An alternate view of Nelson Mandela

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

The point is what DIDN'T happen after Apartheid fell. They didn't slaughter all the whites, which is the excuse the Whites gave about why they couldn't give up Apartheid.

Instead, they had Truth and Reconciliation Committees, everyone apologized for the bad stuff they did, and life went on in a more equitable South Africa.
You dont know what you are talking about

Hundreds if not thousands of white farmers have been murdered and agricultural production has declined under ANC control
 
If the one wrong is what is neccessary to ensure a bigger wrong goes away, yes. In fact history is full of examples.

The US put a nuclear bomb on 2 Japanese cities. Killing nearly 100000 people and ending WW2. Without it the alternative would have been an invasion of the mainland. Certainly causing many more casualties on both sides.

Come to think of it. Aren't you defending the US bombing Iran causing death and destruction of both civilians and military personel. Are you saying now that is wrong?

It seems to me that we both are perfectly aware that sometimes the use of violence is both neccesary and justified. Were we disagree is when.

In this case your argument seems to be that ending apartheid did not justify the use of violence.
If the one wrong is what is neccessary to ensure a bigger wrong goes away, yes. In fact history is full of examples.

Thats the point

It wasnt necessary

International sanctions forced the end of apartheid, not necklessing

We should honor the example of Mahatma Gandhi while condemning Nelson and Winnie Mandela
 
You dont know what you are talking about

Hundreds if not thousands of white farmers have been murdered and agricultural production has declined under ANC control

Actually, the number is closer to 70 over decades... just not a big deal. (Unless you were one of those racist farmers, but honestly, scew those guys.)
 
Probably not a good example. The Japanese were already ready to surrender, and the Soviet entry into the war was a bigger factor in their decision.

The sticking point was the status of the Emperor, which we conceded because we didn't want the Soviets to have half of Japan and China, which is what would have happened if the war had continued on for another six months.
That's highly debatable. And even if true a judgement levied with hindsight and without the context of what was known at the time.

The facts were that Japan had fought like fanatics throughout the war, not balking at nearly 100 percent casualty rates on a routine basis.

In fact, it took a direct intervention from the Emperor himself, something unheard of in Japanese culture to get them to surrender.

The fact that surrender required unprecedented imperial intervention suggests there was no clear internal consensus to surrender beforehand.
 
If the one wrong is what is neccessary to ensure a bigger wrong goes away, yes. In fact history is full of examples.

Thats the point

It wasnt necessary

International sanctions forced the end of apartheid, not necklessing

We should honor the example of Mahatma Gandhi while condemning Nelson and Winnie Mandela
I don't think most historians would agree with you here either. In fact, without Mandela and the international exposure he provided to his struggles it is doubtful that sanctions would have even be levied.
 
I don't think most historians would agree with you here either. In fact, without Mandela and the international exposure he provided to his struggles it is doubtful that sanctions would have even be levied.
How did Gandhi accomplish much more without violence?

The world was united that apartheid had to go

Otherwise the ANC might still be fighting for liberation
 
Back
Top Bottom