[Hencredible Casanova]

(12-08-2013 03:18 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

Thanks for that. Smart stuff.

I really need to go away and read up on this. It seems really interesting.

Props for the honesty and interest. It's unbelievable that some people would choose to spend their time debating about a worldwide historical figure with little more than terse wikipedia entries. But that's what our college education system in the US seems to produce en masse these days.

[cardguy]

(12-08-2013 03:11 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 02:27 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  

I walked by the t.v. this morning and an ABC anchorman said Mandela was Mount Rushmore rolled into one. Its amazing just how politically correct our society has become, and useless the media is. I wish they'd hurry and bury him so something else will be all over the news.

Millions of people the world over, in many different countries and societies, consider Nelson Mandela one of the greatest moral examples in human history. This belief extends beyond those expressed in media reports in your own country. As I've mentioned before, Mandela is widely revered as an international icon of humanity. The event of his passing is being covered incessantly in the media of countries the world over, and for good reason. You'd be hard pressed to find a place on the planet where this story isn't being documented.

Yeah - Nelson Mandela is a cool dude. But it is funny when you consider the worldwide response to his death.

Look at Mother Teresa - a global icon. A living saint.

Yet - Christopher Hitchens once wrote a book about how evil and terrible she was.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Missionary-Pos...a+hitchens

Something tells me the Hitchens brothers found it hard to keep quiet during lessons at school!

[Hencredible Casanova]

(12-08-2013 03:32 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 03:11 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 02:27 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  

I walked by the t.v. this morning and an ABC anchorman said Mandela was Mount Rushmore rolled into one. Its amazing just how politically correct our society has become, and useless the media is. I wish they'd hurry and bury him so something else will be all over the news.

Millions of people the world over, in many different countries and societies, consider Nelson Mandela one of the greatest moral examples in human history. This belief extends beyond those expressed in media reports in your own country. As I've mentioned before, Mandela is widely revered as an international icon of humanity. The event of his passing is being covered incessantly in the media of countries the world over, and for good reason. You'd be hard pressed to find a place on the planet where this story isn't being documented.

Yeah - Nelson Mandela is a cool dude. But it is funny when you consider the worldwide response to his death.

Look at Mother Teresa - a global icon. A living saint.

Yet - Christopher Hitchens once wrote a book about how evil and terrible she was.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Missionary-Pos...a+hitchens

Something tells me the Hitchens brothers found it hard to keep quiet during lessons at school!

Christopher Hitchens had a notably different take of Mandela than his brother.

Quote:

Perhaps the most stirring single event of South African history was the aesthetically perfect moment in February 1985 when his jailers came to Nelson Mandela and told him he was free to leave. And he loftily declined! He would quit the prison when he was ready, and when the whole country had been released, and not a moment before. At that instant, the morons who had confined him became slowly aware that he was already the president of the republic and had in fact been in moral command of the office for some considerable time. Nor was it just a matter of his charisma. A well-rooted and experienced non-racial party, the African National Congress, had for years been saying to the apartheid authorities, with complete confidence: When you are finished running this country into the ground, we are absolutely prepared to replace you. In utero, and well into its third trimester, the new South Africa already existed. -- Christopher HItchens

[cardguy]

I read somewhere that Nelson Mandela was offered freedom if he renounced violence. And chose to stay in prison rather than renounce violence.

I am sure this is some dumb shit which has been spun to make Mandela look bad. But I am still curious.

[Hencredible Casanova]

(12-08-2013 03:43 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

I read somewhere that Nelson Mandela was offered freedom if he renounced violence. And chose to stay in prison rather than renounce violence.

I am sure this is some dumb shit which has been spun to make Mandela look bad. But I am still curious.

That's true. Nelson and the (non-racial) ANC first embraced nonviolence but eventually the Apartheid government became even more and more repressive and he accepted the principle of armed struggle in order to get the government to negotiate. He felt there were no other options to bring about change and insisted initially to sabotage government property without resulting in any casualties. Mandela said, “the attacks of the wild beast cannot be averted with only bare hands." He also feared that with no armed resistance to the Apartheid government's brutal repression, the ANC would lose its credibility with the suffering public which would allow for more radical rival groups to prosper.

[cardguy]

Something else I am curious about.

Nelson Mandela was released from prison because the Berlin Wall fell a few weeks earlier.

It was the end of the Cold War that freed Nelson Mandela. Since the 'red scare' could no longer be used to justify locking him up.

That is how it seems to me.

Probably wrong though. But I am interested in the link between the fall of Communism and the release of Nelson Mandela.

[Samseau]

Mandala, the icon of peace:





It seems the me the reason why Mandala did not exterminate the whites was because he found them more useful alive than dead, and preached his message of peace so he could keep international favor on his side.

Meanwhile, he let his thugs do whatever they wanted. Obviously he had to, otherwise he wouldn't have been able to keep the favor of his own party members.

[kosko]

(12-08-2013 04:07 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Mandala, the icon of peace:





It seems the me the reason why Mandala did not exterminate the whites was because he found them more useful alive than dead, and preached his message of peace so he could keep international favor on his side.

Meanwhile, he let his thugs do whatever they wanted. Obviously he had to, otherwise he wouldn't have been able to keep the favor of his own party members.

The alternative was Millions be killed in a conflict. People don't get how close this was all into turning into a war. The UK was wiling to arn't the SA whites and even at the warped ratio a million could of easily of been killed on each side.

Another harsh critic. So ask you you what you would of done differently then Mandela?

You state that the SA whites in some way a much needed and privileged class that ensures stability when they never attempted any means of nation building during their rule. SA stick resident just being bled dry of its riches during the Apartheid era. In the 20 years post SA has made strides toward BRIC status and has had one the better performing economies in the world. The Boers didn't do this, it was a mix of hard infrastructure laid by the British, and Liberian policies implemented post Apartheid.

[cardguy]

I have sympathy for the whites in South Africa.

It is fine signing petitions and campaigning for democracy. But when the liberals have walked away it is the people who live there that have to deal with this shit.

It is a difficult situation because racism is clearly a bad thing. It is almost a case of which is the lesser of the two evils? It seems to me that South Africa is alot worse today than it was under apartheid. Even for most blacks.

Personally - I think the only rights you get are the rights you win at the barrel of a gun. The world is full of bad shit, and people colonising and dominating other people. Look at Iraq or Afghanistan. Did we survey them as to whether or not they wanted their governments overthrown by the West? Nope - we just went in and killed a bunch of people.

I personally don't support apartheid. But I equally don't support people imposing their liberal values on other countries. When they don't apply the same values to themselves in their dealings with foreign affairs.

I mean - how would America like it if the Native Americans were suddenly handed power thanks to a global campaign about restoring justice to the original people of their lands? I can be as smug as I want in campaigning for that since I (as a Brit) would never have to live with the consequences.

And on top of that. Talk is cheap. Living with the day to day reality of rocketing rapes and murder is real shit. And I think people should have sympathy for those who have to deal with that reality. Instead of walking away, holding a few concerts and thinking they have done good in the world. When all they did was sign a few petitions.

I dunno' - I guess (as an earlier poster said) there are no good guys when it comes to history.

Don't get me wrong. I support Nelson Mandela. And I do hate racism. But at the same time - I dislike the smugness of the West when they look down on those people who have to pay the price in blood for the things that others have imposed. From the comfort of their homes thousands of miles away.

You only have to look at the rest of the African continent to see what a good job the natives have done running their own affairs.

[cardguy]

Hey I hate racisim.

I think whites and blacks should be treat the same!

Who's with me?

Yeah - everyone!

Hey I hate money.

I think rich and poor should be treat the same!

Who's with me?

What - nobody???

[Samseau]

(12-08-2013 04:17 PM)kosko Wrote:  

The alternative was Millions be killed in a conflict. People don't get how close this was all into turning into a war. The UK was wiling to arn't the SA whites and even at the warped ratio a million could of easily of been killed on each side.

Another harsh critic. So ask you you what you would of done differently then Mandela?

I would have behaved the same way as Mandela. There was a rising wave of anti-white sentiment, and as a Black man I would have rode that wave to it's logical conclusion if it benefited me.

Quote:

You state that the SA whites in some way a much needed and privileged class that ensures stability when they never attempted any means of nation building during their rule. SA stick resident just being bled dry of its riches during the Apartheid era. In the 20 years post SA has made strides toward BRIC status and has had one the better performing economies in the world. The Boers didn't do this, it was a mix of hard infrastructure laid by the British, and Liberian policies implemented post Apartheid.

How do you know that nation building was even possible in South Africa? Perhaps the reason Aparthield was enacted was because the white leaders believed there was nothing they could do for the blacks, and simply wanted to contain them because they knew if they became too powerful it would be a threat to their white communities.

Also, read the previous post on the other page about South Africa's supposed economic miracle as reported by Goldman, virtually all of the money has been made in white hands.

[cardguy]

I would have acted like Mandela as well.

The reason most dictators are evil is because you have to be evil in order to take over a country and become its dictator.

But Mandela was born into his position as a tribal chief who happened to later became politically radicalised.

He never had to do be evil (ala Stalin, Lenin, Hilter, Castro, Mao, Hussain, Ceaușescu) in order to achieve total power. It pretty much fell into his lap.

The truth is that 99% of people would have acted like Mandela. But sadly - most of those 99% rarely get the chance to prove it. Since history is mostly a record of the tyrannical 1% who are hell bent on power.

[Hencredible Casanova]

(12-08-2013 04:25 PM)cardguy Wrote:  

I dislike the smugness of the West when they look down on those people who have to pay the price in blood for the things that others have imposed. From the comfort of their homes thousands of miles away.

But that's exactly what you're doing - being an "armchair nation builder" from thousands of miles away. By your own admission, you haven't even read any books on Mandela or South Africa to hold a reasonably informed opinion, and you certainly haven't been there nor have you engaged in any dialogue with black South Africans to gauge whether they are better off after Apartheid, yet you have the gall to make sweeping statements about people you know little to nothing about.

As for Mandela, he did many things that were anomalous for an African leader. For one, he stepped down from power after one term. Look at his counterpart in Zimbabwe - Robert Mugabe - who happened to go to the same high school as Mandela; he's the longest serving leader in Africa and an iconic dictator by many accounts. That's one reason why many in the American media refer to Mandela as "South Africa's George Washington."

Mandela also didn't imprison or murder his own oppressors, which many leaders in many other places have done immediately upon seizing power for the first time from an oppressive regime.

No person who has spent time around the man says he harbors an iota of vindictiveness or bitterness about what his tormentors did to him. On that very basis, he is truly unique.

The fact that his death is honored across the world, from countries as different as the US and Cuba, Russia and the UK, and elsewhere, is a testament to his great character.

Considering that capital flight that ensued upon the end of Apartheid and the seething racial tension, Mandela had no easy choices to make as a leader, but he made the best ones available to him. The alternative would have been a race war, or going in the path of Mugabe by kicking out whites and seizing their property, or Idi Amin in kicking out Indians and doing the same, but what did those policies do for those places?

Unlike South Africa in 2010, Zimbabwe and Uganda aren't even remotely ready to host a World Cup; not in our lifetimes.

Nelson Mandela is simply a great man. You would be hard pressed to find another individual that receives wide praise from people around the world on all sides of the political and ideological spectrum.

Quote:

Nelson Mandela: a noble reminder that those declared "criminals" by an unjust society are often the most just. - Glenn Greenwald

[cardguy]

Hey its all good shit. I know I should keep my mouth when discussing issues like this. But I find I learn alot when I get my ass kicked a little bit.

I really appreciate your input!

[Hencredible Casanova]

Sir Richard Branson - who I personally look up to for his boss lifestyle - was a close friend of Mandela. He said no other book has changed his life as that of Mandela's Way, which was written by Richard Stengel (managing editor of Time). Stengel also was the "ghostwriter" of Mandela's autobiography in the 90s.

This is an interview Branson did with Fortune after Mandela's death.

Quote:

FORTUNE -- Sir Richard Branson's head today is filled with images of Nelson Mandela dancing. The world leader was always spontaneously swirling with people wherever he went. He was also known to break out in song, but according to Branson his singing wasn't the best.
The billionaire industrialist is among countless mourners around the world today that can't think about much else other than Mandela. The South African political prisoner-turned-president died Thursday at the age of 95.
In an interview with Fortune, the founder of Virgin Group recounted Mandela's lighthearted nature in spite of living through immeasurable tragedy. Branson also shared his thoughts on how Mandela was able to bolster the South African economy through foreign investment. Edited excerpts:
Tell me what you remember about Mandela.
He was the same age as my father, both born in 1918, and they were good friends and became good friends through The Elders [An independent organization working toward peace and global rights that Branson and Mandela established]. Spending time together they would often have a big laugh together, and he had a wonderful sense of humor.
He was always willing to do his best to join in the dancing and start at the dancing. His singing wasn't the best, but he would give it a go.
What was it about Mandela that made him a good businessman, and how did he help South Africa's economy?
He went from being something close to a communist to realizing that that wasn't the answer. What he believed in was benevolent capitalism and believed that business leaders must be a force for good and thought that the country needed capitalism and needed people setting up businesses everywhere.
I received a call one day, and he was on the phone telling me to come to take the next plane down to Africa because his principal health club chain needed rescuing and thousands of jobs would be lost. That is the kind of thing he would do as president. He would just pick up the phone and get foreign people to invest in his economy in South Africa. Through trying to make sure that people like myself and others feeling comfortable dealing with South Africa ... that stabilized it.
You wrote on your website that with Mandela there was "no such thing as a free lunch." What did you mean by that?
He was a great believer that wealthy people are fortunate people and [should do their part], and I would agree with him on that. Wealthy people loved to meet him, and he made sure that he turned them upside down and stripped them of any money in their pockets and then figure out where their credit card was. He had so many causes with so much need in Africa. Unlike some other African leaders, people were willing to give generously to him.
Now that Mandela is gone what does South Africa need to continue to grow and improve?
[Mandela] would be the first one to say that there is a lot to be done but it [South Africa] is a lot better now than it was before.
People need to invest in Africa. Africa is growing at something like 6% a year. The opportunities are enormous. With investment, Africa can become a great economy, and that will pull people out of the poverty trap. That is the best way of addressing the problems, and I think that the returns can be very good. We have companies in Africa that can be some of our most profitable.

[cardguy]

I have read all of the books about Richard Branson. He is a really interesting guy. And still a bit of an enigma to most people. Even those closest to him are unsure as to what really motivates him. Or what his goals are.

But - his image outside of the UK is better than it is in the UK.

Why?

Virgin Trains.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/hom...62424.html

http://www.theguardian.com/notesandqueri...61,00.html

And they are expensive as well.

[Hencredible Casanova]

(12-08-2013 04:17 PM)kosko Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 04:07 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Mandala, the icon of peace:





It seems the me the reason why Mandala did not exterminate the whites was because he found them more useful alive than dead, and preached his message of peace so he could keep international favor on his side.

Meanwhile, he let his thugs do whatever they wanted. Obviously he had to, otherwise he wouldn't have been able to keep the favor of his own party members.

The alternative was Millions be killed in a conflict. People don't get how close this was all into turning into a war. The UK was wiling to arn't the SA whites and even at the warped ratio a million could of easily of been killed on each side.

Another harsh critic. So ask you you what you would of done differently then Mandela?

You state that the SA whites in some way a much needed and privileged class that ensures stability when they never attempted any means of nation building during their rule. SA stick resident just being bled dry of its riches during the Apartheid era. In the 20 years post SA has made strides toward BRIC status and has had one the better performing economies in the world. The Boers didn't do this, it was a mix of hard infrastructure laid by the British, and Liberian policies implemented post Apartheid.

Also, that lazily designed graph comes from none other than a white nationalist website; go figure...

http://www.saveyourheritage.com/

[Feisbook Control]

(12-08-2013 06:30 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

Also, that lazily designed graph comes from none other than a white nationalist website; go figure...

Which obviously makes the stats wrong. Of course, the following come from white nationalist websites also, and so should obviously be ignored:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_viol...References

Let's also not forget this racist agenda, which must be summarily dismissed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cou...References

I find it interesting just how much blue pill thinking exists outside matters concerning women/game. Replace a lonely old woman with cats stuffing her face with cupcakes and complaining about misogyny, patriarchy, etc. with sub-Saharan Africa and terms such as colonialism, racism, etc. Twenty years they've had and things have only got worse. As I noted earlier, four words: Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan. All experienced colonialism. All had GDPs at about the level of sub-Saharan Africa in the past. How are their homicide and rape statistics? Where are their GDPs now?

Lest you think I'm making this up, I provide you with the following (Taiwan not included because they didn't have that option). I don't know how to provide it as a picture. Anyway, you can go to the link and fiddle around with the inputs.

https://www.google.com/publicdata/explor...&ind=false

[Hencredible Casanova]

(12-08-2013 08:44 PM)Feisbook Control Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 06:30 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

Also, that lazily designed graph comes from none other than a white nationalist website; go figure...

Which obviously makes the stats wrong. Of course, the following come from white nationalist websites also, and so should obviously be ignored:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_viol...References

Let's also not forget this racist agenda, which must be summarily dismissed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cou...References

I find it interesting just how much blue pill thinking exists outside matters concerning women/game. Replace a lonely old woman with cats stuffing her face with cupcakes and complaining about misogyny, patriarchy, etc. with sub-Saharan Africa and terms such as colonialism, racism, etc. Twenty years they've had and things have only got worse. As I noted earlier, four words: Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan. All experienced colonialism. All had GDPs at about the level of sub-Saharan Africa in the past. How are their homicide and rape statistics? Where are their GDPs now?

Wow, the depths of your ignorance is astounding. None of the Asian countries you mentioned experienced anything remotely similar to Apartheid. Colonialism and Apartheid are entirely different phenomenons.

South Africa became an independent country, as in no longer a colony, in 1910. Apartheid existed in South Africa from 1948 to 1994.

You are badly misinformed and have much reading to do. The audacity of a person of your immense ignorance to take to online forums and spew such rhetorical flatulence is condemnable. Of course, since you can't even differentiate between colonialism and apartheid, you will likely never "get it." I doubt you're capable of serious reading in the first place, considering your defense of sources of information that emanate from white nationalist websites.

Personally, I always disliked the retroactive PR job to paint Mandela as some sort of lukewarm Ghandi figure - that simply wasn’t true. He was no saint, but a man of vigorous passion. His former wife Winnie tells us that his love curried the approximate temperature of lava, he loved women to the point of remarrying at 80 years of age, he loved to knock a n*gga out, he loved his homeboys, and he apparently loved to blow sh*t up.

He straddled the line between freedom fighter and terrorist. He was in every sense a tribalist. But 27 years gives a man time to think. As he ascended to power he was not only given the opportunity, but even begged by the masses to take retribution for all that suffering, experienced on the severest personal level.

Implausibly, his wisdom ultimately won out over his fiery nature. He elected to forego the revenge so within his grasp in favor of love and rationality. His legacy is clear and irrefutable in the world's ledger of history.

If such an intense, passionate dude could find it within himself to forego the bullshit tribal politics that stunt our development at every given turn after rotting in a cell for 27 years, then maybe we could do a little better ourselves.

[Feisbook Control]

Lots of ad hominem attacks there, no actual discussing the data I provided.

You think the Japanese colonialism, oppression of local customs and languages, etc. were a barrel of laughs in the countries they occupied? You think there wasn't racism under British rule of Singapore? The difference was that some people moved on instead of wallowing in self-pity.

You are kidding right? I already knew the historical dates and the differences between the terms colonialism and apartheid. You're splitting hairs and missing the painfully obvious, that apartheid was from the same theoretical source as colonialism, just conducted by people without an empire, obviously.

As I said, look at the statistics. They don't lie. I wasn't defending white nationalist websites or their statistics. What I was doing was mocking your knee jerk reaction to anything that might be considered "racist", hence my sarcasm regarding references that come from PC, left-wing websites (you'll find at least one from the Guardian in there).

There's a hamster running pretty fast right now.

[Hencredible Casanova]

(12-08-2013 09:15 PM)Feisbook Control Wrote:  

Lots of ad hominem attacks there, no actual discussing the data I provided.

You think the Japanese colonialism, oppression of local customs and languages, etc. were a barrel of laughs in the countries they occupied? You think there wasn't racism under British rule of Singapore? You are kidding right? I already knew the historical dates and the differences between the terms colonialism and apartheid. You're splitting hairs and missing the painfully obvious, that apartheid was from the same theoretical source as colonialism, just conducted by people without an empire, obviously.

As I said, look at the statistics. They don't lie. I wasn't defending white nationalist websites or their statistics. What I was doing was mocking your knee jerk reaction to anything that might be considered "racist", hence my sarcasm regarding references that come from PC, left-wing websites (you'll find at least one from the Guardian in there).

There's a hamster running pretty fast right now.

Nice try, but your egregious use of the red herring does not obscure the powerful legacy of Nelson Mandela that has been eloquently stated by me and countless others.

What does the unique nature of South African society have to do with the personal force of Mandela's character? What would you do in his place? How have you behaved with respect to challenges in your own personal life? What in your personal background suggests a force of character on par with a man of Mandela's stature? Why would you compare Sub-Saharan countries with first world Asian countries? That's utterly disingenuous and you know it.

You can sit here and play armchair nation builder all you want but it has no efficacy in the real world.

[thegmanifesto]

Damn.

Hen is a smooth operator.

[Aliblahba]

Has any of the S African members posted on this thread?

[Feisbook Control]

(12-08-2013 09:21 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(12-08-2013 09:15 PM)Feisbook Control Wrote:  

Lots of ad hominem attacks there, no actual discussing the data I provided.

You think the Japanese colonialism, oppression of local customs and languages, etc. were a barrel of laughs in the countries they occupied? You think there wasn't racism under British rule of Singapore? You are kidding right? I already knew the historical dates and the differences between the terms colonialism and apartheid. You're splitting hairs and missing the painfully obvious, that apartheid was from the same theoretical source as colonialism, just conducted by people without an empire, obviously.

As I said, look at the statistics. They don't lie. I wasn't defending white nationalist websites or their statistics. What I was doing was mocking your knee jerk reaction to anything that might be considered "racist", hence my sarcasm regarding references that come from PC, left-wing websites (you'll find at least one from the Guardian in there).

There's a hamster running pretty fast right now.

Nice try, but your egregious use of the red herring does not obscure the powerful legacy of Nelson Mandela that has been eloquently stated by me and countless others.

What does the unique nature of South African society have to do with the personal force of Mandela's character?

Already addressed this point regarding the systemic legacy of founding fathers of nations. That the US or Singapore haven't collapsed into complete madness is a testament to the legacy of their founding fathers in establishing systems that would outlive their own personality cult.

Quote:

What would you do in his place?

See my earlier remark about taking a leaf out of Lee Kuan Yew's book.

Quote:

How have you behaved with respect to challenges in your own personal life? What in your personal background suggests a force of character on par with a man of Mandela's stature?

Irrelevant ad hominems. What has anyone done on a par with any historical figure? It doesn't stop people, be they journalists, historians, or anyone else from assessing others. Either there are objective metrics we can apply to a situation or there aren't. Again, you're missing the point regarding character and you're buying into the cult of personality. By definition, a legacy consists of what remains after the person passes. What remains post-Mandela? What remains post-Lee? What remains post-Washington/Jefferson/etc.?

Quote:

Why would you compare Sub-Saharan countries with first world Asian countries? That's utterly disingenuous and you know it.

Once again, you obviously keep deliberately missing my point that such countries did not originate as first world Asian countries, hence the link to a graph with data from the World Bank which shows this. You'd know better than the people at the World Bank though.

Quote:

You can sit here and play armchair nation builder all you want but it has no efficacy in the real world.

I don't have to. I have provided links to actual stats. You've provided a lot of emotional outbursts and ad hominem attacks.

Here is what you, and by extension much of the West, don't seem to get in this. The world is not neatly divided into evil oppressor groups and their victims, all obsessed with race and the legacy of the past and dancing the same game for all of eternity. There is a third group of people and nations in the world who were on the receiving end of all sorts of bad things themselves. Rather than wallow in self pity, they embraced the national equivalent of game. Despite being resource poor, they educated themselves and modernised. They rose from the ashes of colonialism, civil war, etc. and made functioning, developed societies. It didn't all fall in their laps. They look on all of these other people so weighed down by the past (that is not to say that there aren't still very real tensions regarding the past, see Sino-Japanese relations, for instance) and laugh at them. Meanwhile, they just get on with the job. If the 21st century truly is going to be an Asian century, then all of this late-20th century hand wringing really is going to be irrelevant.

[Hencredible Casanova]

^ The ignorance you've vividly displayed is dauntingly tedious to pick apart.

Mandela is no personality cult. Despite being an immensely beloved individual and politician in South Africa (and the world), he elected to serve one term. In fact, if there's anything he's famous for, it's his modesty and humility (astonishing this is lost on you). Foregoing the mansion in Johannesburg reserved for Presidents, he resided in a modest suburban home instead. If you knew anything about leaders that bear a true personality cult, you would know Mandela does not fit that label.

As for colonialism in the Asian countries you cited, none of them parallel South Africa's Apartheid system. That is not even debatable. What facts have you presented making a remotely clear case to the contrary? Singapore was occupied by Japan for three years in WWII and then became a British colony with significant autonomy bestowed upon them, until its independence in 1965.

There simply is no country in Asia where a foreign white population implanted itself for permanent settlement and then subsequently created an abominable racial categorization scheme rooted in racism and economic disenfranchisement against the native population. That is scholarly fact.

South Korea still clamors Japan for apologies for its behavior during WWII.

Post Washington/Jefferson? Well, many US citizens were still not considered citizens and were enslaved. Only rich, property-owning white men could vote, the list goes on and on. The United States was not even remotely as good as its promise on paper. It still took many great men to correct the country's existential problems (Lincoln, FDR, MLK, Kennedy, etc).

Mandela certainly left behind a heralded Constitution and model framework to ensure a multiracial, democratic, and free market South Africa long after he's gone. Just as with the US, there will be bad leaders that follow, but good ones too. South Africa is moving on. It even hosted the World Cup in 2010. Hard to imagine another African country capable of pulling off something like that.

I'm not even sure why you find it necessary to troll a thread about a topic you are badly misinformed about. According to your profile, though you've visited many countries, none are in Sub-Saharan Africa, let alone South Africa. What could you possibly understand about South African society?

Further, you don't have many posts to begin with (newbie) so you I'd advise you to take it easy and build up a rep by contributing value towards topics you actually know about.

I get the feeling you could be a formerly banned member under a new alias.