←back to thread

358 points impish9208 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.969s | source
Show context
Simulacra ◴[] No.41879526[source]
I think it was the fishing trip with Mandela and then-Prime Minister F.W. de Klerk in 1990 that ended apartheid. Specifically when one of de Klerk's people got a hook in his hand, and a Mandela person cleaned and bandaged it. After that trip Apartheid was finally broken.
replies(4): >>41879733 #>>41879819 #>>41879877 #>>41884619 #
bdndndndbve ◴[] No.41879877[source]
What actually ended apartheid was international pressure and the white government's fear of a civil war. Economically isolated and vastly outnumbered, the apartheid government would have been completely removed from the country and had their property seized.

My understanding is Mandela was a respected leader who was willing to play ball and facilitate a peaceful transition where the white leadership got to keep all their property. That's why there's still massive economic inequality in SA today. Not to say Mandela wasn't admirable or that he didn't suffer, but it was a conscious choice to avoid outright military conflict at the cost of preserving an implicit racial hierarchy.

replies(4): >>41880185 #>>41880625 #>>41882929 #>>41883344 #
TheBruceHimself ◴[] No.41880625[source]
While it certainly involved a lot of people doing the right thing, that peaceful transition was absolutely incredible and I really do think that's why non-South Africans look on Mandela so fondly. If you'd told me everything about the Apartheid right up until its collapse and then said "Ok, the ANC basically win, gain power, what do you think happens?", I'd struggle to think of any scenario where there wasn't incredible bloodshed or upheaval to the point of ruining lives beyond measure. There was so much bad blood. You'd assume that at least the people who were in charge, the people who ran the show, surely would've saw a grim end. Not even property seizures? . Somehow, Mandela led an effort that just rose above that. He probably prevented a lot of pain just by not giving into such things.

To me, the peaceful transition is the achievement. It is the amazing part of it.

replies(4): >>41881940 #>>41883174 #>>41883374 #>>41885466 #
bdndndndbve ◴[] No.41881940[source]
Does poverty not also ruin lives? There's room for people to disagree about the specifics but the lack of widespread wealth redistribution has certainly killed a lot of people as well, it's just easier to ignore than a war.
replies(1): >>41882803 #
jcbrand ◴[] No.41882803[source]
South Africa does have wealth distribution policies in the form of requiring all companies that do business with the state or which need licences (like mines or telecoms) to have a minimum number of black ownership and black employees.

South Africa also has affirmative action.

In fact, there are more race based laws in South Africa currently than during Apartheid.

https://freemarketfoundation.com/race-law-in-south-africa-30...

Now maybe you're talking about violent wealth redistribution. That generally doesn't work. It results in collapse and everyone gets poorer.

Zimbabwe bring the prime most recent example.

replies(1): >>41883405 #
1. skippyboxedhero ◴[] No.41883405[source]
The current President also benefitted heavily from BEE as he was a close personal friend of Mandela. Made hundreds of millions.

If you say that you are going to take large amounts of other people's assets, there is no way to run that process and not have huge amounts of corruption.

The problem has been: very high crime, heavily mismanaged infrastructure (Eskom is collapsing due to corruption, ANC politicians were taking tons of money from contracts), no investment in education, and so a population with no skills. I am not sure what wealth redistribution fixes...it has been tried repeatedly. It is like people thinking that a $1m loan from your father turns you into a different person...no, most people will end up wasting that money too.