"Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God." -- Benjamin Frankin
"And what
country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from
time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let
them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon
and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The
tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of
patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." -- Thomas Jefferson
"I don't know how many we shot. It all started when hordes of natives surrounded the police station. My
car was struck with a stone. If they do these things they must learn
their lesson the hard way." -- Colonel J. Pienaar,local area police commander, Sharpeville
We include the quotes above to illustrate a point. Please bare with us.
Nelson Mandela, Madiba,
was buried today.
Nelson Mandela's death can't be considered a surprise. He was a 95 year old man who had been in ill health for much of the last three years. He had also more than 27 years in prison, much of it in exceedingly difficult conditions, before being released at the age of 72. But his loss was still felt by much of the world who truly did value freedom and justice and his fight to achieve these goals in South Africa. Mandela was eulogized by world leaders and human rights activists and his passing cause for almost universal mourning.
Almost universal. A small, but relatively vocal, minority have used the passing of Mandela to attack the man himself and in particular the armed struggle that the ANC began in 1960. Most of the attacks is couched in the fact that Mandela spent 27 years in prison after being convicted of terrorism and the ANC had been outlawed as terrorist organization. And to be sure the ANC did engage in bombings of government institutions and other business associated with the apartheid regime as well as targeting the infrastructure of the country. But then it might also be useful to provide some context that could
provide a rationale for these actions.
Prior to March 21, 1960, the African National Congress had been, for close to 60 years, a civil rights organization that used non-violent means to fight for the rights of the majority African population of South Africa. They used methods similar to that of other civil rights organizations; strikes, sit-ins, and, perhaps unique to South Africa, the burning of pass books.
In South Africa under the apartheid regime, Africans living in South Africa were required to be in possession of a passbook regimenting their movement and where they could live. Failure to be in possession of one's pass book would result in arrest. Being in an area deemed off-limits would result in arrest. Any white South African could demand to see the pass book of an African citizen. No white South African was required to be in possession of a pass book.
If you have ever watched to movie, "Gandhi" you might be familiar with this particular law, as well as the means of fighting against it.
The goal of groups such as the ANC and the splinter group Pan-Africanist Party was to refuse to carry the pass book. They would then go to jails throughout the country and demand to be arrested for not following a just law. Eventually, the prisons would be packed forcing the government to address the concerns of the ANC and other similar groups. And it could be achieved in a peaceful manner. The desire was to shame the government, not overthrow it.
Such a campaign began in March of 1960 when the Pan-Africanist Party organized a pass book protest in the South African township of Sharpeville:
There is some debate as to how many arrived at the Sharpeville jail to protest; numbers range from 5,000 to 20,000. What isn't debated is
what happened next to protesters who had been engaged in a peaceful action:
Prior to Sharpeville the South African apartheid regime had been engaged in systematic state-sponsored violence to quell the legitimate concerns of the majority African population as well as the Indian and "colored" populations. And even as the violence continued to escalate, the ANC believed that they could,
Sharpeville, and the subsequent crackdown on Africa civil rights groups and leaders, altered this view. After Sharpeville, the once non-violent ANC believed the only way to force the South African government to negotiate was through an
armed struggle.
through non-violent means, achieve the goal of a multi-racial democracy.
But even during the armed struggle, it might be instructive to read the manifesto of Umkhonto we Sizwe:
"Our men are armed and trained freedom fighters not terrorists.
We are fighting for democracy—majority rule—the right of the Africans to rule Africa.
We are fighting for a South Africa in which there will be peace and harmony and equal rights for all people.
We are not racialists, as the white oppressors are. The African National
Congress has a message of freedom for all who live in our country."
As we noted though, the attacks on Mandela and the ANC were merely couched in condemnation of the armed struggle as terroristic. What seems pretty clear though is that condemnation is merely a pretext for the real rationale for their attack on the man and his legacy.
Yep, Ed Kennedy has been back posting on Free Dominion for a while now.