Mandela and Morons

Growing up in the political hotbed of 1980s Cold War London, I found myself among interesting people. The African National Congress, after being banned in the 1950s, had set up a leadership-in-exile, based in London and Amsterdam. One of my teenage friends was the son of senior ANC exiles, a couple who had fled South Africa when the clampdown on the ANC began – including the jailing of the activist lawyer Nelson Mandela.

My friend, and other children of the ANC leadership, tried to be normal teenagers, but that must have been hard. I was warned to keep phone conversations with him minimal and to the point: their phone was almost certainly bugged by British intelligence which, despite our nation’s professed love of “freedom”, was working to monitor and help the South African government suppress the ANC. These children of the ANC had been raised in London, but groomed for political leadership when they one day returned to a country they had never visited. They also had to endure their parents leaving on long, secret trips to southern African countries, from which they might never return.

When Mandela walked free, my friend’s parents returned to South Africa, his father becoming a government minister in the first ANC government. My friend moved to Johannesburg shortly afterwards, was offered a diplomatic career, but decided to follow other paths.

Mandela, like many leaders of oppressed people, showed immense bravery and self-sacrifice. He famously spent 27 years in prison for his “seditious” activities, and refused to leave until a transition to democracy was assured. But Mandela differed from other revolutionary heroes: he tamed his people’s justifiable thirst for revenge, and instead crafted a new, multiracial South Africa; he taught a love of democracy and racial tolerance; he stood down from power rather than try to cling on to the bitter end, like so many other African revolutionary heroes had done. He refused to repeat the mistakes of earlier African independence movements which had angrily expelled the white and Asian elites, only to lose their most educated people and wealthiest investors.

Racists and white supremacists hate Mandela more than any other black leader because he didn’t just outperform other black leaders: he has a valid claim to be named as the greatest national leader of the 20th century. Neither of the great Western “heroes” of the 1980s, Reagan and Thatcher can remotely compare.

Yes, the ANC’s acts of resistance included acts of terrorism. But ANC atrocities are tiny compared to the real terrorism of that era. South African forces repeatedly gunned down civilians, including school children. The South African, US and UK governments supported far greater acts of terrorism in Mozambique and Angola, as they tried to stamp out the ANC’s fighters. How ironic that Mandela, a creator of democracy, was labelled a terrorist by the terrorists – Thatcher and Reagan – who crushed democracy and free speech in the name of freedom.

Mandela rose above all the world leaders of his generation. It is testament to his greatness that the people and newspapers that labelled him a menace in the 1980s are today lining up to praise him.

“But Mandela wasn’t a saint”, people are saying. So what? Both right and left revel in the simplistic idea that the world divides easily into good and bad people. His early activism, his time in prison, his ascent to the Presidency, his founding of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, his creation of a stable nation where most others would have created war and misery; all these things mark him out as far greater than his peers. He wasn’t a superman. He was a human being. But he was a remarkable human being.

“But look at South Africa now”. It’s easy to cherry-pick bad things in the country today. Mandela’s successor, Thabo Mbeki, was easily convinced that AIDS was not caused by the HIV virus, and effectively killed hundreds of thousands of people by suspending treatment programmes. Corruption is rife. The ANC leadership now stuffs its pockets, gorging itself on countless millions of dollars. President Zuma lives in enormous luxury, and boasts an impressive collection of wives. South Africa is a violent country – but then that’s nothing new. Only generational change, coupled with free speech, housing, education and healthcare, can address the violence. South Africa is a deeply racist place too, as attacks on immigrants (mostly other Africans) demonstrate.

Mandela understood his country and his continent. He must have realised much of this was inevitable. Just as in the rest of Africa, the liberation struggle was just the first of a series of struggles. Colonialism and Apartheid put a racial mask on inequality, but now in South Africa, as in the rest of Africa, inequality, corruption and brutality can no longer be conveniently blamed on a foreign devil: it is home grown. Mandela and his ANC comrades, sowed the seed of democracy, human rights and free speech, allowing future generations to renew the struggle – this time a class struggle, not a racial or tribal one.

Nelson Mandela died in a very different world to the one he was born in. His death prompted an inevitable barrage of abuse from morons, but this just served to highlight how much organised racism has declined worldwide. The racist American right settled for complaining that America’s black President was attending Mandela’s funeral but hadn’t attended Thatcher’s (ignoring the facts that Thatcher was not a head of state, and that her greatly-contested achievements were tiny compared to Mandela’s).

I finally visited my old friend in Johannesburg last year. A local celebrity, he mixes in a wide multiracial circle. His black friends are internationally educated and well travelled, unlike their parents’ generation. They are part of a confident and rising Africa that is just starting to be noticed internationally. This Africa is the creation of generations of leaders who shook their people awake and harnessed their resentment; but one man stood head and shoulders above the others.

RIP Madiba.

8 thoughts on “Mandela and Morons”

  1. Nicely put. There’s quite a good article in the Indy today about Mandela’s “mixed” relationship with Britain (it was one of the headquarters for the anti-Apartheid movement, but the UK establishment was generally quite happy to do business with the White Government in Pretoria until much later – late 1980’s). In the mid 1980’s, the Federation of Conservative Students produced “as a joke” various “Hang Mandela” posters, T shirts etc. The president at the time was John Bercow (Cameron joined the FCS later).

    I can remember back to the cancellation of the 1970 SA cricket tour (given how much the South Africans, particularly the whites, at the time loved sport, especially cricket and rugby, the sporting boycott, and later Mandela wearing Pienaar’s Springbok jersey, were important). One of the few occasions when the UK (Labour) government encouraged protest (the MCC tried to keep the tour going any way they could).

    I’m not sure Mandela would have wanted a “class struggle” to continue (certainly not in the way that term is used by Communists), although I’m sure he wanted to improve the lives of the poorest. I visited South Africa in 1995, and saw one or 2 of the townships, which are a sobering experience.

    Lastly, I have to agree about the morons crawling out of various woodworks (from the racist right – “Mandela was a terrorist” – to the radical left – “Mandela should have finished the class struggle job”).

  2. As a side issue, at the Madiba memorial, I see there is a picture of Obama shaking hands with Raul Castro. £5 says that puts the morons into meltdown. What? You won’t bet against that?

  3. How ironic that Mandela, a creator of democracy, was labelled a terrorist by the terrorists – Thatcher and Reagan – who crushed democracy and free speech in the name of freedom

    You had me humming along until this line.

    Reagan clearly suffered from early onset dementia, but despite that he did less to impair what democracy and freedom they have in the states than any of his successors. Which probably says more about his successors than about him, but is still true.

    Thatcher. The bete noire of British Lefties. I always wonder how much of the abuse is based on policies, and how much is actually thinly veiled sexism. Sticking to the point, though: How did Mrs T actually crush democracy and free speech? It is clear, now (and, actually, even in 1985) that her assessment of Mr Mandela was wrong. And she did implement a few ludicrous laws (clause 28 etc). But in comparison to her successors, particularly Blair, she was a paragon of civil liberties. (again, this probably says more about the despicable behaviour of Mr Blair than about Mrs T, but its is nevertheless a fact).

    1. I think your comparison between Thatcher and Blair is only partly correct. It was Thatcher who started the “with us or against us” attitude in the police. The Bill were hardly paragons of virtue before then, but her use of them as “stormtroopers” in events like the miners’ strike was unprecedented. SYP essentially got off responsibility for Hillsborough because of their support for Thatcher in breaking the strike. Blair essentially continued Thatcher’s work to its logical conclusion.

      One point on which Thatcher does score over Blair is foreign wars. She refused to support the (illegal) US invasion of Grenada. Blair thought he had to support US policy to avoid being seen as “soft” (that does suggest the Iraq invasion was at least partly a matter of domestic political calculation, but this may be too cynical).

  4. From Obama’s speech:“There are too many of us who happily embrace Madiba’s legacy of racial reconciliation, but passionately resist even modest reforms that would challenge chronic poverty and growing inequality,”

    Wonder if he includes himself in that.

Leave a Reply