I have far more of an issue with the US' (and particularly New York) continued funding of the IRA even whilst bleating on about the 'war on terror' anywhere else they decide they wanted to bomb for a bit than I do about a statue for Nelson Mandela
From > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/6967927.stm
A statue of former South African President Nelson Mandela has been unveiled in London.
Mr Mandela, 89, his wife Graca Machel, and Prime Minister Gordon Brown were among those at the unveiling in Parliament Square.
Mr Brown hailed Mr Mandela as the "greatest and most courageous leader of our generation".
Surely this man led an armed campaign of guerrilla war because he did not agree with his governments views? Is he not a former terrorist?
History> In 1961, Mandela became the leader of the ANC's armed wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe (translated as Spear of the Nation, also abbreviated as
MK), which he co-founded. He coordinated a sabotage campaign against military and government targets, and made plans for a possible guerrilla war if
sabotage failed to end apartheid. A few decades later, MK did indeed wage a guerrilla war against the regime, especially during the 1980s, in which
many civilians were killed, though fewer than were killed by state security forces and state-backed vigilante groups. Mandela also raised funds for MK
abroad, and arranged for paramilitary training, visiting various African governments.
One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter!
I know which view I and most other people of the world take on this one.
adrian
I'd say he fits somewhere in the grey area between 'freedon fighter' and 'terrorist'.
My own personal view would be a little towards the less stigmatic end of that spectrum because of his preference for targeting government institutions
rather than random civilians. I'd find it hard to ever condone killing for the purposes of making a political point, but i guess the
circumstances in South Africa during apartheid weren't exactly conducive to diplomatic discussions with the people in power.
Mandela and Tutu are recognised for their Truth and Reconciliation where South Africa was reunited without war, conflict or revenge. T&R was one
of the conspicuous high points of 20th century politics, the idea of which, not to mention the successful implementation of which ilicits the highest
respect from me.
Mandela may have done some bad things but he did one big good thing for which he is well recognised. Perhaps we should have a statue of Desmond Tutu
instead because of his more peaceful role prior to T&R.
How about this for a defining difference
If you attack the specific people who suppress you (government, military etc) you're a freedom fighter.
If you randomly attack people (some of whom may well support your cause) you're a terrorist.
Then again, under that definition the IRA who tried to kill the UK cabinet in the Brighton bombings were "freedom fighters".....
Maybe its just if you support their cause you seem them as a freedom fighter, if you don't they're a terrorist!!!
It's a tricky one. I think he stood up against an extremely oppressive and evil regime (e.g. plans to put biological and chemical agents into the
township water supplies if there was an uprising, genetic warfare experiments etc etc)... and he paid a hell of a price for it. But "greatest and
most courageous leader of our generation"? Not sure.
quote:
Originally posted by BenB
If you attack the specific people who suppress you (government, military etc) you're a freedom fighter.
Then again, under that definition the IRA who tried to kill the UK cabinet in the Brighton bombings were "freedom fighters"...
The IRA didn't limit themselves to government targets though, pubs, office buildings and packed shopping centres were generally considered fair
game
I have far more of an issue with the US' (and particularly New York) continued funding of the IRA even whilst bleating on about the 'war on
terror' anywhere else they decide they wanted to bomb for a bit than I do about a statue for Nelson Mandela
IMHO.
If he is THAT important to HIS COUNTRY then the statue should be put up in HIS country. BUT certainly NOT in this one.
My tuppence worth!
I am firmly in the camp of believing that he is a terrorist who committed some heinous acts. This is supported by fact! We should not accept the
'spin' and believe anything else.
Freedom fighter/Terrorist?
It all depends on your perspective.
ie; 'They' have spies. We have intellegence officers.
It was the British (renowned for their fair play) that fire bombed Dresden into a car park. Cities during times of war contain mainly; old people.
children, women and the infirm.
As far as I personally am concerned, ALL acts of war are an obscenity.
Bodica and the Romans.
Mandela and the White supremacists
Its been going on for years and will carry on, lets see what history makes of the middle east.
Statue in London, n ot made my mind up.
To the world, Mandela the symbol is more important than Mandela the man.
The apartheid of South Africa was seen as the last bastion of racial oppression in the western world. Mandela became the symbol of the fight against
the system, that most of the western world thought of as intolerable. Perhaps his actions as a “freedom fighter” should have excluded him from
becoming the symbol he did, but none the less he is the one the global community chose to fill the roll. History is full of examples of Men (in some
cases women even) that became symbols of much more than they were in reality, and intentions much purer than they were motivated by. In the end the
man perishes, the actions are forgotten, but the symbol lives on.
quote:
Originally posted by violentblue
To the world, Mandela the symbol is more important than Mandela the man.
The apartheid of South Africa was seen as the last bastion of racial oppression in the western world. Mandela became the symbol of the fight against the system, that most of the western world thought of as intolerable. Perhaps his actions as a “freedom fighter” should have excluded him from becoming the symbol he did, but none the less he is the one the global community chose to fill the roll. History is full of examples of Men (in some cases women even) that became symbols of much more than they were in reality, and intentions much purer than they were motivated by. In the end the man perishes, the actions are forgotten, but the symbol lives on.
As far as I know, prior to being jailed, Mandela was involved in sabotage only ( power line pylons etc). He was not involved in acts of terrorism
against innocent civilians.
The ANC certainly went on to commit atrocities much later but I believe Mandela acted (from prison) as a moderating influence. As said above, after
his release he used his influence, position in the ANC and respect among both black and white South Africans to prevent the widely-predicted
anti-white bloodbath after the introduction of black majority rule.
I think he deserves to be honoured because of his generosity of spirit in forgiving the vicious treatment at the hands of the apartheid regime, for
leading South Africa through the dangerous transition period (thereby saving the lives of countless white settlers of British origin) and for giving
us all a lesson in humility and selflessness while never compromising his beliefs.
I only wish we had even one politician in this country of his stature. (Bet they don't put up a statue to Winnie Mandela though 
)
I've looked at this on the BBC website and it looks like the statue is doing a Tommy Cooper impression, not like that spoon jar, jar spoon
Viva Zapata! Che Guevara lives!
[Edited on 30/8/07 by Peteff]
Wanna swap?
If Port Elizabeth can have a statue of queen Vic why can London not have one of Mandela?
Cheers
Fred W B
The Main Library is situated opposite the Market Square and faces City Hall. It was constructed in 1835 and served as a courthouse until 1902 when the
library was officially opened. It's regarded as an excellent example of Victorian Gothic architecture. Especially interesting is the fact that
its facade was manufactured in England, shipped to South Africa, and reassembled piece by piece. In front of the library stands a marble statue of
Queen Victoria, which was unveiled in 1903.
[Edited on 30/8/07 by Fred W B]
Errr .. so that was erected when SA was a British colony? and Victoria was the soveriegn of SA ?
I would say that is a pretty different set of circumstances... last time I looked NM was not a British national....
quote:
Originally posted by DaveFJ
... last time I looked NM was not a British national....
Fair point.. He was born in 1918 and the country was unified under British dominion in 1910. Independence for white minority rule came in 1934.
Incidentally the ANC was formed in 1912 and was initially an, partialy, anti 'British rule' movement....