4 ms·

His peaceful assumption of power and non-violent transition of government are his lasting legacies. His violent struggle which resulted in his imprisonment bec

His peaceful assumption of power and non-violent transition of government are his lasting legacies. His violent struggle which resulted in his imprisonment became his advocacy for peaceful transformation. As the movement became focused on peaceful resistance it gained moral weight against the brutal violence perpetrated by the South African government. Emphasizing the non-peaceful roots, and the fact that there was much violence in the struggle against the oppression of apartheid is to ignore his own words on the topic and to only tell half a story.

mathieuh 13y ago
Mandela's address after being released from prison emphasises the need for continuing struggle against oppression and is completely devoid of pacifist white washing: http://www.anc.org.za/show.php?id=4520 http://www.anc.org.za/show.php?id=4520
- richardjordan 13y ago
  An unfortunate turn of phrase, but it's not about pacifist white washing... his release from prison was into a society where apartheid had yet to be removed and he advocated that in many circumstances people need to use force to defend themselves against oppression for most of his life. The point is that it takes a certain obtuseness to focus on that when his crowning achievement was avoiding a bloodbath on transition away from South Africa, choosing instead a path of peace and reconciliation. Also your flame-baiting attack on liberals is very confused - the key criticism by conservatives against liberals on this topic, for years, was their support for a terrorist who advocated violence, thereby themselves supporting violence. The truth is nuanced, but not to such a degree that it's incomprehensible to ordinary people.
- SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
  The word "struggle" occurs 16 times in that speech, and while it is not "pacifist", it is not "guerilla" either. The word covers every means of bringing about the end of Apartheid and start of democracy, from campaigning for votes through negotiations and yes, "Armed struggle". e.g. "mass marches and other forms of struggle" It refers to every means of bringing about the right ends. There's a paragraph near the end starting "Our struggle has reached a decisive moment...". I read it as "keep your guns, they're what's keeping those guys at the negotiating table.". He was a smart politician, neither dogmatically for violence ... or dogmatically against it.
- jessedhillon 13y ago
  Your reading of that speech is incredible -- literally lacking credibility. No person familiar with the English language could reasonably conclude that it is in any way a call to arms. "Struggle" is a word with many connotations, something that you certainly must know already. Therefore, to me it's clear that you're attempting to manufacture a narrative in spite of the facts: the man became president of a majority black nation and could easily, if he was so vengeful as you'd like to portray him, have commanded force against his former jailers.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- ismail 13y ago
  " Our resort to the armed struggle in 1960 with the formation of the military wing of the ANC, Umkhonto we Sizwe, was a purely defensive action against the violence of apartheid. The factors which necessitated the armed struggle still exist today. We have no option but to continue. We express the hope that a climate conducive to a negotiated settlement will be created soon so that there may no longer be the need for the armed struggle.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

mathieuh 13y ago

Mandela's address after being released from prison emphasises the need for continuing struggle against oppression and is completely devoid of pacifist white washing: http://www.anc.org.za/show.php?id=4520 http://www.anc.org.za/show.php?id=4520

richardjordan 13y ago
An unfortunate turn of phrase, but it's not about pacifist white washing... his release from prison was into a society where apartheid had yet to be removed and he advocated that in many circumstances people need to use force to defend themselves against oppression for most of his life. The point is that it takes a certain obtuseness to focus on that when his crowning achievement was avoiding a bloodbath on transition away from South Africa, choosing instead a path of peace and reconciliation. Also your flame-baiting attack on liberals is very confused - the key criticism by conservatives against liberals on this topic, for years, was their support for a terrorist who advocated violence, thereby themselves supporting violence. The truth is nuanced, but not to such a degree that it's incomprehensible to ordinary people.
SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
The word "struggle" occurs 16 times in that speech, and while it is not "pacifist", it is not "guerilla" either. The word covers every means of bringing about the end of Apartheid and start of democracy, from campaigning for votes through negotiations and yes, "Armed struggle". e.g. "mass marches and other forms of struggle" It refers to every means of bringing about the right ends. There's a paragraph near the end starting "Our struggle has reached a decisive moment...". I read it as "keep your guns, they're what's keeping those guys at the negotiating table.". He was a smart politician, neither dogmatically for violence ... or dogmatically against it.
jessedhillon 13y ago
Your reading of that speech is incredible -- literally lacking credibility. No person familiar with the English language could reasonably conclude that it is in any way a call to arms. "Struggle" is a word with many connotations, something that you certainly must know already. Therefore, to me it's clear that you're attempting to manufacture a narrative in spite of the facts: the man became president of a majority black nation and could easily, if he was so vengeful as you'd like to portray him, have commanded force against his former jailers.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
ismail 13y ago
" Our resort to the armed struggle in 1960 with the formation of the military wing of the ANC, Umkhonto we Sizwe, was a purely defensive action against the violence of apartheid. The factors which necessitated the armed struggle still exist today. We have no option but to continue. We express the hope that a climate conducive to a negotiated settlement will be created soon so that there may no longer be the need for the armed struggle.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]