[ad_1]
Some people find it easy to badyze Mandela and write what they like about this international icon, often in anhistoric and depoliticized narratives.
Paradoxically, I am also inclined to admit it: it is not difficult to write and say anything about Madiba.
What is difficult is to straighten out what should be written, what should be said about what it actually represents; if the environment that shaped it, the context that shaped its decisions is really appreciated by all who invoke its name, the world we live in would probably be a better place.
Unfortunately, most writers, commentators, and politicians selectively choose and apply "Mandela lessons" that promote their causes instead of promoting Mandela's values.
Usually and often subtly, the comment is punctuated with a posture that suggests that those in power are not qualified to be there because they do not look like Madiba.
In South Africa in particular, a debate is unfolding that says Madiba a hangover or opportunistic gauge the performances and styles of contemporary leaders using the character of Mandela as a stallion.
The task in the comparison is twofold.
First, he depolitises Mandela. In other words, this removes him from his organization, thus indirectly suggesting that it was a lonely crusade, uninformed and influenced by organizational policies, discipline and decisions. Secondly, the descriptors are applied instead of settling the definition questions first. History has proven that in public discourse, people choose to describe complex phenomena like Mandela instead of engaging in the most basic aspect of badysis – defining the phenomena . You do not set the temperature by looking at the sun – the temperature must be felt and not seen.
What is the purpose of all this? Let's start with a notation on the story before attempting a contemporary definition of Mandela's meaning.
The freedom fighter, Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, a lawyer by training, has made his teeth in the ANC Youth League (ANCYL), which he founded with comrades like Anton Lembede, Walter Sisulu and Oliver Tambo.
He practiced law with Tambo until it was no longer possible to do so because of the political situation in the country. Even before the events that preceded the Rivonia trial, Mandela had made a name for himself as a young activist who steadfastly pursued the ANCYL's radical agenda, which was the foundation of the Defiance campaign and the introduction of the armed struggle. until he was captured in the Natal Midlands, put on trial and sent to jail.
He was clear on what his generational struggle was all about: "We are not anti-white, we are against white supremacy, we have condemned racism no matter who it is professed to be."
He was unequivocal. a national liberation struggle to unleash those of a darker skin who suffered the worst of racial bigotry and indignity. He declared: "During my life, I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people, I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all human beings live in harmony and harmony. with equal opportunities.It is an ideal that I hope to live and achieve.But if it is needed, it is an ideal for which I am willing to die. "[19659002Headded:"WeareundertakingthisarmedstruggletoshowthatblackSouthAfricanswillnolongerliveontheirkneesTherecomesatimeinthelifeofapeoplewhenthereareonlytwochoices:Thedecisionistostandupandfight"
These claims put forward by Mandela as part of his defense in the Rivonia lawsuit from 1961 to 1964 are relevant since they define Mandela's character and what he represents. They have a global agency today as they did decades ago.
Finally, Mandela and his comrades were sentenced to life for acts of "defiance," "sabotage," and "terrorism." He spent 27 years in prison, most of whom were on Robben Island. When he was released in February 1990, he repeated the last part of the quote above, signifying his political attitude towards a future non-racial, gender-neutral and equal society.
Therefore, his commentary on his quest for freedom for the African people excluded from the political body of apartheid in South Africa as well as its non-racial character must be seen through his enduring commitment to democratic principles that he inherited from his ancestors in the ANC. They were men and women of great rectitude and moral conviction who were struggling to create a free, non-racial, non-badist, inclusive and prosperous South Africa. They shaped his political attitudes.
Therefore, outside the historical context of his liberation movement, a figure like Mandela is inconceivable. We must also remember that when apartheid rulers, PW Botha and FW de Klerk, succumbed to the call to bargain, Mandela reminded them that he was a prisoner and that he was a prisoner. he therefore had no right to negotiate. Finally, De Klerk was forced to unconditionally release all political prisoners.
Here, Mandela understood that he was part of the collective and therefore could not accept an agreement that excluded his fellow prisoners from clandestine and exile. It can be said that the greatest test of Mandela's character was his astute political management of the period between 1990, when political organizations were wiped out and political prisoners released, and 1994 when South Africa organized the first elections democratic principles.
It is now a historical fact that the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (Codesa) could have collapsed – triggering a new period of uncertainty and instability – if Mandela, acting in part of the ANC collective, did not direct the process towards a particular direction.
Essentially, he had to balance two things: to ensure that the oppressor believes that a future democratic South Africa had room for it without compromising the fundamental requirements of the oppressed majority that was to be comfortable enough to accommodate some minority interests.
A privileged white minority had for centuries enjoyed exclusively the spoils of colonialism and apartheid. Now, they had to be equal before the law with those whom they had oppressed.
A decisive moment was the death of Chris Hani on April 10, 1993. Almost a year after the Boipatong Mbadacre on June 17, 1992, Mandela had to calm the nation again and remind De Klerk to speed up the negotiations. . The unintended consequence of Hani's murder was the immediate announcement of the date of the national democratic elections scheduled for April 1994. For many leaders, maintaining calm during this period would have been a daunting task. The emotions were high and the anger of the people was more palpable and justified.
Here is what he had to say: "Tonight I am addressing myself to all South Africans, black and white, from the depths of my being. A white man, full of prejudices and hatred, came to our country and committed such a culpable action that our whole nation is on the brink of disaster.
"A white woman, of Afrikaner origin, risked her life so that we could know and bring to justice this murderer … Now is the time for all South Africans to stand together against those who, to destroy what Chris Hani gave his life for – the freedom of us all. "
An additional complication was that apartheid negotiators were not honest brokers, so the Madiba's biggest task was to push them towards a faster settlement. They soon realized that unless they stopped the killings and unrest, the whole bargaining process would collapse. They had more to lose than the oppressed.
The conditions were ripe for the insurgency. Of course, those who are overthrown by the insurgency can not negotiate – they take what is offered. And yes, we felt the blood.
Enter 1994 and the IFP threatens to boycott the elections. Given the instability and violence in Gauteng, KwaZulu and Natal, Madiba knew that no section of South African society would benefit from the boycott of the elections. That's what he told them in so many words.
Finally, IFP participated in the first democratic Parliament and cabinet.
Mandela the State Man presided over the most difficult period in the history of post-apartheid South Africa. The state was weak and bankrupt. Police and security forces and other state apparatus have no legitimacy. The economy was failing.
Violence continues in the townships. The whites said that they were terrified.
The black majority was waiting for an immediate change. South Africa no longer being a rogue state, she was admitted into the international arena. By the time he finished his term, Mandela had reversed the state and overall position of South Africa. The armed and police forces have been integrated. There was a unitary state incorporating the tribal homelands created by apartheid. He lifted the Rugby World Cup in 1995 and the Africa Cup of Nations in 1996. The "gevaar swart" has evaporated and Thomas Doubs has been silenced.
More importantly, he launched a vital project of unification of disparate bureaucracies and formed a unique national mechanism, despite all the weaknesses badociated with it. The social security system has been reformed, which has helped to regularize and equalize social subsidies from a race-based system to an inclusive system. The taxman was stabilized.
Foreign direct investment began to return to South Africa. A world-renowned constitution with the Bill of Rights became the highest law in the country in 1996.
In the postcolonial era, tyrannical rule often manifests itself in the quest for the presidency for life and therefore the Mandela's revolutionary decision to retire has become a model.
In many cases of endless rule, the common chorus is that a particular leader has yet to complete his mission. Invariably, it's a coded way of saying that the leader must stay in power forever. However, Mandela retired graciously after only his first term, but remained in the service of the public through charitable foundations. To this day, it remains a source of inspiration for the poor and oppressed around the world. He is our zeitgeist.
And today we ask, whose name is Mandela anyway? Or should be the question: apart from the inevitability of the summit of human tragedies (death) that finally visited him, why should we all celebrate a life well lived by Nelson Mandela?
Without risking the politically correct, I affirm that, despite my introductory remarks, Mandela is worthily celebrated by the entire world community – progressive, tyrants, his persecutors, bigots, officials and even imperialists.
For the progressives, the reasons are obvious; they are also looking for equitable and inclusive political systems and economic, local and global, where social justice prevails. For them, Mandela embodies the most profound example of what it means to strive to liberate the mbades of exploitation and misery. For those who are totally opposed to what Mandela lived and was willing to die, celebrating Mandela's life will hopefully help them to answer his call when he opens Parliament in May 1994: "Our greatest challenge is therefore to help establish a social order in which the freedom of the individual will truly mean the freedom of the individual.We must build this people-centered freedom society."
More directly, it was what he had to say to those who were blocking or opposing the irreversible movement towards human progress: "The people have risen and the tyrants The demand for free and fair elections is very strong.What is happening here is going to send a message to similar regions. "
As for those of us who are in the region, we are in the midst of this. State, let's remember what he said while having lunch in the honor of the outgoing commissioners of the Commission d he Public Service in 1996: "For the majority of South Africans, the public service was seen as a hostile instrument of an oppressive minority. We have a huge challenge to build a truly service-oriented state for all South Africans; it is equitably representative of our society; this is guided by the broad vision of a better life for all; and that is dedicated to the effective use of public resources. No less demanding are the tasks of rooting out corruption Achieving all these goals at the same time we find the right size for our public service, will undoubtedly produce some testing time. "
For the imperialists who hypocritically invoke his name, here is a lesson: continue the paradigm of peace as the paradigm of the war you have pursued.
As claimed by Sabelo Ndlovu-Gatsheni in the book Decolonial Mandela: "Madiba's paradigm of peace offers an epistemic turning point, a gift from the South to the rest of the world and a reminder that peace, negotiations, democracy, equity, and economic inclusion are the most powerful weapons against human suffering. "
There can be no better tribute to Mandela's legacy than responding to an appeal to the people of the world to show their unity, service, and sacrifice." The death of a mortal mobilizes it the international community for it to unite in the promotion of a global civilization and liberation.
Integrity characterizes Mandela as much as & # 39; He denies being a saint.
This is a challenge for the world as we celebrate Mandela's centenary – a figure similar to a messiah who dared to dream and gave the world a new human face in the form of 39, a paradigm of peace that looks at us, asking dictators and those who build walls: how did we get here?
Scribes, historians, poets, singers, correct the writings on this just and reluctant man who lived for that we can live.
His teachings and his thoughts reaffirmed the. altruism and integrity as universally applicable normative values aspiring to adoption by all in leadership and the grbadroots. He lives forever because he was always ready to die for the ideal of an equal society liberated from the clutches of human indignity. Mandela lives!
Ngcaweni is co-editor of Nelson Mandela: Decolonial Ethics of Liberation and Servant (Africa World Press)
[ad_2]
Source link
