The frail Mandela now being kept alive by the best medical care, that would have surely bypassed any other name, seems to be sticking around for the good of the Madiba groupies. The Mandela story is a powerful tribute to pretentiousness and all things sanctimonious, of which the SA populace relish to the marrow and bone. Madiba’s ascent into the Godhead is entirely man made and in its entirety, a work of fiction. It makes for a captivating Hollywood script, but ultimately bears no resemblance to reality.
Every human effort to romanticize the figure has become the national chore and the preoccupation of white sanctimony. The ANC, in the position to rewrite history, has concealed its murky past of armed resistance and replaced it with the cult of Mandela. To look at Madiba objectively without all the visceral baggage is to many groupies synonymous with racism, to the backward thinking individual, any objection to what comes after apartheid redounds to an endorsement thereof. Replacing evil for another evil is not progress, its just a change of players.
Mandela does stand out positively amongst African leaders, but in the company of Africa’s savage and wicked tyrants, this is hardly saying much. Mandela is especially praised for what he didn’t do. He didn’t order the genocide of the whites. This is where the bar for glory has been set. I guess this makes sense to set the bar so low, among a people desperate for a moral savior.
The story goes that it was a enduring spirit of brotherly love and every other virtue that accounts for Madiba’s political trajectory to conciliation. This is a premise that has no substance, completely predicated on soppy presumption. By 1990 there was bargaining and negotiations behind closed doors that we were not privy to, but we can presuppose terms and conditions to the hand over of power. Was a genocide really an option for Mandela?
No, firstly it has been conceded that such a course would have been economic suicide, and Mandela surely knew it. The chaos and inevitable decay could be easily foreseen, and Mandela had his retirement to think of – spending his latter years dividing the spoils of war was not what Mandela had in mind. It was the meek Nelson who mobilized the armed wing of the ANC ,the MK in league with the SA Communist Party, to carry out a campaign of persuasive violence. Notable among these were the January 8, 1982 attack on the Koeberg nuclear power plant near Cape Town, the Church Street bombing on May 20, 1983, killing 19 and wounding 217, the June 14, 1986 car bombing of Magoo’s Bar in Durban, in which 3 people were killed and 73 injured. Mandela preferred the company of murderers and thieves, then, in the person of Winnie Mandela. Mandela always denied being associated with the South African Communist Party, but groupies will have to confront the possibility that dear Nelson, is capable of telling a lie.
Painstaking research by Professor Stephen Elllis concludes that Mandela was indeed a member of the SACP, and in fact a member of it’s central committee.
In a interview with Newsweek, 2002, Mandela provides us rare Insight into his sinister obsessions with race, when discussing the imminent Iraq War.
So you see this as a racial question? Well, that element is there. In fact, many people say quietly, but they don’t have the courage to stand up and say publicly, that when there were white secretary generals you didn’t find this question of the United States and Britain going out of the United Nations. But now that you’ve had black secretary generals like Boutros Boutros Ghali, like Kofi Annan, they do not respect the United Nations.
His silence during Mugabe’s rape of Zimbabwe adds sufficient weight to a verdict of cowardice and a sympathy for the despotic.
Certainly, and without question, the mobilization of a resistance and liberation movement was justified and due its merit , but to erase the innocence of victims slain, is casuistry defined. One wonders whether any parent would be willing to offer their own sons and daughters as a blood sacrifice for the next noble or just cause – perhaps a moment of hesitation? No, that would mean a face to face confrontation with hypocrisy and that just wont do. Mandela was responsible for terrorist acts, that is factually and historically irrefutable.