The world has lost a great man and a giant of human rights

rjplenter

rjplenter

True Classic
But his influence will live on.

RIP Nelson "Madiba" Mandela.

"It always seems impossible until it is done."





As a rugby fan, former player and current coach, this is an image forever burned into my memory.

This one day of sport, amongst many other days of politics, was a day of great change.





.
 
Another man of stature

Francois Pienaar, 1995 Springbok captain and one of the best blind-side flankers I've ever seen.
 
Absolutely agree, Rob......!

rjplenter said:
....
RIP Nelson "Madiba" Mandela.

"It always seems impossible until it is done."

As a rugby fan, former player and current coach, this is an image forever burned into my memory.......
Click to expand...

......one of the world's finest men!! :nod:

Rob, are you coaching Rugby in the US???
That must be a challenge for a tru-blue Ozzie! :eyepop:

cheers, Ian - NZ
 
Invictus...

Eastwood's film about the Mandela and Pienarr is worth a watch. Typically Hollywood but pretty good classic storytelling and it was far less sentimental and far more enlightening than I would have thought. We watched it about 3 months ago and both my wife and I-neither of us sports fans-found it very worthwhile.
 
Maybe it's just me...

...but I'm sad that the moderators felt the need to move this thread to NFC when a thread about a dead actor is left in the discussion section..... :confuse2:
 
perspective is a funny thing

To many people, Osama Bin Laden was/is and always be a heroic figure in the great fight against "infidels", wherever they may be. To others he is/was and always will be known as nothing more than a cowardly terrorist who used his money to finance weak mind people to do his zealous bidding.

Reagan was a great/terrible President, depending on perspective.
Obama is an okay/terrible President, depending on pespective.
Clinton, Bush.... you get the point.

Capitalism or Socialism is Great/Terrible, depending on perspective.

It's funny how we label someone as heroic or subversive based on our own unique viewpoints. I am just curious how many people here really know the whole story of Mandela good and bad. Learn for yourself outside both "neocon" and "progressive" talking points, spin and outright mischaracterizations. You may be surprised.

For all the talk, the real questions remaining are: a)how was the overall economy and welfare of the average South African 20 years ago, and b) how is it now?
 
Last edited:
Good question

Good question indeed. For me, the best way to learn the answer to this kind of question is in
Code:
talking to as many South Africans as possible, instead of reading about them through the biased filter of another with an agenda.
 
There are a lot ...

of South Africans to talk to. Maybe 52-53 million at this point. That would take a lot of talking. The other obstacle is , of course, simply a logical one, what is meant by 'overall welfare' ? The economic conditions for the roughly 80% of the population that are black or colored is not dramatically better. For the 9.5% that are white the situation is better (see chart) from a purely economic or at least personal income point of view.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...ica-changed-and-didnt-over-mandelas-lifetime/

Hard to say what 'the average South African's' condition is. Certainly no worse than it was and certainly much better than it would have been had the sanctions against the country not been lifted and the flow of foreign investment turned on again. Looking at the black population it isn't very impressive, the increase in personal income I mean. Whether that constitutes a reasonable proxy for 'overall welfare' I don't know , but I rather doubt it.
 
True Enough

But I would ask you specifically, of those millions, how many South Africans have you personally spoken to about these kinds of topics?

My point is that I think many people who have any opinion about South Africa and Mandela, don't really know anything beyond what they have seen or heard via a very liberally biased media. Ask the average 18 year old American - who can vote - to explain their understanding of African National Congress. Then ask the average 18 year old South African the same question. I could tell you the answers I have gotten to these questions, but then you would be hearing them through my own bias filter. Better to ask for yourself, if you actually want to know.

I guess what I find ironic is that people use words like "noble" and "humanitarian" to describe anyone that uses terroristic methodology as tools for change.

Again, I guess it all just depends on perspective. The Twin Tower bombers and even the Tsarnaev brothers have more than a few well-educated and wealthy supporters lauding their bravery and commitment in standing-up to the evil oppressors (that is us by the way) and use them as examples to recruit more like them.

How's that for perspective?
 
Respectfully

I can totally see why this was moved to NFC. In fact, I am a bit surprised it was not deleted. This IS a global forum and not everyone shares the same view on political personalities, perspectives and platforms.
 
Well ,it is a perspective...

that's for sure. My nearest neighbor is a South African doctor doing a year of residency here. His opinions on the state of his country are the same as my opinions on my own-highly mixed and largely personal.
And, it is true that Mandela and any revolutionary who does not openly denounce and refuse to engage in violence to achieve their means is open to being named as a terrorist. But that is facile polemic-Washington could have been labeled thus had he not won the war.
Words like noble and humanitarian are just that-words; just as terrorist is. Personally I consider Obama a terrorist due to his grey war against anyone that a drone can be launched against and has been labeled. I doubt that even in the conservative quarters of America where his reputation is as low as it can get that I would find many allies in my opinion.
All that being said apartheid was ended in SA and it is Mandela who received by acclimation the lion's share of the credit for ending it. Perhaps other scenarios, other possible worlds could have brought an end to it using other means, but that didn't happen. He receives the credit for doing what otherwise might not have been done and the only possible grounds for truly criticizing him in that very narrow regard would be to say that apartheid was fine and didn't need changing. Everything else that is said about him is mostly irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
azxhead said:
I can totally see why this was moved to NFC. In fact, I am a bit surprised it was not deleted. This IS a global forum and not everyone shares the same view on political personalities, perspectives and platforms.
Click to expand...

Correct, and ironic as well. The high ground would have been to NOT turn this tribute into a political statement. Take it elsewhere.
 
I see

I think I understand now. Saying that a politcal entity was a great humanitarian is somehow NOT a political statement, but suggesting that this view may not be shared by everyone else IS a political statement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top