NELSON MANDELA

Ted Cruz Commenters Hate Mandela

Rising party stars like Ted Cruz might be trying to pay tribute to the South African leader, but their conservative elders hated him as a dangerous ideologue—and their base still does.
As we mourn Nelson Mandela and honor his memory, it’s important to remember that—for most of his life—he was a polarizing and divisive figure. As my colleague Peter Beinart notes, American conservatives disdained Mandela. Ronald Reagan placed the African National Congress on America’s official list of terrorist organizations, Dick Cheney (along with 144 other Republicans) opposed a resolution urging Mandela’s release from jail, and a stream of conservative intellectuals offered their condemnation of him and support for the regime he opposed.
In 1985, William F. Buckley Jr. voiced his support for South African President P.W. Botha, writing, “The entire continent of Africa is near a state of decomposition, anyone who maintains that such countries as Ethiopia and Uganda…are better off than they were in colonial days is an ideologue.” In the same column, he declared, “Where Mandela belongs, in his current frame of mind, is precisely where he is: in jail.” As recently as 2003, National Review condemned Mandela for “vicious anti-Americanism” and attacked his wife as a “murderous thug.”
You can find George Will writing in opposition to sanctions and Jerry Falwell leading a “reinvestment” drive to counter the push to divest assets from South Africa. The conservative movement was so invested in opposition to Mandela that decades later it has become a problem for the latest GOP generation, which represents a constituency that still hates Mandela as a dangerous ideologue.
Yes, today’s conservatives might extend praise to Mandela, but many of the people they represent aren’t so willing to show the same courtesy.
To wit, when Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) paid tribute to Mandela on his Facebook page, he was met with a stream of angry condemnations. His statement was straightforward and uncontroversial:
“Nelson Mandela will live in history as an inspiration for defenders of liberty around the globe. He stood firm for decades on the principle that until all South Africans enjoyed equal liberties he would not leave prison himself, declaring in his autobiography, ‘Freedom is indivisible; the chains on any one of my people were the chains on all of them, the chains on all of my people were the chains on me.’ Because of his epic fight against injustice, an entire nation is now free. We mourn his loss and offer our condolences to his family and the people of South Africa.”
The reaction was swift and contemptuous. “Let’s not forget that Mandela called Castro’s Communist revolution ‘a source of inspiration to all freedom-loving people,’” wrote one commenter. “Mandela was a communist trained by the KGB who sings racial hate songs…and now, the South Africa is a worst country for both whites and blacks,” wrote another. One man, who presumably is older than Cruz, chalked up the praise to the senator’s youthful ignorance, “Ted, long before you were born, his reputation was the complete opposite. He was, in fact, a terrorist and a criminal, he persecuted and killed Zulus. All the apartheid BS you hear in today’s media is all lies.”
You hear that? All that nonsense about apartheid was the media deception.
Video screenshot
From President Obama to Hamid Karzai to Aung San Suu Kyi, see how various world leaders are mourning Mandela.
But not every response was so vitriolic. Some supporters were just worried that Cruz was misguided. “Ted, I love ya, but you might want to do some research and delete your post on this one,” said one commenter. Others were disappointed. “Um, yeah, Mandella was a communist and was involved in torture, terror, and murder. Just lost a lot of respect, Senator Cruz. A whole lot,” said one. At least one response was a little whimsical: “I am sure there are some dyed-in-the-wool Marxists that love cute little puppies as well. I’m not gonna celebrate them either.”
By and large, the comments echoed the rhetoric of Buckley and other conservatives who opposed Mandela in the 1970s and ’80s. For Cruz’s followers, Mandela was a “communist,” “socialist, and “murderer” whose life was a net negative for the world.
Yes, today’s conservatives might extend praise to Mandela—though, even now, it’s backhanded and ugly—but many of the people they represent aren’t so willing to show the same courtesy.
But that shouldn’t come as a surprise. Remember, the same Buckley who trashed Mandela in the 1980s defended American segregation in the 1960s and supported politicians who turned a blind eye to racial inequality. It’s only fitting that the members of the movement he built are still more concerned with the opponents of South Africa’s white supremacist regime than they are with its supporters.
366COMMENTS
623 people listening

It is totally irresponsible to overlook the fact that he was a radical communist, socialist and a fighter. It is the truth. Yes I admire his fight against Apathied and his sweet demeanerin his old age. He  never, ever gave up his socialist views. Anyone that could unite a country and be loved so much by everyone has my admiration., as I am sure Ted Cruz's people do too. I admire Ted Cruz and do not appreciate propaganda against him and it furthers the disgust that peoplefeel against this kind of journalism..
@dudeful If he were truly a "radical communist", then why isn't South Africa a radical communist nation today? The ANC has been in power since 1994, and remains by far the most powerful political party in South Africa. Mandela's government had every opportunity to embrace Marxism had it wanted to, but after 19 years of ANC rule South Africa remains a capitalist democracy.
As I wrote below, the ANC were never really ideological in the sense that most Americans understand. They were loosely aligned with the Soviet bloc during the Cold War almost by default, because the United States and Britain tacitly supported the apartheid regime. They sought support from wherever they could find it, and that just happened to be from the Soviet bloc.
This guy is a clown who makes his living being a racist and doing his best to perpetuate hatred.  He's ignorant and shouldn't be allowed to write for anyone.  Ever.
@Justame What did he say, specifically, that was untrue? And you're advocating that writers "shouldn't be allowed to write for anyone"? Censorship of people you disagree with? So much for freedom of speech.
Mandela's hands weren't entirely clean in the 1950s and 1960s prior to his imprisonment.  He founded the the Umkhonto we Sizwe which used bombings/violence to try to advance their cause.  He was definitely not in the same non-violent vein as Ghandi or MLK.  He and many others in the pre-free elections ANC did advocate a Marxist/Communist path for Southern Africa.  To ignore these facts and try to paint certain politicians as being quietly racist for having reservations about his release and legitimizing the ANC is wrong.  They were valid concerns at the time.  That said, Mandela was still an amazing, forgiving politician and statesman after he was realeased from prison in 1990.  He could have taken the low road and been vindictive and seeking retribution when he became president, but he was the opposite and it won over the country and the world.  I have the utmost respect for him in his later years and he laid the groundwork for the modern nation that is South Africa.  While its far from perfect and there are still great inequalities there, it could have been much, much worse (as in Mugabe's Zimbabwe). 
@Jeffredo The ANC's alignment with Marxist ideology was more a product of the Cold War than anything else, a case of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". They were never fiercely ideological in the sense that, for instance, Castro was. Because the Cold War world was bipolar and the white apartheid regime was tacitly supported by the two most powerful capitalist nations in the world, Britain and the United States, it was natural that the ANC would align themselves with Marxist ideology. In those days, you were either on one side or the other, and the ANC had nowhere else to go. When the ANC finally gained power, South Africa remained a capitalist democracy. The ANC made no attempt to convert the nation to Marxism.
And yes, Mandela advocated armed struggle during the apartheid era. Had I been in his shoes, having to watch my people being brutally oppressed and murdered by a violent regime, I would have done so too. After all, peaceful resistance wasn't working (consider the 1976 massacre of unarmed black schoolchildren in Soweto by South African security forces). Hell, there are people in this country today who advocate armed struggle just because they don't like paying taxes. I cannot fault Mandela for supporting armed resistance considering the brutal oppression of his people under the evil apartheid regime.
Most of the repukes that hate Mandela are Cubans because Mandela expressed his sympathy for Castro's revolution. I don't know why Cubans hate Castro so much? Thanks to him and his communist regime they can come to America and claim they are political refugees. They are given political asylum at once. They don't have to wait decades, they don't have to go to the back of the line like other immigrants either. Cubans are the only immigrants that can  get their papers as soon as they set foot in America thanks to Castro and "dry foot wet foot" policy. So why do they always complain and play the victims? If Cubans hate Castro so much why  they don't they get rid of him like the Arabs did during the Arab spring. Yeah, I know it's because they are cowards, they are afraid of Castro and it's easier to claim they are persecuted and come to America than stay and fight in the Island like real men. But you Cuban goobers keep hating Mandela. As always you cowards are in the wrong side of History. If you want to get rid of dictator Castro go back to Cuba and  FIGHT against him and don't expect Americans foot the bill to put him out of power.
@baldor465  We did. It was called the Bay of Pigs invasion where Castro's forces annihilated 1200 Cubans in the first two hours and imprisoned, tortured, raped and killed thousands of others who were involved in that particular beach landing.  Within the island, he imprisoned several hundred thousand Cubans who were waiting for the delivery of armament sold to us by the C.I.A.  We bought the armament like we do everything else.  You must remember that Cubans have always owned, lived, participated in commerce and business in the Floridian lands since the age of the conquistadors.  The first wave of Cuban exiles, after Castro triumphed his revolution, were for the most part the upper crust of white Cuban aristocratic families. They came as exiles fleeing socialist and communist ideals but were not greeted with closed arms due to the Cuban population already established in these neck of the woods.  You see Mr. Baldor, we have always been here and do not feel that we are invading or situating ourselves or immigrating for whatever reason into a land that we find unfamiliar.  We have always controlled the tobacco, armament, book making, narcotics, bootlegging, prostitution, textiles, agriculture, equine commerce, food industry, most of the tourism, most finance institutions, construction, etc., etc., etc., in Florida Get the picture so far ? Castro killed our royal buts He demolished us.He took everything away and gave it to his Cubans from his organization called "El Comite" The Committee. They are his Gestapo who are entrusted to snitch on anyone who lives better than the other ones. It is a classless society now when Cuba was always about class. Yes. Class and wealth and culture not enslavement. The Nicaraguans fought and loss.Where are they now? The Salvadoreans fought and loss. Where are they now? The Guatemalans fought and loss. Where are they now? I'll tell you where they are now. Most are working for the Cubans. Cubans are a divided people. Anti castro and the other half pro castro. Classy Cubans and classless Cubans if you will. I am not even going to defend my kind for having been called "cowards" We Cubans who fled the island are in our lands still. We feel right at home in La Florida. We did not invade La Florida Mr. Baldor. The rest of the cultures invaded us. As for Mandela, He is exactly where he belongs. We fought and lost and then went back to our forefathers land to keep on living.We did not return to establish ourselves when we have always been established in La Florida. We never left. We are arrogant creatures Mr Baldor,as you can tell. We believe our stench doesn't  smell because we are at the top part of the foodchain ,right below the Semites which can be considered our cousins from another father. The Lebanese, Egyptian, Libyan, Palestinians, and Syrians have been fighting since forever.Where has that led them ? Nowhere. An intelligent person must know when to put up the gloves,has to know their limitations, has to accept defeat in order to regain health, stamina, and composure. We Cubans accepted defeat.That is just one of the reasons why we are so successful .., again. As for our political pull and immigration status,those are fruits of so called cowards fighting a non violent game of thrones. You use your head in other words Mr. Baldor. Not your nuts. Go to any Cuban and call him a coward in the streets of Hialeah and see what happens Mr. gun-ho. I dare you ! We are at Home! Jew need a yob,Mr. Baldor?
I'm sure that if the internet had been around in the 1960s, the pond scum that are denouncing the great Nelson Mandela today would have been saying much the same things about MLK following his assassination. Right-wing Twitter feeds would have been ablaze with jubilant comments, and James Earl Ray would be lauded as a "warrior patriot" on far-right conservative blogs.
Once again, they are on the wrong side of history.
Judge a man by his actions, not by the lyrics of the songs he sings. This is a Xhosa folk song. Hell, there are even white people in the video singing along. I mean, do you literally mean the lyrics of every song you've ever sung? For instance, I sung Mustang Sally at karaoke a couple of weeks ago, and I don't own a Mustang or know anyone called Sally. Shortly afterwards, I sung Sweet Home Alabama, even though I'm from New England and have never visited Alabama.
Now, if he'd given a speech calling for the murder of white people, or facilitated white genocide after becoming president, that would be a different matter. But he didn't. He worked tirelessly to facilitate peaceful reconciliation and preached forgiveness, even pardoning many members of the former apartheid regime who were complicit in the murder of his people. 
As I said, judge a man by his actions not by the words of the folk songs he sings.
@yankeeprowler @professo12 Do me a favor and google white genocide in South Africa.  This man is no man of peace.
@professo12 @yankeeprowler White people exist in the same large numbers they did before Mandela so clearly there was no white genocide. I'd google the word genocide. 
What bugs me as always is the blatent hyporcricy. The same people who talk of the tree of freedom needing to be fed with blood, instantly call people like Mr. Mandela a murderer. He fought for the freedom of his people. Actual freedom. Segregation. Dignity. The vote. A decent living standard. A decent education. All these were denied the majority of the population, and yet suddenly it isn't ok to fight for freedom. When black and brown people do it. 
And when he got freedom for his people he did not disenfranchise whites. He did not eliminate free market capitalism. He cheered on the white rugby team. He did not commit genocide and he established the truth and reconciliation committee, which created a mechanism of forgiveness that also respected the victims rights.   
So yes. He gets to be called a man of peace. 
The same people who denounce Mandela for embracing armed struggle when the vicious apartheid regime was murdering and oppressing his people are the same ones who claim that they need their guns to prevent the U.S. government from increasing their taxes.
Hypocrites.
Google white genocide in South Africa and u will see Mandela praising it.  He may have done some good, but he is no sweetheart or angel.
@professo12 If he truly advocated white genocide, then he was in a perfect position to make that happen when he became president. Instead, he appointed his white predecessor as his deputy president, and worked tirelessly for peaceful reconciliation when there were many among his people who were hungry for retribution after six decades of vicious, murderous white oppression.
I doubt I would have been quite so forgiving or magnanimous as Mandela after what he and his people endured. In fact, I don't know any man who would be. That's why he was such a giant among men.
@professo12 Where? Why don't you link it? And from a reliable source? The ANC the party of which he was part of and later head specifically had  a charter that called for non-discrimination for all races. 
In the space of just a few days, we've had Rush Limbaugh denouncing the Pope as a Marxist, and all of the hateful, sick vermin on right-wing websites making disgusting comments about Nelson Mandela. Who are they going to add to their "enemies" list next? How about Gandhi, a peacenik commie who should have been grateful to the British Empire for bringing civilization to his people? Or perhaps even Jesus himself, with all his bleeding heart liberal platitudes about helping the undeserving poor and his denouncements of "wealth creators"?
These people are hateful, bitter savages who have no shame, no class, no dignity and absolutely no compassion. I almost feel sorry for them.
You quoted William F. Buckley Jr.  as saying: "... anyone who maintains that such countries as Ethiopia and Uganda…are better off than they were in colonial days is an ideologue....” . Obviously, the man doesn't even know African history...for a starter, Ethiopia has never been colonized.
The conquest of Ethiopia by Italy in 1936 was one of the events that lead to the eventual end of the League of Nations. So yes Ethiopia was once colonized. 
The lunatics and mental patients in the Bagger Party cannot stand to see a black man praised. They are so filled with white trash hate and resentment. And the Palin-Gohmerts prey on that fear of their vanishing demographic.  
@Nilan25 One has to wonder what sad, miserable and empty little lives these people must lead to make them hate their fellow man so much. This kind of hatred doesn't evolve in a vacuum. Their comments are characterized by a sense of insecurity, inadequacy, an enormous inferiority complex and a misplaced sense of persecution. All of these traits manifest themselves in a need for self-glorification. Hence why so many TP folks laughingly glorify themselves as "patriots" and "warriors", and are eager to tell everybody how successful they are (it's amazing how many TP posters claim to be successful entrepreneurs, even when they can barely construct a coherent sentence).
@Nilan25  Hey Nilian, guess which party passed the 13th amendment 148 years ago? And then guess which party voted almost 100% against it?  
Democrats and liberals are by far the most racist human beings on the planet. 
@JustJPs @Nilan25 That was 148 years ago before they decided to support the other side in civil rights. And simply saying that liberals and modern democrats are racists doesn't make it so. Proof please. 
@JustJPs @Primrose @Nilan25 Which president got it passed? Lyndon Johnson.  As the wikipedia article I am citing shows, the divide was not Republican/Democrat but Southern and Northern.  Among Dems 7 southern dems voted for it, verse 0 southern republicans. The Dems had more southern congresspeople at the time, and instantly lost them when LBJ got it passed.  The Republicans had no qualms swooping in and gathering up these racist congresspeople appealing to their racism.  Had the R's been the people you claim they would have left the Southern section alone. 
Mandela was a terrorist who advocated armed overthrow of the SA government. He was also an associate of many Communist revolutionaries such as Fidel Castro. The key word is "was". As he grew older, he got wiser and realize that violence could overthrow a government but it was a very bad basis for a new government. He associated with Communist because they were enemies of his enemies but knew they were not really his friends. This was the Cold War when many governments tricked the USA into supporting them simply by claiming to be anti-Communist which in term trigger support from the Communist to any anti-government groups. 
When apartheid ended and the ANC came to power, he accepted the democratic system that SA had and just extended it to everyone, not just the white minority. He instituted a policy of forgiveness rather than revenge. Mandela showed a willingness to change rather than blindly follow his own earlier dogmas. The criticism of him by the right only shows the fossilization of their thoughts and an unwillingness to accept change. Mandela went from radical leftist to moderate centrist but that movement to the right is ignored by the right.

There is nothing wrong with critiquing his whole life, rather than just the end years.    One has to wonder why Obama will spend so much money/time/energy on this funeral as compared to Thatchers.  I guess Thatcher, like Obama's stated about his grandmother, was just a "typical white woman".
Cruz' detractors did not critique Mandela's whole life. They critiqued only the early years and ignored the end years.

Obama made no great fuss about Thatcher's death because she was a conservative and Obama does not have the wisdom that Mandela had and probably will never get it given his thin skin.


@klow
Thatcher was not universally admired in the same way that Mandela is. She never suffered decades of imprisonment, and her people were not brutally oppressed. Hell, she isn't even that loved in her native Britain. In fact, she was so reviled by the time she was kicked out of office that it took more than a decade before her Conservative Party was electable again, and they've spent the past twenty years trying to shed themselves of her legacy.
The fact that we are having this discussion shows that Mandela was also not universally admired.

As for her policy, according to The Economist, Thatcher's lasting legacy was a Labor Party that has continued most of her economic policies because they worked.
@klow
And yet she was kicked out of office by her OWN party in 1990, who realized that they could not win another general election with her at the helm. Her successor John Major reversed many of her most controversial policies and managed to cling onto power until 1997, but he was never able to completely shed himself of her legacy and the conservatives lost power to Labor in the biggest landslide in British history. Thatcher's legacy rendered the conservatives unelectable for the next 13 years, and the only reason Labor eventually lost power was because of the economic meltdown in 2008. Even then, the conservatives only managed to regain power as part of a Liberal-Conservative coalition, led by David Cameron.
Even today, a couple of years after her death and twenty years after she left office, she remains the most divisive figure in British political history, with less than half of the population approving of the job she did. Mandela, meanwhile, is beloved by whites and blacks alike in South Africa, and by billions of people around the world.
When I said "universally loved", I was talking about the vast overwhelming majority of people on this planet. Of course, there will always be a few haters of great men such as Mandela, which is why we're having this conversation. But they are a lunatic fringe, and don't represent the vast majority of people around the world who revered this great man. Hell, there are people who still hate MLK too, yet we have a national holiday to celebrate his life. There's an international holiday in honor of Nelson Mandela too. But there will never be a Thatcher Day in Britain. If you don't believe me, walk into any pub in Britain and ask people what they think of Thatcher. Good luck walking out of the pub alive.
@Forenziks_ Maybe it is because Thatcher provided sanctuary and succor for a dictating torturer. http://www.globalresearch.ca/thatchers-tyrants-the-tanks-the-guns-the-christmas-cards/5331905  
According to this article, "Barack Obama declaredThatcher ‘one of the great champions of freedom and liberty’." and "According to Charles Powell in the Telegraph, Thatcher was driven by ‘a determination to change the world for the better, a quality which she shared with President Reagan, probably the most important strand in their relationship."
The article sure makes Thatcher look more like the Dalai Lama than Richard Nixon. 
@klow There is no disputing that Thatcher was a historically significant figure, which is why Obama had to offer a respectful eulogy. What else was he supposed to say? I'm sure he would have offered a similar platitude had he been president when Ronald Reagan passed away.
As for Charles Powell, he is hardly an unbiased source. Powell was one of Thatcher's top political advisors and closest friends, so of course he would praise her legacy while ignoring the wreckage she left behind.
And The Telegraph is anything but an objective source when it comes to Thatcher. It is a far-right newspaper that has never pretended to hide its political bias, and remained a vocal cheerleader for Thatcher long after the rest of the country had turned against her. Citing an article the Telegraph is like citing Fox News, Rush Limbaugh or FreeRepublic as an objective source for a critique of Ronald Reagan's presidency.
Finally, Blair's Labor government persisted with many of Thatcher's less controversial economic policies, that's true. However, both Blair and his predecessor Major reversed some of Thatcher's more destructive and unpopular policies after she was ousted. In fact, one of the reasons that Blair eventually became so despised by voters (apart from his support for the War in Iraq) was that he turned out to be something of a closet Thatcherite. After all, he was a former member of the Conservative Party himself, so his progressive credentials were always suspect. Even Bill Clinton eventually became skeptical of Blair for this reason.
So I'm not saying that Thatcher was an insignificant figure, quite the opposite in fact. However, she was and remains a bitterly divisive and controversial one. She will certainly never enjoy the worldwide respect and adulation that Mandela does (a few fringe right-wing lunatics notwithstanding).
@Forenziks_ Ms. Thatcher is not on Mr. Mandela's level. And plenty of people find her ideas wrong and destructive, and some of them (like myself) are white women. You are making something racial that is not. 
@klow They seem to be stuck in a Cold War time warp that most of them are too young to actually remember. So, where are they getting this bile?
Mandela was not officially cleared of being a terrorist until some time in the 1990's. So it is not so much a Cold War time warp as it is a post Cold War time warp.
@klow Actually, he was on the U.S. terrorist watchlist until 2008. I mean, seriously, the Bush administration had Nelson Mandela, the revered and beloved former president of South Africa on a terrorist watchlist until just five years ago. It's shameful.
After reading some of the comments here and on his Facebook page - I'm reasonably certain he will never be president.  He seems to attract  rather angry and resentful types who don't seem to be all that intelligent.  I don't think many of them even read the article.
whereas Jamelle's bigoted statement, which ignores all the leftists who are also criticizing much of Mandela's life, is something the rest of us informed people are supposed to ignore?   Why does believing anything from the left require stupidity and ignorance?
@AC_646 He attracts the typical TEAvangelical voter. I do not call them Republicans because they are not...any more than he really is. He and his followers are the real RINOS.
Show More Comments