4 ms·
I'm more interested in simply highlighting the whole truth rather than making a value judgement. The truth is that Mandela was a pragmatist in regards to tactic
by eaurouge 13y ago
I'm more interested in simply highlighting the whole truth rather than making a value judgement. The truth is that Mandela was a pragmatist in regards to tactics. When bombing fast food restaurants was tactically viable his organization did that. When the situation changed, he advocated an alternative approach.
No, you're attempting to portray him as someone who employed peaceful protest only when it proved convenient, or as a last resort. One only needs compare your 'quote' (all ellipses and no context) with the full quote posted by azernik.
He might have turned into a pacifist, at some point, but he certainly gained political capital, intially, through violence.
The opposite, you've got the wrong order. Read the link you posted on motivation for the formation of MK, then watch his interview in 1961, here (first posted by Q_the_Novice):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrBCgiFhmNA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrBCgiFhmNA.
As Q_the_Novice put it, "first educate yourself ... before posting ...".
- mcantelon 13y agoI'm pointing out facts about him, nothing more. My quote was brief because I'd tweeted it and ended up copying the abbreviated form, but the substance of it is clear: it is a statement advocating militant struggle. The video clip you posted for some reason expresses a similar sentiment. And the quotes from his book I mentioned earlier, advocating violence in certain conditions, were from his book published in 1994. Pacifism is defined as opposition to violence. Mandela, unlike many Western leftists, never ruled out violence as a tactic. Would his movement have succeeded without killing civilians and torturing enemies? Possibly not.