Based on my analysis of the material, I agree with Los Angeles Time writer Dixon Robyn that Mandela used violence “primarily” as a political tactic and not a “principle” in his quest to combat apartheid in South African. Dixon’s article Nelson Mandela’s Legacy: As a leader, he was willing to use violence first appeared in the Los Angeles Times on 6 th December 2013. Dixon’s editorial mainly centers on Mandela’s political life as both a radical youth, who mostly embraced violence and a diplomatic leader, who won the Nobel Peace Prize for embracing peace and negotiations, later in his life. I have several reasons why I agree with Dixon that Mandela embraced violence as a political tactic and not principle.
As Dixon notes, “Mandela embraced armed struggle” as a means of ending the brutal and racist apartheid regime, which could not have stopped had Mandela opted to otherwise opt for ANC’s (African National Congress) nonviolence policy. I agree that this was a political tactic Mandela used to fight apartheid considering the failure of the traditional ANC’s Defiance Campaign strategy to bear any fruits against the unfair rules of apartheid. This was indeed the reason Mandela opted to make the famous No Easy Walk to Freedom speech in Johannesburg. In his speech, Mandela was rooting for new plans to address apartheid; force.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Another evidence from the article that Dixon uses to support Mandela’s use of violence as a tactic is the 1956 trial of the leader and 156 other ANC members for treason. A few critics might confuse Mandela’s response to the jury for supporting violence as a principle for yes. On the contrary, I believe he used it as a tactic just as Dixon writes. The main reason is that if Mandela had agreed that violence was their approach, then the jury might have given a life sentence to all of ANC members for plotting to overthrow the government. It is, therefore, correct to argue that violence was just Mandela's strategy for ending apartheid because we see him later denounce it for peaceful negotiations after seeing its inefficiency. Just like he initiated the Umkhonto we Sizwe violence, he launched peace talks with the government in 1985 and continued to advocate for nonviolence even after his election as the executive of South Africa in 1994.
References
Dixon, R. (2013, Dec 6). Nelson Mandela’s legacy: As a leader, he was willing to use violence. Los Angeles Times, https://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-nelson-mandela-legacy-violence-20131206-story.html
