the U.S. had treated the UN with disdain because of racism. His remarks on the latter conflict, during which Mandela used the word "holocaust" to describe American ambitions in Iraq, drew wide criticism. Mandela had, however, supported the U.S. in Afghanistan, saying at the White House in November 2001 that the war should not end until allied forces had "flushed out the terrorists." Those remarks provoked criticism and concern among South Africa's largely anti-American, left-wing ruling elite.

Mandela continued to maintain controversial allegiances to Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, to Libyan dictator Muammar Gadhafi, and to Palestine Liberation Organization chairman Yasser Arafat, rewarding them for their support of the ANC during its exile. A peace-maker at home, Mandela failed to broker an end to civil war in Zaire/Congo, and neither he nor his successors managed to convince Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe to leave office.

In his last days, Mandela's illness was accompanied by public fighting (http://www.breitbart.com/system/wire/CNG---4c0a82e75e92a3141ed5d9c57c62c268---bc1) and legal wrangles among his family members about where he would be buried--whether at his childhood home in the small village of Qunu, or at a site in Mvezo chosen by his grandson Mandla. The controversy amplified family disputes that had plagued Mandela throughout his public life, particularly as colleagues and relatives sought to profit from his name and stature.

Yet Mandela’s legacy remains a profoundly positive and inspirational one. He brought his country to democracy without the civil war that was once considered inevitable. And whereas South Africans once feared the chaos that would result once Mandela left the political scene, the country--though still troubled by labor unrest, poverty and crime--had long since stabilized to the point where it had anticipated Mandela’s death with grace.

Mandela leaves behind a world that will remain fascinated by his example. He also leaves many who remember him dearly, as a caring friend with a gentle wit. As his former parliamentary opponent, Tony Leon, said in a 2008 tribute, Mandela “wore his power, and immense moral authority, very lightly.”
He touched the lives of individuals as well as nations. He will be missed; with any luck, he will be imitated. Farewell, Madiba.

[Aloha_Shooter]

I see Obama couldn't even write an original line to memorialize the event. He stole Stanton's line regarding Lincoln's death "he belongs to the ages" without attribution. I supposed he'll say he thought of it first but telepathically influenced Stanton in the past or some such rot.

[RMAC757]

I was inclined to at least consider your opinions until you wrote that. Did the colonists commit acts of barbarism on occasion? Sure. It always happens during war. But to equate the colonists and founders to terrorists in general (especially how we interpret the word today) is ridiculous and nothing more than a distortion of history. If anything the British army conducted far more "acts of terror" (probably more accurately described as war crimes) against the colonists than did the colonists against the British.

When was the last time a terror organization (as we commonly use the word) achieved their political goals and used their victory to:

Produce a document as profound as the Declaration of Independence?
Produce a system of gov't and laws that recognized equality of man and his natural rights?
Develop a system of gov't that endures and has become the epitome of freedom around the world?
Lay the groundwork for a country that people from around the world will literally die trying to reach?
Occasional amended their system of gov't, laws and Constitution to recognize that there were flaws in the originals?
Encouraged individual achievement in order to better the person rather than the state?
Freed others from the oppressive, tyrannical governments under which they live in order to restore their freedom, not just enslave them under another tyrannical gov't, and asked nothing in return?

That's right. Never. I would argue that the further away our elected leaders of our federal gov't get from it's founding ideals the closer it's becoming to a tyrannical state, but in a general, overall sense it's not really there yet.

(I'm not arguing our federal gov't hasn't over-reached in it's power in the slightest. But we still don't live in a country run by a true tyrant in the sense of the tyrants we've seen in the past. Might not be too far away...but we're not there yet.)


Bailey....my point if you chose to read it correctly is that the British viewed the Colonial Army as nothing more than a band of terrorists ( for their ambush and sniping techniques and unconventional warfare ...for fighting "unfair" and were not inclined to even treat our troops as standard soldiers of war but criminals. I have read extensively on this topic. Read about the prison barges they kept the colonial troops in. Next time, don't distort what I wrote to jump on the bandwagon. It's not like you. Obviously I wasn't equating our founding fathers to Al Aqadea. With that being said, I'm out for now.

[speedysst]

Hell the blacks in SA even hate the black Angolans that fought for SA during the Border Wars. Take a look at Pomfret where 32 Battalion soldiers got dumped off. They get treated like crap by the ANC just because they fought on the SA side of the war.

[generalmeow]

Considering SA is far worse now than it was then, how can you say that Mandela did anything good for the country, or the people of the country, or the world?

Oh, whites were oppressing blacks there? Evidently with good reason. How can you argue against that? Their actions to keep a lid on this behavior have been retroactively proven justified. If you can't behave civilized, then you deserve to be treated like a second class citizen. And that goes for any skin color, anywhere.

And if you can't behave civilized, and you can't stand being treated like a second class citizen, and you start blowing stuff up to get your way, you are a terrorist. You're not a freedom fighter.

[Ronin13]

Considering SA is far worse now than it was then, how can you say that Mandela did anything good for the country, or the people of the country, or the world?

Oh, whites were oppressing blacks there? Evidently with good reason. How can you argue against that? Their actions to keep a lid on this behavior have been retroactively proven justified. If you can't behave civilized, then you deserve to be treated like a second class citizen. And that goes for any skin color, anywhere.

And if you can't behave civilized, and you can't stand being treated like a second class citizen, and you start blowing stuff up to get your way, you are a terrorist. You're not a freedom fighter.
Historically, white colonists in Africa (see: Rhodesia, South Africa, and Zambia) have been subjected to pretty harsh treatment and oppression. I would classify some of the events that happened to Rhodesians as near-genocidal. Of the South African contractors (one actually identified himself as Rhodesian) I met in Afghanistan, the general consensus was "South Africa was a safer and more productive place before Mandela took control."

[generalmeow]

Imagine if the American colonists threw off the yoke of their British oppressors only to immediately fall into decline, and become the rape and HIV capital of the world. Would George Washington be revered all over the world?

Obviously the revolution would be called a huge mistake, and GW would be a joke. I can't figure out how Mandela has escaped this.

[RMAC757]

I know I said I was out but this warranted a reply. The atrocities committed by all races in SA was horrible. It was a product of Apartheid. If you systematically treat people unethically a monster will be unleashed. Poverty creates violence and a host of other issues. It doesn't matter if your black, white, Indian or Asian. Look at Northern Irleland or some of the many other nations that have felt "oppressed". Less than 10% of the population of SA ruled over and created a separate code of living for the rest of the nation. How could this not end in violence or revolution? Ask yourself what would happen here if 10% of a particular ethnic group voted itself all powerful? Would you lay down your guns and comply with your new rules? Would you move to the newly formed Ghettos or would you fight? I read a book when I was about 15 called "Kafir Boy". It lead to me reading a host of other books on South Africa and apartheid. There is never a good reason to treat one ethnic group differently than another. Just ask those in the Balkans. It will not end well. As a reply to some, I don't support all things black. That's just stupid. Mugabe is a monster and deserves to be treated a such. As does any other dictator that advocates violence against its people. Whites oppressing blacks for good reason? Is it possible they created this monster? Mandela wasn't a saint, but I believe in what he fought for.

[generalmeow]

I know I said I was out but this warranted a reply. The atrocities committed by all races in SA was horrible. It was a product of Apartheid. If you systematically treat people unethically a monster will be unleashed. Poverty creates violence and a host of other issues. It doesn't matter if your black, white, Indian or Asian. Look at Northern Irleland or some of the many other nations that have felt "oppressed". Less than 10% of the population of SA ruled over and created a separate code of living for the rest of the nation. How could this not end in violence or revolution? Ask yourself what would happen here if 10% of a particular ethnic group voted itself all powerful? Would you lay down your guns and comply with your new rules? Would you move to the newly formed Ghettos or would you fight? I read a book when I was about 15 called "Kafir Boy". It lead to me reading a host of other books on South Africa and apartheid. There is never a good reason to treat one ethnic group differently than another. Just ask those in the Balkans. It will not end well. As a reply to some, I don't support all things black. That's just stupid. Mugabe is a monster and deserves to be treated a such. As does any other dictator that advocates violence against its people. Whites oppressing blacks for good reason? Is it possible they created this monster? Mandela wasn't a saint, but I believe in what he fought for.

I agree that if I were part of the 90% being oppressed by the 10%, that I wouldn't like it, and I would want to fight.

But as an outsider I can see that the 10% were right to be scared and in trying to oppress the 90%. They have been proven correct, haven't they? Their standard of safe living has been destroyed.

It turns out that the 90% didn't mind living like they were. They don't even mind living even worse now. They live worse, and they love Mandela for it. They just didn't want anyone living better than themselves. They were jealous.

The 10% were the good guys. Or maybe not good, but they had very good reasons (and have been vindicated) for oppressing the 90%. Namely, "If we let you have the power, we'll become the rape and HIV capital of the world, so no, you can't have the power".

[davsel]

I see the same issues arising in Israel if "the world" has its way.
South Africa was a tribal hell hole before white colonialists civilized it as much as they could.
Israel remains an oasis of civilization surrounded by savage nations.
If you remove the protectors of civilization from a region, lawlessness will rapidly take its place.

Personally, I believe the continent of Africa should have been left alone from the beginning. However, the greed of politicians will not allow.
It has been proven many times that you cannot bring a third world state up to a first world state quickly. Does not work. Lead a horse to water... Afghanistan is likely the most recent example.

Third world morals are not the same as first world morals.
Without a higher moral standard, civilization cannot exist.

[sniper7]

CNN just reported Mandela was on the terrorist watch list until 2008.

[RMAC757]

For a great read on colonialism in Africa.
http://www.amazon.com/King-Leopolds-Ghost-Heroism-Colonial/dp/0618001905


I see the same issues arising in Israel if "the world" has its way.
South Africa was a tribal hell hole before white colonialists civilized it as much as they could.
Israel remains an oasis of civilization surrounded by savage nations.
If you remove the protectors of civilization from a region, lawlessness will rapidly take its place.

Personally, I believe the continent of Africa should have been left alone from the beginning. However, the greed of politicians will not allow.
It has been proven many times that you cannot bring a third world state up to a first world state quickly. Does not work. Lead a horse to water... Afghanistan is likely the most recent example.

Third world morals are not the same as first world morals.
Without a higher moral standard, civilization cannot exist.

[hatidua]

the continent of Africa should have been left alone from the beginning.

....if only. But it's too late to un-ring that bell.

[Ronin13]

I know I said I was out but this warranted a reply. The atrocities committed by all races in SA was horrible. It was a product of Apartheid. If you systematically treat people unethically a monster will be unleashed. Poverty creates violence and a host of other issues. It doesn't matter if your black, white, Indian or Asian. Look at Northern Irleland or some of the many other nations that have felt "oppressed". Less than 10% of the population of SA ruled over and created a separate code of living for the rest of the nation. How could this not end in violence or revolution? Ask yourself what would happen here if 10% of a particular ethnic group voted itself all powerful? Would you lay down your guns and comply with your new rules? Would you move to the newly formed Ghettos or would you fight? I read a book when I was about 15 called "Kafir Boy". It lead to me reading a host of other books on South Africa and apartheid. There is never a good reason to treat one ethnic group differently than another. Just ask those in the Balkans. It will not end well. As a reply to some, I don't support all things black. That's just stupid. Mugabe is a monster and deserves to be treated a such. As does any other dictator that advocates violence against its people. Whites oppressing blacks for good reason? Is it possible they created this monster? Mandela wasn't a saint, but I believe in what he fought for.
In response to this, I only have this to say: Two wrongs do not make a right. Just because someone wrongs you (jeez, I hope Obama hears this, he should take this to heart) doesn't give you the just cause to wrong them back. In the case of southern African nations, if the white colonists oppressed the blacks, then the blacks take control and oppress and/or murder the whites in retribution (or "Truth and Reconciliation") then that makes the blacks in power of lower moral character than those who oppressed them. Of all that I've read about Mandela, it would appear that the man was of weak moral character. I'm not saying Apartheid was right or just, but if after it ended, the country was worse off, then was it all worth it? Could a better alternative have been attempted? I would like to think so.

[RMAC757]

Dave I think you have a weak understanding of colonialism in Africa. I have read up on I quite a bit and to say Europeans had good intentions is absurdly far fetched. It's like saying the American Indians needed us to become "civilized". The colonization of Africa was about natural resources. King Leopold of Belgium killed tens of millions of people while raping a nation of its resources. I'm not sure I would call that civilized. Tribal societies function different land always will. Why are we so intent on imposing our moral code on everyone. Sure a lot of it is F-ed up, but who gives a damn. It's their country....let them have at it. You were right about one thing, Greed. Africa is full of natural resources and colonists wanted them. It's strange as hell to hear people on this forum think that 90% of South Africans want to live in a shit hole. I'm guessing that a vast majority of those folks are just like us. They want a good life and a fair chance of advancing themselves. Years of Apartheid created vast poverty which in turn created a group of predators and shitty people. It happens anywhere poverty exists. It's not about race, it's about money and power. One poster said that white South Africans were scared, that's why they had to use Apartheid. With this logic liberals would have a field day in this country thinking that if they took away our guns, they would be much safer. Why not go a step further and put away anyone who opposes the current administration. That would certainly cut down on dissent.


I see the same issues arising in Israel if "the world" has its way.
South Africa was a tribal hell hole before white colonialists civilized it as much as they could.
Israel remains an oasis of civilization surrounded by savage nations.
If you remove the protectors of civilization from a region, lawlessness will rapidly take its place.

Personally, I believe the continent of Africa should have been left alone from the beginning. However, the greed of politicians will not allow.
It has been proven many times that you cannot bring a third world state up to a first world state quickly. Does not work. Lead a horse to water... Afghanistan is likely the most recent example.

Third world morals are not the same as first world morals.
Without a higher moral standard, civilization cannot exist.

[RMAC757]

In response to this, I only have this to say: Two wrongs do not make a right. Just because someone wrongs you (jeez, I hope Obama hears this, he should take this to heart) doesn't give you the just cause to wrong them back. In the case of southern African nations, if the white colonists oppressed the blacks, then the blacks take control and oppress and/or murder the whites in retribution (or "Truth and Reconciliation") then that makes the blacks in power of lower moral character than those who oppressed them. Of all that I've read about Mandela, it would appear that the man was of weak moral character. I'm not saying Apartheid was right or just, but if after it ended, the country was worse off, then was it all worth it? Could a better alternative have been attempted? I would like to think so.

Ronin, Truth and Reconciliation gave amnesty to anyone who was a party to a crime during the Apartheid era. Mandela opposed any type of retribution against the white population from everything I've read. In a perfect world two wrongs don't make it right but I've never seen this happen. Most people and nations hold grudges. Look at the Ukraine, China, Northern Ireland or the Balkans. This has nothing to do with race.

[Ronin13]

Ronin, Truth and Reconciliation gave amnesty to anyone who was a party to a crime during the Apartheid era. Mandela opposed any type of retribution against the white population from everything I've read. In a perfect world two wrongs don't make it right but I've never seen this happen. Most people and nations hold grudges. Look at the Ukraine, China, Northern Ireland or the Balkans. This has nothing to do with race.
I wasn't directly referring to Truth and Reconciliation, I was saying that many nations when there is a shift in power dress up some policy as something, then execute the opposite behind the veil of what "friendly" policy they have in place. Like you said, China, Northern Ireland, etc. this worked magically. Again, I refer back to Rhodesia with the one wrong retorted with an even worse one.

[davsel]

Dave I think you have a weak understanding of colonialism in Africa. I have read up on I quite a bit and to say Europeans had good intentions is absurdly far fetched. It's like saying the American Indians needed us to become "civilized". The colonization of Africa was about natural resources. King Leopold of Belgium killed tens of millions of people while raping a nation of its resources. I'm not sure I would call that civilized. Tribal societies function different land always will. Why are we so intent on imposing our moral code on everyone. Sure a lot of it is F-ed up, but who gives a damn. It's their country....let them have at it. You were right about one thing, Greed. Africa is full of natural resources and colonists wanted them. It's strange as hell to hear people on this forum think that 90% of South Africans want to live in a shit hole. I'm guessing that a vast majority of those folks are just like us. They want a good life and a fair chance of advancing themselves. Years of Apartheid created vast poverty which in turn created a group of predators and shitty people. It happens anywhere poverty exists. It's not about race, it's about money and power. One poster said that white South Africans were scared, that's why they had to use Apartheid. With this logic liberals would have a field day in this country thinking that if they took away our guns, they would be much safer. Why not go a step further and put away anyone who opposes the current administration. That would certainly cut down on dissent.

I think you misunderstood my post. I did not intend to imply Europeans colonized Africa due to good intentions. It indeed was the wealth of resources that attracted them, and they raped the continent acquiring them.
I intended to call out Apartheid South African whites as a small "colony" of civilization surrounded by third world natives. When the civilized leaders leave, the natives take over and the state reverts back to its roots.

Apartheid did not "create[d] a vast poverty." The injection of a civilized, wealthy group made the poverty suddenly apparent to natives, and they wanted it for themselves: the wealth, not the civility. They thought it was the power of politics that would make them wealthy, but failed to realize it was also the morality of a civilized society that is needed to maintain a healthy economy. Apartheid ended, and the natives squandered the economic gains.

Many are compelled to share their moral code with others because they are called by God to do so.

[generalmeow]

One poster said that white South Africans were scared, that's why they had to use Apartheid. With this logic liberals would have a field day in this country thinking that if they took away our guns, they would be much safer.

But they wouldn't be safer. We believe that, or we wouldn't be here chatting in this forum. That's the difference. They would be wrong.

We now know that the South Africans were right to be scared.

[ZERO THEORY]

The real mandella http://americanfreepress.net/?p=11873

I'm not going to argue one way or the other, because I never lived in SA and have no frame of reference. Having a frame of reference is important in knowing the ins and outs of a situation. Just saying.

Again, I don't personally know what happened there; I wasn't born yet and I've never been. However, my father is a South African-born, Congolese immigrant who has lived in this country for nearly 30 years. He is a registered Republican, has a M.S. in Telecom. Eng. and designed comm. relays for Lockheed for what it's worth (just want to cover those bases to ensure those ad hominems and speculation don't pour on too thick).

I called him today to ask him to shed some light on Mandela and his legacy in light of left wing worship and right wing dismissal. He pointed out pragmatically that accusing Mandela of being a Soviet-tied Red would be a good way to ensure the West didn't back his efforts, and that the crime and "fall" of SA is blown out of proportion by people who denounce his reign. Again, these aren't my words, and my father might have just as much bias as does anyone else. But I figured I'd give you guys a bit of insight from someone with actual first-hand understanding of what happened and happens currently in SA.

Take that for what it's worth.

[gos]

History is written by the victors, and the USA is no exception. Had the British won in 1783, we'd be speaking with funny accents, drinking warm beer, eating bland food, and reading about how the colonial terrorists were successfully stopped by the noble, peace-loving British soldiers.

Even worse, we'd believe it.

[streetglideok]

Something worth looking into, how the majority of the people came to south Africa, and why, and how they tried to control it. Then look at our immigration problem.

[Aloha_Shooter]

I would say don't be so quick to blame the actions of Jacob Zuma and the rest of the ANC on Mandela. Yes, Mandela had a mixed history (aligning with the tyrants of the USSR and Cuba was just flat out stupid) but the way he made peace with de Klerk said volumes. Menachem Begin bombed a hotel in his younger days but I think he fully deserved the praise he got for making peace with Sadat. Mandela's beatification disturbs me far less than the butt worship shown to Obama or Clinton. What's really funny is how quickly Obama and the Clintons have tried to tie themselves to him now that he can't say, "that's not true".

[RMAC757]

Newt Gingrich comments on Mandela:


Yesterday I issued a heartfelt and personal statement about the passing of President Nelson Mandela. I said that his family and his country would be in my prayers and Callista’s prayers.I was surprised by the hostility and vehemence of some of the people who reacted to me saying a kind word about a unique historic figure.
So let me say to those conservatives who don’t want to honor Nelson Mandela, what would you have done?
Mandela was faced with a vicious apartheid regime that eliminated all rights for blacks and gave them no hope for the future. This was a regime which used secret police, prisons and military force to crush all efforts at seeking freedom by blacks.
What would you have done faced with that crushing government?
What would you do here in America if you had that kind of oppression?
Some of the people who are most opposed to oppression from Washington attack Mandela when he was opposed to oppression in his own country.
After years of preaching non-violence, using the political system, making his case as a defendant in court, Mandela resorted to violence against a government that was ruthless and violent in its suppression of free speech.
As Americans we celebrate the farmers at Lexington and Concord who used force to oppose British tyranny. We praise George Washington for spending eight years in the field fighting the British Army’s dictatorial assault on our freedom.
Patrick Henry said, “Give me liberty or give me death.”
Thomas Jefferson wrote and the Continental Congress adopted that “all men are created equal, and they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
Doesn’t this apply to Nelson Mandela and his people?
Some conservatives say, ah, but he was a communist.
Actually Mandela was raised in a Methodist school, was a devout Christian, turned to communism in desperation only after South Africa was taken over by an extraordinarily racist government determined to eliminate all rights for blacks.
I would ask of his critics: where were some of these conservatives as allies against tyranny? Where were the masses of conservatives opposing Apartheid? In a desperate struggle against an overpowering government, you accept the allies you have just as Washington was grateful for a French monarchy helping him defeat the British.
Finally, if you had been imprisoned for 27 years, 18 of them in a cell eight foot by seven foot, how do you think you would have emerged? Would you have been angry? Would you have been bitter?

[Skip]

Newt Gingrich comments on Mandela:

[snip]

Wow--he went full RINOtard!

[Aloha_Shooter]

Those who want to denigrate Mandela because the Left is deifying him now should consider that even his "adversaries" in SA have praised him for how he approached reconciliation and unification. It would have been very easy for him to want revenge instead of reconciliation when he got out of prison but he really and truly sought to unify the country with an eye toward its future.

F.W. de Klerk doesn't get enough praise for the country's transition but he had nothing but praise for Mandella. "Pik" Botha had this to say: (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/12/07/reflections-on-my-relationship-with-nelson-mandela/?intcmp=HPBucket):


To this day, I remain deeply impressed by Mandela’s opening address.
He displayed a remarkably thorough knowledge of the history of the Afrikaner, referring to the pain and sorrow of the Anglo-Boer War: 27,000 women and children who died in the concentration camps. Boer soldiers returning to graves and ruined farms. The ensuing poverty of the Afrikaner and his harrowing feeling of being wronged.
The enormous suffering of the Afrikaner he could understand. But what he could not understand, he said, was why the Afrikaner, when they started recovering from their devastation, didn’t then reach out to their fellow black South Africans who were equally impoverished, degraded and subjugated.

He posed a haunting question to us.
The answer is that the whites also became victims of apartheid, the Afrikaner more so. We had fought fiercely and paid a terrible price for our own freedom, but failed to realize that we could not truly be free unless all the people living and working in what we considered to be white South Africa could share that freedom with us.


This is how I got to know him – an unfathomable human being.
An elder brother.
A person who endured imprisonment for 27 years and then handled the presidency of the country as if he had never spent a single day in jail.
...

His conviction in court did not preclude him from adhering to his conviction that black and white needed each other to achieve progress and prosperity for all our people.
He decided that he was not going to allow himself to be governed by hatred and bitterness.
He believed that the inequities and animosities of the past could be ruled out by a charter or bill of fundamental human rights.
He assured us that majority rule would not entail a black majority dominating a white minority.
He emphasized that we live in a country that belongs to all of us, black and white. The black majority will need the white minority to achieve the same level of proficiency in management and craftsmanship.




Mandela achieved his “cherished ideal” with an immeasurable endurance of suffering, without having to die for it.
He warded off the temptation to be guided by the bitterness of suffering 27 years imprisonment and resolved to persevere on the road of reconciliation and peaceful negotiations to accomplish his arduous “long walk to freedom” for all the people of South Africa, black and white.

Yes, many in the ANC and SA government are not living up to Mandela's post-apartheid ideal but blaming him for that is like blaming Robert E. Lee for the excesses of Quantrill and Anderson. Jacob Zuma is not governing as Mandela did and he's trying to hold on to power through racism, theft, and redistribution -- it's not like we haven't seen that before.

By the way, how many of you have been to SA or dealt one-on-one with South Afrikaners recently? Yes there's crime, particularly in Jo'burg. I was in Jo'burg 4.5 years ago and advised to not leave myself isolated in a parking lot or leave the hotel grounds after dark but I had no problems walking around a shopping mall. SA seemed to me to have a viable economy -- not without its problems but they don't have some buffoon who thinks he can spend 40% more than he takes in forever without consequence either. Trying to understand their current situation from a handful of news accounts is like trying to understand the US from a handful of reports on knockout "games" and the Trayvon Martin case.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Wow--he went full RINOtard!

I generally dislike Gingrich but no, this statement was not "RINOtard". He's absolutely right about this one.

[Skip]

I generally dislike Gingrich but no, this statement was not "RINOtard". He's absolutely right about this one.

I would suggest you do some reading...

http://americanfreepress.net/?p=11873

The portrayal of a peace loving man who unified SA is a work of fiction. The man was a monster who was offered the choice to renounce violence for his freedom; he refused. He, like all Communists, requires the deaths of millions to get what he wants. And the bloodshed isn't over.


[snip]

By the way, how many of you have been to SA or dealt one-on-one with South Afrikaners recently? Yes there's crime, particularly in Jo'burg. I was in Jo'burg 4.5 years ago and advised to not leave myself isolated in a parking lot or leave the hotel grounds after dark but I had no problems walking around a shopping mall. SA seemed to me to have a viable economy -- not without its problems but they don't have some buffoon who thinks he can spend 40% more than he takes in forever without consequence either. Trying to understand their current situation from a handful of news accounts is like trying to understand the US from a handful of reports on knockout "games" and the Trayvon Martin case.

I have worked with two contractors who both fled SA for their lives--one working on his citizenship and the other married an American. Neither one will talk about it openly for fear of political correctness/judgment.

Your characterization is another gross misrepresentation. What's happening in SA is a quiet genocide. To equate this with excessive consumer spending is "interesting" (for lack of a respectful word).

http://www.genocidewatch.org/southafrica.html


I would kindly like to inform you about the ongoing white genocide in the Republic of South-Africa. Since 1994, the end of the so-called Apartheid, whites people, especially white farmers, have been subject to extremely brutal and racist murders. About 50 people on average are murdered in South-Africa per day, of which at least 20 of them are whites(95+ % black on white murder rate). Please take into consideration that white people make up only 9% (4 500 000) of the demographics in South-Africa and therefore the white murder rate in South-Africa is quite significant.

This is Mandela's legacy and the fruit of his labor. To say he's not responsible for this when he started the practice as President is ridiculous. Trying to relate what this terrorist did to our founders is downright offensive (as the RINO did).

Did George Washington, Patrick Henry, or Thomas Jefferson do this?

37839


Some of you are very confused--and there are folks hoping you stay confused.

[RMAC757]

Those who want to denigrate Mandela because the Left is deifying him now should consider that even his "adversaries" in SA have praised him for how he approached reconciliation and unification. It would have been very easy for him to want revenge instead of reconciliation when he got out of prison but he really and truly sought to unify the country with an eye toward its future.

F.W. de Klerk doesn't get enough praise for the country's transition but he had nothing but praise for Mandella. "Pik" Botha had this to say: (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/12/07/reflections-on-my-relationship-with-nelson-mandela/?intcmp=HPBucket):







Yes, many in the ANC and SA government are not living up to Mandela's post-apartheid ideal but blaming him for that is like blaming Robert E. Lee for the excesses of Quantrill and Anderson. Jacob Zuma is not governing as Mandela did and he's trying to hold on to power through racism, theft, and redistribution -- it's not like we haven't seen that before.

By the way, how many of you have been to SA or dealt one-on-one with South Afrikaners recently? Yes there's crime, particularly in Jo'burg. I was in Jo'burg 4.5 years ago and advised to not leave myself isolated in a parking lot or leave the hotel grounds after dark but I had no problems walking around a shopping mall. SA seemed to me to have a viable economy -- not without its problems but they don't have some buffoon who thinks he can spend 40% more than he takes in forever without consequence either. Trying to understand their current situation from a handful of news accounts is like trying to understand the US from a handful of reports on knockout "games" and the Trayvon Martin case.

Well stated Aloha.

[Aloha_Shooter]

I would suggest you do some reading...

http://americanfreepress.net/?p=11873

The portrayal of a peace loving man who unified SA is a work of fiction. The man was a monster who was offered the choice to renounce violence for his freedom; he refused. He, like all Communists, requires the deaths of millions to get what he wants. And the bloodshed isn't over.

I've read it. I was also reading the press articles contemporaneously during the Soweto Uprisings, de Klerk's reign, and Mandela's ascension to the presidency. The fact of the matter is that Mandela had every opportunity to be the bitter divisionist that Obama has been, to seek "revenge" as the New Black Panther Party has, etc. and he didn't. Yes, he was a bitter violent foe of apartheid but he didn't go past that when he got what he wanted (the end of apartheid). Yes, he made mistakes along the way like aligning with the Soviets, something I neither forgive nor forget.




I have worked with two contractors who both fled SA for their lives--one working on his citizenship and the other married an American. Neither one will talk about it openly for fear of political correctness/judgment.

Your characterization is another gross misrepresentation. What's happening in SA is a quiet genocide. To equate this with excessive consumer spending is "interesting" (for lack of a respectful word).

http://www.genocidewatch.org/southafrica.html



This is Mandela's legacy and the fruit of his labor. To say he's not responsible for this when he started the practice as President is ridiculous. Trying to relate what this terrorist did to our founders is downright offensive (as the RINO did).

Did George Washington, Patrick Henry, or Thomas Jefferson do this?

37839


Some of you are very confused--and there are folks hoping you stay confused.

My dealings have hardly been a statistical representation but I've met and talked with young SAers in SA. Yes, there's quite a bit of political correctness in how they talk but they come from a different demographic -- non-farmer Afrikaners. As I said, you're confusing Nelson Mandela with Zuma, Winnie Mandela (don't get me started on that beeyatch), and others. The violence you're talking about has got significantly worse in Zuma's reign as Mandela got sick and even your sources predict an uptick now that Mandela is dead. I wonder why that is if Mandela hadn't been a force against the racist thefts and murders? I look at Mandela as I do Menachem Begin who also started as a terrorist by anyone's definition. That's why I oppose his deification but it would be equally wrong to deny that he consistently tried to chart a peaceful path for SA. By the way, 20/50 is a 40% rate, not 95%, but I do expect it to be worse in more recent years.

[Skip]

I've read it. I was also reading the press articles contemporaneously during the Soweto Uprisings, de Klerk's reign, and Mandela's ascension to the presidency. The fact of the matter is that Mandela had every opportunity to be the bitter divisionist that Obama has been, to seek "revenge" as the New Black Panther Party has, etc. and he didn't. Yes, he was a bitter violent foe of apartheid but he didn't go past that when he got what he wanted (the end of apartheid). Yes, he made mistakes along the way like aligning with the Soviets, something I neither forgive nor forget.

My belief is Mandela got this out of his system in the early days with the ANC. Then when the world was watching he turned into a saint.

This is why he was imprisoned in the first place.

You have a great point with the comparison to Obama! But like in the US currently, there is an awkward understanding of what is too far that is often negotiated out of plain sight. Unlike Obama, Mandela actually to work his way into the Presidency.



My dealings have hardly been a statistical representation but I've met and talked with young SAers in SA. Yes, there's quite a bit of political correctness in how they talk but they come from a different demographic -- non-farmer Afrikaners. As I said, you're confusing Nelson Mandela with Zuma, Winnie Mandela (don't get me started on that beeyatch), and others. The violence you're talking about has got significantly worse in Zuma's reign as Mandela got sick and even your sources predict an uptick now that Mandela is dead. I wonder why that is if Mandela hadn't been a force against the racist thefts and murders? I look at Mandela as I do Menachem Begin who also started as a terrorist by anyone's definition. That's why I oppose his deification but it would be equally wrong to deny that he consistently tried to chart a peaceful path for SA. By the way, 20/50 is a 40% rate, not 95%, but I do expect it to be worse in more recent years.

Mandela as a stabilizing force? Maybe. And maybe because he understands the consequences of a questionable legacy. Maybe because he is offsetting his formative years.

The folks I have talked to have laid it out exactly as I have read it. The writing is on the wall no matter what. They chose to leave while they could still sell their property. The crime is constant and the police often look the other way--even with serious crimes against persons. Whites are walling themselves in, turning their homes into compounds. There are no neighboring countries that will take them in.

I believe there are two stats the source quoted; murders by race and then murderers by race. Yes, 40% of the people killed are whites (in a country where only 9% are white) but they are killed by blacks 95% of the time. This is in spite of the increased security and awareness. This is a genocide and it has been since 1994.

At the end of the day, there will be people who paint this as black and white. It's Mandela or Apartheid; therefore they praise Mandela. Nothing could be more false. Apartheid was evil. So was Mandela's response to it and their legacy will continue to be racial strife, injustice, and genocide.

[Mtn.man]

http://dcclothesline.com/2013/12/07/mandela-dies-hype-continues/

[RMAC757]

My belief is Mandela got this out of his system in the early days with the ANC. Then when the world was watching he turned into a saint.

This is why he was imprisoned in the first place.

You have a great point with the comparison to Obama! But like in the US currently, there is an awkward understanding of what is too far that is often negotiated out of plain sight. Unlike Obama, Mandela actually to work his way into the Presidency.




Mandela as a stabilizing force? Maybe. And maybe because he understands the consequences of a questionable legacy. Maybe because he is offsetting his formative years.

The folks I have talked to have laid it out exactly as I have read it. The writing is on the wall no matter what. They chose to leave while they could still sell their property. The crime is constant and the police often look the other way--even with serious crimes against persons. Whites are walling themselves in, turning their homes into compounds. There are no neighboring countries that will take them in.

I believe there are two stats the source quoted; murders by race and then murderers by race. Yes, 40% of the people killed are whites (in a country where only 9% are white) but they are killed by blacks 95% of the time. This is in spite of the increased security and awareness. This is a genocide and it has been since 1994.

At the end of the day, there will be people who paint this as black and white. It's Mandela or Apartheid; therefore they praise Mandela. Nothing could be more false. Apartheid was evil. So was Mandela's response to it and their legacy will continue to be racial strife, injustice, and genocide.

I wonder what the murder rates were along racial lines during Germany from 1938-1945? Did the international community subject and divide Germany ( well at least the western half ) along racial lines to keep to peace post National Socialism? 6 million Jews were murdered. Would the rounding up of and displacing of the German people while creating a separate set of laws based on their history of violence solve anything in the long run? Racial violence isn't the domain of any one particular group.

[RMAC757]

http://dcclothesline.com/2013/12/07/mandela-dies-hype-continues/

That has more holes in it than my favorite pair of gym socks

[Mtn.man]

https://scontent-a-pao.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/s403x403/1491648_619475234758632_407047403_n.jpg

[RMAC757]

https://scontent-a-pao.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/s403x403/1491648_619475234758632_407047403_n.jpg

Mt, this is just a a random chart showing bombings and his picture. I could take photo shop and anyone's pic and do this in 5 minutes. I could take my picture and place a list of "Super Bowl" titles and someone would believe it. "Guilty by photoshopped incriminating internet photo" seems to be a trend. This pic could of come from anywhere. "It has to be true, it was on the internet"

[TheWeeze]

One of the underlying themes I've been reading here has to do with how savage the black population is after the end of apartheid. About how rape and murder is at miraculous highs and how 95% of whites are murdered by blacks. And many are quick to blame Mandela for this and his ANC for this. But maybe the real blame needs to be placed at the feet of the 50 years of apartheid segregation and human rights violations prior to its end. That no matter who it was that ended Apartheid that this was going to be the the lingering effects of it. That generations of people raised in a culture of hate, discrimination, violence, and economic struggle don't know anything different than to hate, discriminate, and be violent towards those that were responsible.

Maybe we should be talking about how Mandela and his successors, while they're not perfect, might have had a hand in keeping the country together and not into a completely desolate land of savages without any semblance of society. That 50 years of oppression, rape, murder, and torture isn't wiped away clean when a white man frees some black men and says that Apartheid is over.

Maybe South Africa is better off now than it would have been without Mandela because we all know that Apartheid wasn't going to last much longer anyways, and it could have come to a much more violent end.

[hatidua]

I'm not from South Africa, nor have I spent any time in Africa south of Nairobi so I decided to email a friend who is South African, born and raised (for reference, he's middle-aged, white, blond-haired, blue-eyed) to get the outlook of someone who lives there rather than simply reads newspapers in some other country. Prior to this email I had no idea how he felt about any of this stuff, hence my emailing him about it in the first place. This is the email I received from him this morning regarding the passing of Mandela:

Apologies for the late reply mate, its been a very busy last 10 days, and that was before the very sad passing of Mandela…

Thanks for the mail and the enquiry about how things are down here…


Not sure how you guys are seeing it over there, or how its being distorted or not by the media, but on this end things are good… We've all known it was a day that has been coming for a long time, and I think most are thankful that the great man is now in a better place… he has been sick for a long time, and pretty much out of it for the last 6 to 8 months, on life support, so it came as no great surprise or shock to most… But it is still a very sad day to have the loss of such a great man… a man each and every South African has to thank for the place we are today, and for uniting this mad nation during a time when things really could have gone the other way, were it not for his grace, forgiveness, compassion and drive to leave the past behind, and go forward….


The unfortunate thing is that the ideals and practices of Mandela have long since been forgotten or swept to the side by the current leaders of the ANC and in turn, the country… a more corrupt bunch of thieving, nepotistic , lying useless sacks of shit you would be hard pressed to find… Its quite sickening in fact how these useless bastards are ruining what was so hard fought for by Mandela and others of his ilk… The current crop are just in it for themselves, to line their pockets as much as they can, with little to no thought of tomorrow, or next week, or next month…. And even sadder is how they have completely forgotten their people… the people that Mandela fought for, fought to elevate above poverty give a better life.. The people who voted these lying scoundrels currently in charge to power… these are the folks I feel most sorry for… us so called "privileged" whites are ok, we thankfully were given a decent base by our forefathers, and we have the means to work around the currently corrupt and inept government… but those not so fortunate are just being used and abused by these swines…. Typical story of Africa unfortunately… A man is a freedom fighter, a man of the people, by the people, for the people…. Until he gets into power… then he becomes just another self serving, power hunger, money grabbing corrupt thief… its like a sickness, and unfortunately while Mandela was able to rise beyond and above that, those who follow have not been so lucky…


That being said, we South Africans, all of us, Black, White, Coloured, Indian, we are a resilient bunch, and we will work through it all… The great mans passing has united the nation by reminding us to focus on the good things Mandela was able to do for us all, how he united us all no matter the circumstance… And hopefully will remind a lot of folks that the ideals he stood for, fought for, and in turn was able to provide to so many millions of people in his land, are being taken away from them by their own government, and that they will wisely use their vote in the coming elections to take the power away from the current crop of bastards in government, and vote for those that will actually help them, and help this nation…


Right now its all about Mandela here… 10 days of mourning and remembrance… and as yet the petty government factions have not yet started to lay claim to Mandela as "theirs" because they are black or because they are the ANC and Mandela was ANC president or for any other reason…. Because its bound to happen sooner or later, and there are already whispers of this faction or party "claiming" him.. The truth is Mandela belongs to no one and all of us at the same time… As a South African, as an African, and as a human, we can all lay claim to Mandela, because who he was, and what he stood for, belongs to all of us, and I hope that is what stands out above all else in the coming weeks..


Sorry if that’s perhaps a slightly slanted view on things…. But its how I see it as someone who loves his country more than anything, and hates seeing it destroyed by a bunch of idiot money grabbing thugs…. I may be white, but this is my land of birth, that makes me an African… I was raised here, on this earth, on this land.. My soul resides here, and I am as fiercely loyal too, and protective of what I know is my country as anyone who calls this home….


Thanks for the mail, and apologies for the tirade… perhaps I needed to ramble on for a bit! :-)


Hows things on your end mate? Winter kicking in?

[Bailey Guns]

a more corrupt bunch of thieving, nepotistic , lying useless sacks of shit you would be hard pressed to find… Its quite sickening in fact how these useless bastards are ruining what was so hard fought for… The current crop are just in it for themselves, to line their pockets as much as they can, with little to no thought of tomorrow, or next week, or next month…. And even sadder is how they have completely forgotten their people…


Wait... I need some clarification. Is your friend talking about South Africa or the Obama administration? I'm confused.

[centrarchidae]

Actually Mandela was raised in a Methodist school, was a devout Christian, turned to communism in desperation only after South Africa was taken over by an extraordinarily racist government determined to eliminate all rights for blacks.
I would ask of his critics: where were some of these conservatives as allies against tyranny? Where were the masses of conservatives opposing Apartheid? In a desperate struggle against an overpowering government, you accept the allies you have just as Washington was grateful for a French monarchy helping him defeat the British.

This.

I'm sitting out the rest of this thread, but you called one very important thing:

Mandela was not in a good position to pick and choose his allies. There were two, maybe three places outside of SA where he could go for support: The "West" (meaning us), the "East" (meaning the communists), and maybe whoever was backing Islamists back then (which weren't a huge movement in the 70's, relatively speaking.)

We never made with the guns or money. I'm going to guess that even if our "good friends" the Saudis were crapping out money for politics, they would have insisted that Mandela convert to Islam or some damn thing. Which leaves...yep, the USSR and/or PRC.

So, should he have turned the support down because of where it came from? And just packed up and went home?

So, yes, Mandela aligning with communists was indeed IMHO a classic case of us missing an opportunity.

[ZERO THEORY]

One of the underlying themes I've been reading here has to do with how savage the black population is after the end of apartheid. About how rape and murder is at miraculous highs and how 95% of whites are murdered by blacks. And many are quick to blame Mandela for this and his ANC for this. But maybe the real blame needs to be placed at the feet of the 50 years of apartheid segregation and human rights violations prior to its end. That no matter who it was that ended Apartheid that this was going to be the the lingering effects of it. That generations of people raised in a culture of hate, discrimination, violence, and economic struggle don't know anything different than to hate, discriminate, and be violent towards those that were responsible.

Maybe we should be talking about how Mandela and his successors, while they're not perfect, might have had a hand in keeping the country together and not into a completely desolate land of savages without any semblance of society. That 50 years of oppression, rape, murder, and torture isn't wiped away clean when a white man frees some black men and says that Apartheid is over.

Maybe South Africa is better off now than it would have been without Mandela because we all know that Apartheid wasn't going to last much longer anyways, and it could have come to a much more violent end.

What's funny is the selective convictions we see every day. Being oppressed and lashing out violently was heroic on the parts of the colonists, Afghans who defied the Taliban, Bosnians/Serbs being attacked on both sides, etc. But when South Africans who were living in 3rd world conditions while whites prospered and herded them into favelas fight back, they're savages and need to be put down. Now, obviously killing white civilians just for being white is not amicable. It is, however understandable.

You're kidding yourself if you think people of ANY race who are being oppressed violently and economically by another race are going to hold hands and sing Kumbaya. I seem to recall innocent Japanese Americans having their businesses, homes, and lives seized by the US government because actual Japanese militants thousands of miles away came and bombed Pearl Harbor.

[Rucker61]

From my kids' principal in the weekly newsletter to parents and students: The passage of Nelson Mandela (1918-2013) has elicited the attention of national leaders and minor celebrities from around the world. The ruling elite have been seen in the right places and heard saying the right things. There is an aspect of this that is dangerous to our youth because it is instructive of something without meaning to be. That something is that sentiment matters more than truth, and that feeling about one’s cause matters more than either. The cause itself, the manner in which it was achieved, and the consequences it brought about are dismissed as needlessly nuanced.
There is much to admire about Nelson Mandela, but an overview of the facts will render him less deified and more comprehensively human. This is to say that he is not apart from our nature, or our challenges, or our politics. It is this, incidentally, that will make Mandela’s character arc and his story interesting, but it depends upon our telling the whole truth. “No man is a hero to his valet,” wrote Montaigne. As history brings a figure more into focus, the less heroic they are apt to appear. That may seem to be an indictment of all heroes, but all of us, however insignificant our station, should endeavor to be keen students of history because none of us knows all that has been, will be, or may one day be demanded of us. As such, it is critical to learn our lessons well.

There is a popular Chinese curse that was brought to the West on the tongues of members of the British Foreign Service which goes, “May you live in interesting times.” The thing is, however, we all do. It is only that some of us are aware enough to be engaged while a great many more are not. Mandela undoubtedly lived during interesting times. He was born a second-class citizen and imprisoned from 1962-1990. One writer noted that Mandela began life as his country’s Vladimir Lenin, but ended it as its Vaclav Havel. As beautiful as it is, the problem with this comparison is that Havel rejected communism whereas Mandela did not in his leadership of either the African National Congress (ANC)
or Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation). Not only did he not renounce communism, but he thoughtfully endorsed violence and terroristic measures.
“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 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 was not easily arrived at. It was 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 political 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 other words, the decision was deliberate, considered, and premeditated. If anything, his wife Winnie was even blunter when she noted that, “with our boxes of matches and our necklaces we shall liberate this country.” The necklaces she spoke of in 1985 were a popular form of execution in which a tire filled with petrol was placed around a victim’s neck and lit afire causing them to be burned alive. Not that we should wish to do the Devil’s arithmetic, but it bears remembering that in 46 years of apartheid, whites are estimated to have killed 7,518 black South Africans, whereas in a relatively few years of active struggle against apartheid, blacks killed 13,482 blacks, and most of these in the horrendous ways described above.

Horrific as they are, these are not the images called to mind when we see the Economist photograph of Mandela looking pensively out of the prison cell he occupied on Robben Island. We should remember that there are times in our own history that most of us feel have justified revolutionary language and revolutionary actions. Jefferson, for instance, wrote in the Declaration of Independence that, “when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.”

What we remember about Mandela is a classically admirable quality, namely, magnanimity. The sense of forgiveness exuded by Mandela in his later life is worth pondering. He noted in explaining this that “resentment is like drinking a poison hoping it will kill one’s enemies.” This is a profound point, but a country and a people must, in time, become responsible. History is an explanation – not an excuse. They must, as Jefferson noted, transform themselves into the type of people and the type of society that not only can throw off a despotic government, but provide new guards for their future security. We know something about the moral character of those who upheld the apartheid regime, or at least we think we do, but what of those who have replaced them? It was Lord Molten who wrote that,

…to my mind the real greatness of a nation, its true civilization, is measured by the extent of this land of Obedience to the Unenforceable. It measures the extent to which the nation trusts its citizens, and its existence and area testify to the way they behave in response to that trust. Mere obedience to Law does not measure the greatness of a Nation. It can easily be obtained by a strong executive, and most easily of all from a timorous people. Nor is the license of behavior which so often accompanies the absence of Law, and which is miscalled Liberty, a proof of greatness. The true test is the extent to which individuals composing the nation can be trusted to obey self-imposed law.

Has Mandela left his countrymen with this legacy? How much better off are the people of South Africa after ending apartheid? The country now leads the world in rape, has a stratospheric murder rate, a stagnant economy, and is a breeding ground for mercenaries and private militaries. Given that the cost of legal equality has meant an increase in crime and unemployment, has the price paid been worth it? These are genuine questions students of history should ask and would ask if history were presented in a way that so encouraged it. One of the lessons of history in matters such as these is that legal equality provides only opportunity, which people must then act upon for themselves. No government has ever given people equality of condition. The best governments in the world do not have such lavish and utopian aspirations. Instead, they try to secure the conditions by which people can secure their own happiness with as little interference, encumbrance, or obstruction as possible. Achieving democracy, as the world and history have repeatedly demonstrated, does not mean that the people who live underneath the ensuing regimes will be happier for it. As James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 10,

“Hence it is, that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives, as they have been violent in their deaths.”

What sorts of people can enjoy the fruits of a democracy? Students should ask this not only of people from faraway places, but of their peers and neighbors. A partial answer is that it is only an educated and acculturated people who seek truth, practice wisdom, and honor virtue. A government may be unfair, horrible, and homicidal, as the apartheid government was, but each of us will be remembered (if we are remembered at all) by what we do, and this part of our lives is entirely up to us. It was also entirely up to Mandela, and if we sanitize the man’s history, every student will suffer for it.

The politically correct xenophilia by which we have recently been gripped is the truer threat to our children’s education, and by extension, to our liberty. It is the greater threat because such puerile versions of history are the ones most likely to guarantee that we repeat the types of crimes committed by the apartheid regime, and by the ANC in their bid to remove the apartheid regime, and by the millions who have tolerated innumerable crimes and lawlessness since the end of apartheid in 1994. Our children, students of history as they undoubtedly are, deserve better than the nonsense history and pablum they are now being fed by Bono and other celebrity politicians and hypnotized members of the media. The death of Nelson Mandela should neither lead us to condemn nor sanctify him, but to reflect on his life and on history more generally, and insist that both he and it be remembered aright.

[RMAC757]

so killing whites is understandable?
because darker skinned africans were oppresed by lighter skinned africans 2 generations ago? yes 2 generations 20 plus years is 2 generations in many places. Current young africans do not have any reason to fight each other over apartheid. just like we dont owe darker skinned Americans anything because of injustices 8-10 generations ago. Either people will come together and learn to live peacefully or we will all self destruct and watch our children die horrible deaths too young. what the hell is wrong with people? And until we drop this hyphenated American bullshit we will continue to have racism. If your people have been here for 200 years you are not an African American. You are an American. When we are all Americans life will be better. (I think)


And if you think I am singling out dark skinned Americans because of my African American comment... well I am sorry. I dont see many other groups of people REQUIRE others call them European Americans, Asian AMericans, South American Americans, Arctic Americans, Antarctic Americans, Australian Americans.

I don't think anybody is requiring anyone to call them anything HBAR. You know how I feel about that as well. As a matter of fact, I have a neighbor friend who owns Colorado Italian-American license plates. It doesn't bother me at all. Why should it? It's something he's proud of.

[RMAC757]

I clearly dont mean you. I mean everyone (clearly not everyone) in this country seems to walk on egg shells talking about Americans with darker pigmented skin. If you call an American with darker pigmented skin anything other than an African American all hell breaks loose. You know it, We all know it. It needs to stop. Nobody cares if someone identifies as a African American, Italian American, Irish American. But the only group I see that basically requires you call them that it is the darker skinned American community. Every tv show, news broadcast they must be called that or face the wrath.

The part that is crazy is we are still wasting time talking about an old, old man who died in some third world shithole. 6700 Americans die everyday. Who cares about some old man who lived a very very long life in another country?

You picked apart he last part of my comment but you didnt mention if it was ok to kill whites for injustices that occurred many many years ago. and not even to many of the people that are doing the killing.



and just so you know RMAC, I have been the "victim" of racism many many many times in my life.

Wasn't trying to pick apart your comments HBAR. Just pointing something out. And you know I don't think it's ok to kill whites. That would be genocide on my own peeps. Anyone being the victim of racism sucks.

[HBARleatherneck]

racism does suck. and sadly after thousands of years people just cant accept people. live and let live. I personally dont care if people dont like me for my race or creed. The problem is when dislike turns to evil actions.

I know its been said a million times but it would be wonderful to get to the day when we no longer hated each other for our differences.