i agree w okey that it is unseemly to start criticizing mandela when he has barely passed on. many of us fought against apartheid for a long time, and he was an important part of that struggle. at a later date i want to remind folks about that struggle in the african literature assn, and the absence of it in the african studies association. we have already had debates about winnie on this list.
what i wanted to mention, or really ask people about, is the issue of race versus class.
mandela gave most of his life to end racial discrimination. when the time of transition came, he was willing to make compromises with the anc position in order to facilitate the end of white minority rule and to create conditions for democracy.
in doing that, part of the compromise was not to proceed to an end to the structures of capitalism that had been put in place under apartheid. thus, a wealthy capitalist class, predominantly white, would remain, although the conditions for black south africans to now join that class were established.
that is what has happened since, as far as i know.
despite such signal accomplishments as the progressive constitution, the economy remains, like the u.s. economy, largely divided between the very wealthy minority, and the overwhelmingly poor majority.

in not expropriating white holdings mandela actually acted as did mugabe, kenyatta, and almost all other african leaders on independence. for sure, that was also the case throughout francophone africa, except for guinea. was it different in tanzania? if so, wasn't that an exception?
i don't know what happened after independence in lusophone africa. but my point remains that it was class that remained as the determinant feature in shaping the social structures. isn't that what we are hearing about every single day on this list concerning nigeria? and i certainly hear about it in the drc, in angola, today.

so, mandela was a hero to the world, and i hear it in the press, on the radio today, all the time, since he left the whites to retain their property, he was 'unvindictive," and is contrasted with what mugabe had become. kenyatta is forgotten, i suppose.
but when you read mda, his criticisms about the fall of the anc into a kleptocracy or autocratic, corrupt govt, are echoed all the time.  it isn't race which is the determinant factor any more in south africa, it is class. and maybe it was always class to the extent that being black meant being excluded from the ruling class, not just the ruling race.
and that, of course, was something mandela set in motion by his compromises on independence.
but could he have done otherwise??
i'd love to hear opinions of others on this. moses, thoughts?
ken

..

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/06/opinion/the-contradictions-of-mandela.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=0

 

 

Re: The Contradictions of Mandela

 

..

 

I have  just read the New York Times article by Professor Zakes Mda and his convenient bifurcation of complex human and political issues in order to show the 'contradictions' of Nelson Mandela rankles greatly. Here was a man born into a community, a culture and a tradition of accommodation and resistance seared deeply in his history, yet some people expect him to pick and choose to meet the expectations of an angrier or more disaffected section of the populace. That he found the courage to look at the big picture and paint a masterpiece of political actuation with vigour and ingenuity is not enough, Mda wants us to see the cracks in his ideological commitment through such evidence as how he tolerated his Bantustan-loving relatives or how a segment of the black population in South Africa believes he sold out. But while it is okay to present these other facets of the individual and how others view him, the truth is they become false equivalences when compared with his greater acts pursuant to the bigger goal.

 

Leadership is a complex affair and political leadership more so, especially when required to be exercised while held down by an oppressive social and political order which singles you out as an embodiment of how not to fight the oppressive system. The challenge for such a leader is not just to lead in such constrained circumstances that are externally and internally imposed, but to win over those he or she is reputed to be leading in all their disparate and broken bits. In such a situation, ideological rigidity will offer no panacea, not only because of differing motivations, but naturally because the constraints make it impossible for the message to be fully passed to those who should hear it. They are more likely to feel the whip of oppression faster than they'd hear from a caged leader.

 

So any leader with his wits about him would learn to play the game, not to compromise the great principle of the struggle with which the rest of the world identify, but to navigate the treacherous terrains that ultimately lead to the Promised Land, because that task and that burden cannot be delegated. That is why Mandela turned Robben Island into a university of the struggle for all the young people captured from the streets and dumped there. He knew the time would come when they'd have to walk their talk. When that time comes, he wanted them to be ready intellectually and temperamentally. That is how he came to know the time to sit with the apartheid jackals to discuss the future, even as those closest to him in the struggle were open-mouthed about such sacrilege. He saw the future and just told them to relax, because something good can come out of it. A leader is a prophet and he was right. That was the same attitude he used in handling the affairs of the ANC when they came to power. It was never the possibilities the present can deliver in terms of power, but a future watered by the lessons of the past to create that Rainbow Nation that apartheid found an anathema. Blood, even bad blood does not have to be wasted.

 

Wisdom is a rare gift in high places and we must always be grateful when exercised by persons who have the platform to abuse it to the detriment of us all. Of all the Mandela quotes about, the one that I find most profoundly reflective of the character of this complex man is this one: "As I walked out the door toward the gate that would lead to my freedom, I knew if I didn't leave my bitterness and hatred behind, I'd still be in prison". It's a powerful statement about individual power of choice, independence, courage, grace and selflessness. More crucially, it's a statement about responsible leadership. Of course, Mandela was not going to be put in a physical prison if he'd left there with his bitterness and hatred, but he knew that such feelings imprison whoever bears them wherever they are, more so as political leaders. He recognised his humanity by not denying those feelings. No one who's been through what he and his people had been through for decades before his freedom would claim not to feel bitterness, anger or hatred and he was never going to underplay that just to satisfy the worried White establishment. But he knew that while the populist thing to do was to use these negative feelings to mobilize his people, the wiser thing to do was to rise above them. He knew his example will save his nation. And it did.

 

I am happy that Professor Mda says he does not share the perspective of those who today disparage the methods and achievements of Mandela, even though he understands their frustrations and shares their disillusionment. However, if indeed he understands the "skillful politician whose policy of reconciliation saved the country from a blood bath and ushered it into a period of democracy, human rights and tolerance" or the one he says he admires "for his compassion and generosity, values that are not usually associated with politicians", then he would realise that for this, there is necessarily a price, because we are dealing with the human condition and a coagulated history of real wickedness. The courage to achieve these things is wrought from a crucible that leaves a prize for others, no matter how uncomfortable. In other words, Mandela knew that the opportunity cost for establishing a social order governed by his sentiments is the loyalty he has to show to those who have the ability to destroy it and who can justify that turn with reference to a scarred past. He was courageous enough to pay that price.

 

Professor Mda should take a cue from the story he himself relates in his piece about how Mandela reacted when as a private citizen he wrote him a long letter complaining about the emerging patronage system and crony capitalism. Mandela phoned him within a week, arranged a meeting between Professor Mda and three of his senior cabinet ministers. Now, Mda says nothing came out of it, but he fails to understand the significance of that action. The gift of Mandela to South Africa and the world is the gift of vision, not of action. Anyone can complain about corruption, about the South African dream still far off, about economic apartheid still in place and so on, but Mandela was not made to change all that. He was made to show his people how to change all that by making access available to the democratic institutions that should effect that change in a wholesome and meaningful way. But the task of running that democracy, of challenging it to deliver change remains ours. Mandela knew that he was the past, but he made himself a bridge to the future and a sure, solid one at that! The best we could ask for in terms of action is his personal example. We've all seen it and we know that can stand the test anywhere.

 

It is enough that he has singlehandedly stemmed that anger with the potential to destroy the nation while leaving others to get on with the politics of putting the fittings in to freely accommodate everyone. Oh, there will always be complaints in the house he's built, but it's better than any other alternative. His greatness cannot be diminished by the chinks in his armour, because whatever the cracks, he's used that armour to save his country and give humanity a reason to continue believing in its truly civilizing mission.

 

 

Kennedy Emetulu

London

 

…

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--   kenneth w. harrow   faculty excellence advocate  professor of english  michigan state university  department of english  619 red cedar road  room C-614 wells hall  east lansing, mi 48824  ph. 517 803 8839  harrow@msu.edu