He is known as the father of post-apartheid South Africa.
This must mean that he was a great influence for good.
My real time memories of him are sketchy. The 27 years he spent in prison ended when I
was an adult, and his time as president of South Africa was something I
certainly remember; that election was 1994. But I didn’t pay a huge amount of
attention to what was happening on the other side of the world. I was aware
that many people refused to do business with South Africa during the last years
of Apartheid, in an effort to pressure for change, which eventually worked.
Mandela’s tribal Xhosa name was “Madiba,” which he was often
called with affection. He was born in 1918, about a month after my own father,
so that gives me a view of his lifespan. Some of what I know of him is through media. I especially
liked the movie Invictus, a rugby
movie that was really about bringing people together. Morgan Freeman played President
Mandela, and the photo on the cover of Friday’s Houston Chronicle looked surprisingly like the actor. I love the
smile. It’s understandable why many people would have affectionate memories for
that face and the apartheid-ending legacy.
I do recall bad media of his second wife, Winnie Mandela,
during the latter years of his imprisonment, I think. She was known to beat and
berate her personal servants. Looking at media now, I’m uncertain what to
believe. But there are some other details about Mandela that are historic and
worth considering. (The Wikipedia article, already updated since his death, is
useful.)
He spent many years working as a lawyer, speaking for rights
for black South Africans, as a leader in the ANC (African National Congress, an
anti-imperialist pro-independence movement). He grew up Christian, was baptized
a Methodist, and attended throughout his childhood, even though this was mixed
with tribal practices; his mother was the third of four polygamist wives, in
the royal tribal family. Mandela was among the royal family of his tribe, yet the first of his family to attend school.
While he was interested in Soviet support for wars of
independence, he didn’t trust the idea of communism. And through WWII he
supported British rule. So he was a skeptical communist. He seemed to favor the
non-communist idea of freedom to vote for all citizens as paramount, but
willingly accepted socialism as a way to rule.
Early on he was a follower of Ghandi’s nonviolent
resistance, more for pragmatic than ideological reasons. Later he came to
believe the ANC had “no alternative to armed and violent resistance.” At trial
he pleaded guilty to 156 counts of public violence and terrorism. I don’t know
how specifically guilty he was personally for murders that took place, but
there are claims that he, as ANC leader, was behind multiple bombing plots in
which women and children were killed.
He could be compared to Yasser Arafat of Hamas, a terrorist
leader of a terrorist organization, who later became a “respectable” leader of
a people. But I was aware enough of Arafat to never see him as other than a
terrorist. I don’t know how much of Mandela’s reputation is media created, but
he wasn’t—as was Ghandi—a political prisoner; he was imprisoned for crimes he
admitted committing, which was why Amnesty International refused to advocate
for him.
The outcome of overcoming the suppression of a people based
on race is an important positive outcome.
There is no overstating that. I have no patience for tearing down a
person because of disagreement over race. But that is not the only issue of his
life, so I’m trying to see the full picture.
 |
| Pro-Communist/Socialist Mandela photo from here |
His other efforts, using socialist means to “fight poverty,”
are all statist tyranny tactics. He worked for income redistribution, using the
typical socialist approaches, apparently unaware that these tactics never
create wealth but only prevent wealth creation by the “haves.” Granted, there
was a lack of basic needs, like water and electricity, suffered by the black
poor but not the white wealthy. So, without the thinking of American freedom,
it’s unfortunate but not unlikely for socialism to appear persuasive. Socially,
he was pro-abortion. He codified pro-sexual promiscuity into the constitution—in
a country suffering from the devastation of AIDS (one f his sons died of AIDS).
Personally, he was known to be friendly, relaxed in the
company of everyone, and humble—even making his own bed while president.
Promiscuity, combined with the strain of political strife, ended his first two
of three marriages. Still, he is reported to have enjoyed his private family
time.
South Africa is much better off today than during apartheid.
But think how much better off the people would be if their great leader had
used his influence to lead the people to guarantees of God-given rights, free
market economics, and the pro-religion and pro-family principles necessary for
thriving civilization.
The title “southern hemisphere hero” does not refer to the
location on the globe of South Africa; it refers to the southern hemisphere on
the Spherical Model. North is freedom; south is tyranny. So much of world
history has taken place in the southern hemisphere, where people believe the
choices are between anarchic tyranny and statist tyranny. But there is an
entire northern hemisphere of freedom they’re missing.
The decision to allow all people a vote was a movement
northward. It might be that Mandela accomplished all he could, as a single
individual, in a difficult time and place, without the right beliefs. And not
every “hero” has as much moral integrity as Ghandi or George Washington. But
I believe the struggles his country still suffers could be solved by significant movement
northward on the sphere.
So this remarkable man is to be honored, but with limits.
No comments:
Post a Comment