Nelson Mandela

[Dick7Access]

This article claims that they can prove that Menadela was a communist all along. I don’t care one way or the other. However, does anybody know if the people of South Africa are better off, the same, or worse than before apartheid?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-Communist-Party-after-decades-of-denial.html

 

[Brianwarnock]

Never been but would guess that for some it is better, some the same, some worse, but nothing alters the fact that apartheid was wrong.

Brian

 

[The_Doc_Man]

We decided a long time ago that "separate but equal" meant "unequal." In South Africa, apartheid didn't even mean "separate but equal." It just meant "separate."

Are they better off? Yes, even if they are worse off at the same time, because they now have closer to equal opportunities to succeed or fail on their own. A person who fails miserably on his own has at least a chance to learn from the mistake. A person who has help failing miserably might not learn as much.

Yeah, I know it is a slightly skewed viewpoint - but it is also true.

 

[Dick7Access]

We decided a long time ago that "separate but equal" meant "unequal." In South Africa, apartheid didn't even mean "separate but equal." It just meant "separate."

Are they better off? Yes, even if they are worse off at the same time, because they now have closer to equal opportunities to succeed or fail on their own. A person who fails miserably on his own has at least a chance to learn from the mistake. A person who has help failing miserably might not learn as much.

Yeah, I know it is a slightly skewed viewpoint - but it is also true.

I don't think is is skewed I think its right on

 

[groengoen]

We decided a long time ago that "separate but equal" meant "unequal." In South Africa, apartheid didn't even mean "separate but equal." It just meant "separate."

It might have just meant "separate" semantically, but in reality it meant "separate and absolutely unequal".

Is the USA better off after it came out of British colonisation?

 

[Dick7Access]

It might have just meant "separate" semantically, but in reality it meant "separate and absolutely unequal".

Is the USA better off after it came out of British colonisation?

Of course they were better of. I am not for any country being under anybody else rule, but my question are they better of financially, emotionally, economically, etc, not is not to say even if they are not that I think they should be under someone else. When I asked the question I would have hoped that they were a success story like the US. I ask hoping I would get a response from someone that actually lived there as apposed to the media which I don't trust.

 

[Vassago]

We were definitely better off. Unfortunately, as a country, we have our own problems. Two parties that won't work together for the good of everyone. Neither want a middle of the road approach, which 90% of America falls in. I've met very few people who are so far right or so far left they agree with EVERYTHING their affiliated party wants.

 

[Brianwarnock]

Of course they were better of.

You can't know that.

I am not for any country being under anybody else rule,

I agree so how about handing the land back to the original nations

Brian

 

[Fifty2One]

Mr.Mandela denied being an active member of the communict party, it did not mean he did not belong to the party. Lats paragraph in that article quotes from Mr.Mandela's biography

Mr Mandela, now 94, retired from public life in 2004 and is now in poor health. He did, though, allude to a symbiotic relationship with the Communists in his bestselling biography, The Long Walk to Freedom. "There will always be those who say that the Communists were using us," he wrote. "But who is to say that we were not using them?"

 

[Fifty2One]

I would beg to differ about the US being a success story, the view is vastly different for different races and demographic groups in your country, same as in mine.

Of course they were better of. I am not for any country being under anybody else rule, but my question are they better of financially, emotionally, economically, etc, not is not to say even if they are not that I think they should be under someone else. When I asked the question I would have hoped that they were a success story like the US. I ask hoping I would get a response from someone that actually lived there as apposed to the media which I don't trust.

 

[Dick7Access]

I would beg to differ about the US being a success story, the view is vastly different for different races and demographic groups in your country, same as in mine.

You have a valid point. Not for everybody, I'll agree with you there. Success story as far as liberty, not under tyranny, and success as the most prosperous country in the world, albeit we are loosing that fast. There is only two other countries that I would consider, and that's Canada and Australia.