Nelson Mandela RIP

[Lord Kangana]

I'm sorry, but I don't see how you can draw a moral equivalence between the actions of oppressors and oppressed.

There's an horrific film from from The Second World War of Germans throwing rotten potatoes and stale bread into a mass crowd of (starving) Russian POW'S. There is clearly not enough to feed the hundreds, so naturally, they fight violently over the scraps (it was, after all, intended German State policy to starve many of them to death). Are we to conclude, from the evidence presented, that the Russians were indeed subhuman animals who would kill each other for bread (as the Nazi's publicly proclaimed) or being driven to such behaviour by the inhuman-ness of their treatment? There are two sides to every story, it doesn't make them of either equal credence or worth mentioning.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

I fail to see what the Nazis have got to do with it. The man did good and bad things and I'm not happy to ignore some of those things.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

I fail to see what the Nazis have got to do with it. The man did good and bad things and I'm not happy to ignore some of those things.

He's saying that 'bad things' can sometimes have a moral justification that is so strong that they cease to be bad things - like force used in directly resisting Nazis.

As you say though, it's hard to imagine what acts perpetrated by an apartheid state could 100% justify the bombing of a supermarket.

LK says he finds it hard to be judgmental about 'any' response... I agree that this seems an unnecessarily extreme view, in the same way, for example, that I maintain that people should only be allowed to use 'reasonable' force in defence of themselves and their property.

[Bijou Bob]

Never have I been so glad to be out of the country. I made the mistake of turning on the tv in my hotel room and tuning in to BBC Jewish/Israeli news, sorry BBC News 24, only to find that there are apparently no news worthy items other than the death of an elderly statesman.

I check BBC sports page for the Ashes update to find the leading article is "Nelson Mandela - his influence on sport".

Feck me sideways.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Never have I been so glad to be out of the country. I made the mistake of turning on the tv in my hotel room and tuning in to BBC Jewish/Israeli news, sorry BBC News 24, only to find that there are apparently no news worthy items other than the death of an elderly statesman.

I check BBC sports page for the Ashes update to find the leading article is "Nelson Mandela - his influence on sport".

Feck me sideways.

what?

[Bijou Bob]

BBC News 24 - they only ever seem to report Israeli/Jewish news stories. You won't ever find a Palestinian perspective on there.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

That'll be the Rothschild influence. Buggers are trying to take over the world...

[Lord Kangana]

Them and the Bolsheviks.

[Montreal Wanderer]

Them and the Bolsheviks.

No, clearly a protocol officer of the Elders of Zion.

[William the White]

I've been trying to locate the supermarket bombing that AT mentions.

Here is the list of MK operations the ANC reported to the Truth and Reconciliation Committee.

http://www.anc.org.za/show.php?id=2651" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

At then end of the list is An Appendix headed by the statement:

APPENDIX FIVE: Armed actions for which target category and/or responsibility is uncertain


Please note:
This list includes all incidents we have found in press reports and from SAIRR annual surveys which cannot be classified according to the target categories used in the appendix headed "list of known MK operations". In addition, we are uncertain as to whether these attacks were carried out by bona fide MK cadres. Some appear to be the result of operational difficulties; others very probably "false flag" operations.


In this list several bombings of supermarkets/restaurants other 'soft' targets are recorded. The ANC aren't claiming responsibility for these (or 'accepting' responsibility if you prefer that formulation). Is the attribution of these to MK verified in any way other than the presumption of guilt by the racist state and its media? I ask this with no polemical intent.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

I don't know the exact details of the bombing and as it's a sensitive subject for the wife I haven't pressed her for too much info.

[Prufrock]

I'm sorry, but I don't see how you can draw a moral equivalence between the actions of oppressors and oppressed.

There's an horrific film from from The Second World War of Germans throwing rotten potatoes and stale bread into a mass crowd of (starving) Russian POW'S. There is clearly not enough to feed the hundreds, so naturally, they fight violently over the scraps (it was, after all, intended German State policy to starve many of them to death). Are we to conclude, from the evidence presented, that the Russians were indeed subhuman animals who would kill each other for bread (as the Nazi's publicly proclaimed) or being driven to such behaviour by the inhuman-ness of their treatment? There are two sides to every story, it doesn't make them of either equal credence or worth mentioning.

Who is drawing moral equivalence? I've not seen anyone yet say Mandela or the MK were as bad as the state. Still, even if you personally think such tactics are in this case justified, you must be able to see how people would have trouble with the killing of innocents being justified by the killing of other innocents? You don't have to think it worse to think that it might be bad.

To get away from supermarkets after Will's post, I know Mandela didn't dispute that he knew about/was involved in the planning of things like the strategic targeting of power stations, where he knew innocent people may die. I found it really interesting to read how he felt it was justified, how it was the only way, but he certainly wasn't sure. There's a hesitancy in what he writes. Even if you think it was justified, you have to acknowledge it's a grey area, and people are entitled to think otherwise, surely?!

I compared it to Dresden and the Belgrano earlier, and I think Dresden in particular is a good comparison. As a general rule, it's the liberal left that most reveres Mandela, and the liberal left whence criticisms of Dresden come. I'm not saying that position can't be reconciled, but I think both exist in a grey area morally and am surprised when people are confident enough to have entrenched positions on them!

[Lord Kangana]

Dresden is a terrible comparison though. We had no need whatsoever to conduct the raid on Dresden. In all probability, it was to demonstrate our aerial might to the Russians (who were not far from the city already). Of course its a grey area, but you cannot possibly compare the powerful and the powerless.

Life is unequal and unfair, it drives me f*cking nuts when the same rules are applied across the board. Context is everything, and when you are desperate and repressed (lets be clear, it isn't the same as being a bit miffed with life, Apartheid worked in exactly the same way The Nuremberg Laws did, QED; just like all the Nazi comparisons) you will take options that only the desperate and repressed can. Again, lets be really clear, people were killed by the state (just like they are being in Zimbabwe now) for publicly expressing political views that were not those held by the controlling dictatorship (which, by any parameters, they were).

[Prufrock]

You keep saying this, but no-one is applying the same rules across the board. What I'm saying is, quite specifically, the morality of blowing up a supermarket, or a power station or whatever, can be appraised without having to say it's as bad as the Nazis, or worse than the South African state.

Simply, Mandela, the MK, the ANC, they had a cause the legitimacy of which I haven't seen anybody dispute. They were oppressed, discriminated against and killed. Nevertheless, once you start deciding that your cause is worth killing innocent people, even if you do your best to minimise that, you start getting on dodgy ground. I think that's all anyone has said on here. That they feel unease at what we'd call terrorism if we didn't agree with the cause. Mandela as I've said sets out a pretty good case that he felt it was the only way, that it was desperation. Others might agree, but I don't think it's obvious they have to.

[Lord Kangana]

You just compared it to the state killing of thousands of people in Dresden, didn't you?

[Prufrock]

Not in the sense of saying one is as bad, worse better than the other. Just that both involve weighing up taking life for what you believe is a just cause, and that you'll rarely find an example where there is an obviously right answer.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Never have I been so glad to be out of the country. I made the mistake of turning on the tv in my hotel room and tuning in to BBC Jewish/Israeli news, sorry BBC News 24, only to find that there are apparently no news worthy items other than the death of an elderly statesman.

I check BBC sports page for the Ashes update to find the leading article is "Nelson Mandela - his influence on sport".

Feck me sideways.

This again.
I'm utterly aghast, especially on this thread and the way it's going, that nobody else seems to think this post is Pricksville...

[Montreal Wanderer]

Never have I been so glad to be out of the country. I made the mistake of turning on the tv in my hotel room and tuning in to BBC Jewish/Israeli news, sorry BBC News 24, only to find that there are apparently no news worthy items other than the death of an elderly statesman.

I check BBC sports page for the Ashes update to find the leading article is "Nelson Mandela - his influence on sport".

Feck me sideways.

This again.
I'm utterly aghast, especially on this thread and the way it's going, that nobody else seems to think this post is Pricksville...

You didn't notice a note of irony in some of the responses?

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Sorry, I meant nobody else apart from the original responders, LK and yourself

[William the White]

I'm sorry, but I don't see how you can draw a moral equivalence between the actions of oppressors and oppressed.

There's an horrific film from from The Second World War of Germans throwing rotten potatoes and stale bread into a mass crowd of (starving) Russian POW'S. There is clearly not enough to feed the hundreds, so naturally, they fight violently over the scraps (it was, after all, intended German State policy to starve many of them to death). Are we to conclude, from the evidence presented, that the Russians were indeed subhuman animals who would kill each other for bread (as the Nazi's publicly proclaimed) or being driven to such behaviour by the inhuman-ness of their treatment? There are two sides to every story, it doesn't make them of either equal credence or worth mentioning.

Who is drawing moral equivalence? I've not seen anyone yet say Mandela or the MK were as bad as the state. Still, even if you personally think such tactics are in this case justified, you must be able to see how people would have trouble with the killing of innocents being justified by the killing of other innocents? You don't have to think it worse to think that it might be bad.

To get away from supermarkets after Will's post, I know Mandela didn't dispute that he knew about/was involved in the planning of things like the strategic targeting of power stations, where he knew innocent people may die. I found it really interesting to read how he felt it was justified, how it was the only way, but he certainly wasn't sure. There's a hesitancy in what he writes. Even if you think it was justified, you have to acknowledge it's a grey area, and people are entitled to think otherwise, surely?!

I compared it to Dresden and the Belgrano earlier, and I think Dresden in particular is a good comparison. As a general rule, it's the liberal left that most reveres Mandela, and the liberal left whence criticisms of Dresden come. I'm not saying that position can't be reconciled, but I think both exist in a grey area morally and am surprised when people are confident enough to have entrenched positions on them!

And he was anxious to avoid these deaths. And there were no deaths from MK activity throughout the 1960s. It's a very long stretch to pin responsibility on Mandela for supermarket bombings at a time when he had been imprisoned for over twenty years and, thus, not in any sense in operational command of MK. And when MK itself does not claim responsibility for these.

However, the world is in mourning including people of all races and communities in South Africa. A great man has passed. RIP.