Commentary on the news of the death of 95-year-old Nelson Mandela will vary tremendously, from fawning obsequience and hero-worship in the mass media, to outright condemnation by "right wing" commentators.
I would like to take a different approach, not only because I want to be different, but also because this is something which I really believe and which the "right wing" would do well to consider.
The time has come for all honest pro-European activists across the world to take on a new perspective of this African nationalist.
Yes, Mandela was a Communist.
Yes, although Mandela personally did not kill anybody, and never set off any bombs, or even shoot a gun in anger—he certainly had the intention to do so and the organization which he founded—the ANC’s armed wing—most certainly did kill people.
And Mandela was certainly no friend of white people, no matter how the media tries to spin it.
Yes, the current state of South Africa is shocking.
But I would suggest that the current state of South Africa was inevitable, and would have occurred even if Mandela had never lived.
The knee-jerk condemnation of Mandela as the cause of South Africa's problems, is a typically “right wing” misunderstanding of the story of the political development of South Africa.
I know, because this was the line I was fed as a youngster in Southern Africa, and, sadly, believed for a long time—until I became wiser and realized it was just another lie of apartheid [Ed. See also here, here, and here].
|The pointless war: Arthur Kemp. (left front) and his Casspir crew, Unit 19 mobile reaction unit, 1988.|
The reality is that the ANC only resorted to “armed struggle” some 50 years after its foundation. During those prior five decades, it had sought to end white minority rule by protests, mass demonstrations, strikes, stay-aways and so on.
The state, however, refused to contemplate black rule, and cracked down on the ANC—using force.
From Mandela’s perspective therefore, it can be argued that the resort to “armed struggle” was a reaction to the state’s violence against opposition to Apartheid.
And, contrary to the “right wing” version of history, this is in fact completely accurate. The ANC resorted to violence and, yes, terrorism, after its five decades of peaceful attempts to end white rule.
Think about it for a minute: if you had been a black person in pre-1994 South Africa, what would you have done?
The time has come to be completely honest about this: if I had been a black in South Africa in the pre-1994 era, I would have supported the ANC and the armed struggle as well. And so would all of my “right wing” friends in South Africa—had they been black.
The truth is that any objective observer cannot “blame” Africans for wanting to rule themselves, not be ruled by whites and for eventually taking up arms to achieve this goal.
Quite frankly, that is a perfectly normal human reaction, and I would expect it of any healthy people.
No healthy race wants to be ruled by others.
Why would you, except if you were sick?
Now I know that Mandela was an self-admitted socialist. He described himself as such (see Sampson, Anthony (2011) . Mandela: The Authorised Biography.London: HarperCollins) and one of the main pieces of evidence during the Rivonia Treason Trial was a hand-written document by him called “How to be a Good Communist.”
I know that the ANC committed many gruesome atrocities in its “armed struggle.” But I also know, from personal experience of my four years’ national service in South Africa from 1985-1988, that the state was prone to violence as well. It was a cycle of violence, each outrage feeding the next in an ever-increasing spiral.
But all of this aside: the true meaning of Mandela is that here was a man, fully committed to the liberation of his people at whatever cost, who held true to this belief and never wavered.
Even though you may personally not like his ideology or what was done in his name (and, given the outrageous black-on-white murders in South Africa which are still occurring), you cannot get away from the fact that from his perspective, he stood by his principles and never faltered, even though the personal cost was massive.
The desire of Africans to rule themselves in their nations, free of white rule, as personified by the life of Mandela, in fact justifies the demand of Europeans to rule themselves in their nations.
Think about it. Instead of condemning Africans for wanting to rule themselves, pro-European activists should accept that it was wrong for Europeans to colonize the Third World—and therefore, that it is equally wrong for the Third World to colonize European lands.
Instead of condemning Africans for doing what any healthy people would do, “right wingers” should give up the old, tired and failed rhetoric, and instead be looking for a “European Nelson Mandela” to help lead them away from the path of extinction on which they are currently headed.
Arthur Kemp holds a degree in International Politics, Political Science, and Public Administration. An author of several books, he was a journalist in South Africa.
This video concerns Genocide against the White farmers, Graphic scenes have been sanitized so it is no more graphic than a typical TV news broadcast.
How White people are facing an ongoing genocide in South Africa and the vital need for people all over the world to raise their voice to stop this Genocide.
The world was told that the White Government in South Africa was evil. Yet, the White people made a great nation and Black people thrived and prospered there. Far from genocide, Blacks came from all over Africa to enjoy the prosperity, medical care, education, and relative freedom that the White people created there.
If the world could boycott South Africa for having separate racial development should it not boycott the South African Government for the genocide going on against White people in that country today.
Boycott the World Cup