The US government may have had that idea, local resistance movements often did not, especially in Eastern Europe. I’m not saying it’s right, but I also don’t think it makes you just as bad as the other guy. Atrocities to enforce apartheid =/= atrocities to overthrow it.
-
-
which i do not regard as the behavior of Saintly Wisdom Grandpa
-
No one who seriously pushes this narrative believes that Mandela was always a saint. The whole point is that he renounced violence after advocating for it (and engaging in it!) for many decades. Militant revolutionary becomes pacifist.
-
okay, good. that isn't really what filters through the layers of tarting up, tbqf
-
i am kinda left to wonder why a convert to pacifism would never say word one against a practice like this, but maybe he was busy
-
I don’t know; he didn’t specifically call out terrorism, either, but he stopped doing it. It’s like if Lenin, on the eve of the October revolution, said, “nope, we’re going to do this peacefully. No one hurt the aristocrats or the bourgeoisie.”
-
Even in 1990 The New York Times was running editorials like “Why Won’t Mandela Renounce Violence,” and handwringing about whether he’d follow in the footsteps of Gandhi or Lenin. So when he governed like a peacemaker it was a big deal.https://www.nytimes.com/1990/06/21/opinion/why-won-t-mandela-renounce-violence.html …
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.