Nelson Mandela RIP

[MrGongGong]

.....Yes GG....what a joy you are....

Thanks mate

[vinteuil]

Boilk's Middlemarchian final sentence is fair enough...

... for those who may not have a reliable edition of George Eliot to hand -

"But the effect of her being on those around her was incalculably diffusive: for the growing good of the world is partly dependent on unhistoric acts; and that things are not so ill with you and me as they might have been is half owing to the number who lived faithfully a hidden life, and rest in unvisited tombs."

[amateur51]

Well of course they would, after all that is their job
Compared to the Jubilympics its very restrained IMV

You can bet there are BBC journalists looking at the floods at Snape as well
because that's what NEWS is about
things that are happening or have just happened

as you were

Unless it's certain sorts of news, in which case here it gets chucked into the basement pronto

[Padraig]

As they say over here 'A happy release', when an old ill person dies, and I know of a few. But not many that aroused a real affection in me over the long period of his active life. We all need a hero, and he was one of mine.

[ahinton]

Gushing to me implies something about the attitude of the coverage, not just the quantity of it; what the OED calls Extravagant display of feeling or sentiment.

There may have been too much - but what there has been has been quite measured, I thought.

...which is what I said, was it not?...

[ahinton]

As they say over here 'A happy release', when an old ill person dies, and I know of a few. But not many that aroused a real affection in me over the long period of his active life. We all need a hero, and he was one of mine.

And surely also of most of us - so let's just try to draw some kind of veil over the profoundly unwelcome and unwarranted dissent, oui?...

[jean]

...which is what I said, was it not?...

You said you didn't like the 'gushing', which implied that there was some. I didn't think there had been.

That's why I asked for some examples, which I never got.

[Dave2002]

I hope there is no chance, or else it's a bit of that 'wise and fair government' that some of us find fatally dangerous.

Seconded.

There should be room for dissenting voices, or at least voices which question revisions of history made years after the original events.

I have great difficulty in trying to find out details about the ANC and putting this into context. Was Mandela ever what we might call a terrorist? I don't know. I know nothing.

I don't know whether he ever claimed that he was, or was not a terrorist.
I don't know whether, if he did admit that he might have been, he made any statements which expressed regret, though it is clear that as his life progressed he eschewed violence.

There is evidence that NM distanced himself from the militant elements associated with MK (ANC) as he became aware that sabotage could affect the lives of innocent civilians - attacking hospitals etc. What is to me uncertain is whether he ever condoned attacks on "legitimate" targets, which is the sort of language which is used nowadays by many countries, and which often leads to sad spillover incidents in countries such as Afghanistan and Pakistan.

There were acts of violence in the 1960s which the ANC were probably responsible for. This article from CNN examines some of the history relating to NM - http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/06/wo...html?hpt=hp_c2

It seems likely that for some while NM did feel that violence had a role to play in social change, though whether he participated, or was directly connected, or indeed effectual in implementing any of the acts of violence and sabotage, is uncertain. Does that absolve him, compared with others for whom evidence of participation in violence is stronger?

The South African government at the time and subsequently used deadly force against its population, and in particular with the massacre in Soweto in 1976. Whether one considers violent acts against the government and society as justified "defence" or not depends on whether one adopts a pacifist or militarist stance to such matters, and this has long been the case, and is still so today.

Others in the ANC were more actively involved in violence, and there is evidence of that - should they be considered as heroes because of opposition to an unjust regime, or terrorists? We are back to word definitions - "terrorists" or "freedom fighters".

I certainly don't want to side with Nick Griffin, but I don't think we should shy away from asking questions, and trying to find answers, and suppressing views as suggested in msg 16 doesn't seem to me to be the right way to go.

It is clear that later on NM adopted views more closely aligned with non-violent change.

Since South African became more democratic, others have tried to understand what happened before. See http://www.idrc.ca/EN/Resources/Publ...licationID=745 which contains the following quote:

"What has changed is the context. During apartheid, any acts that helped render a township ungovernable — acts that would now be considered criminal — were perceived by the community to be a form of political protest. “Apartheid criminalized any form of politics, but the liberation struggle politicized crime,” says Graeme Simpson, CSVR’s executive director. "

I am happy to believe that NM did a great deal of good for South Africa, and not only that, but also for people of different races, in the expression of his views for equality and tolerance, and deserves to be remembered for that.

Nelson Mandela RIP

[Richard Tarleton]

I hope there is no chance, or else it's a bit of that 'wise and fair government' that some of us find fatally dangerous.

Quite right Beef, an over-reaction on my part.

I remember reading the news of NM's sentence when I was at school - I was 13. The Daily Mail that day carried a striking (and literary) political cartoon of a huge black Gulliver figure (which may have been Mandela, or representative of black South Africans generally), lying on his back, tied down, surrounded by tiny white Lilliputians.

[amateur51]

Quite right Beef, an over-reaction on my part.

I remember reading the news of NM's sentence when I was at school - I was 13. The Daily Mail that day carried a striking (and literary) political cartoon of a huge black Gulliver figure (which may have been Mandela, or representative of black South Africans generally), lying on his back, tied down, surrounded by tiny white Lilliputians.

What a striking image, RT.

[Beef Oven!]

Boilk's Middlemarchian final sentence is fair enough - and with all respect to Tutu, Biko, Donald Woods and all the unsung millions who shared Mandela's cause, and without wishing to gush - so I will alter my agreement with Barbirollians to read "the greatest public figure of my lifetime"; the one who personified the causes and plights of those others with the greatest dignity and respect for what they suffered and strived to achieve.

I've been on the planet since mid 1960 (I'm a bit old and frail now), and unless your lifetime began and ended before 1960, your new statement still won't do. NM wasn't, in my very humble opinion, the greatest public figure, nor the was 'greatest man' during my lifetime (as the Barbirollians chap claims).

Boik is spot on. Need to remember that 'our' or 'my' lifetime is a chronological period that anyone alive today will share (that's to say nothing of those that can say nothing because they were here then, but aren't now, if you get my drift). So it's important that we speak for ourselves.

[Dave2002]

Quite right Beef, an over-reaction on my part.

I remember reading the news of NM's sentence when I was at school - I was 13. The Daily Mail that day carried a striking (and literary) political cartoon of a huge black Gulliver figure (which may have been Mandela, or representative of black South Africans generally), lying on his back, tied down, surrounded by tiny white Lilliputians.

You can find out more about the trial here - http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/project...ndelahome.html It is interesting to note that the judge declared that he would not sentence any of the men to death beforehand.

In my earlier post I also omitted to mention the Sharpeville shootings - which Mandela refers to in his trial speech. They were in 1960. Over 60 people were shot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharpeville_massacre

Attitudes have changed. Thatcher and others in the UK for a long time held that NM was a terrorist - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...n-1327902.html and in the US, where attitudes later changed, NM was still on a list of terrorists until 2008.

[Flosshilde]

you can bet BBC journalists and producers will have been all over SA this year....readying programmes....

Well, of course they would. Newspapers & other media have obituaries ready for anybody of note, regularly updated. There's nothing reprehensible about that.

[eighthobstruction]

Well, of course they would. Newspapers & other media have obituaries ready for anybody of note, regularly updated. There's nothing reprehensible about that.

Well of course ....a mundane statement of fact ....not a reason for disagreement or escalation....

[Ferretfancy]

The BBC used to have an obituary unit preparing for the deaths of the great and good, usually with a Laurence Olivier figure reading the commentary. Naturally these had to be updated from time to time, and so the editing process led to a more and more scrappy result.

As soon as a well known figure died, all the news and current affairs chiefs hastily cobbled a new obit from whatever came to hand. I don't remember a formal obit ever to be used, except as a quarry for archive footage