Contact		- Add to Favorites		Comment - Bottom of article
TWRToday Facebook & TWRToday Myspace accounts.
TWRToday Supports These Sites: Bambooo - Genesis Radio - Ligali

A comparison of Mandela and Mugabe

I was skimming through some newspapers and saw the headlines of two African leaders. These two elders were headlined in separate newspapers. One headline said 'Man of the month' while the other said 'How do we stop this tyrant?'. The former headline commented on how former president of South Africa, Nelson Mandela flew into London for a week of birthday celebrations, his first trip to London in 1964 as well as mentioning his suffering under apartheid. On the other hand you have other tabloids with headlines such as: 'Freeze this tyrant' referring to Robert Mugabe, current president of Zimbabwe. I suddenly thought about the huge difference in perception of the two but would be facinated to find out the similarities of these two Elders apart from them being older than my grandparents.

It is well documented how Nelson Mandela served a long prison term and became president after 27 years of confinement. I was enlightened to know that Robert Mugabe also spent a long stint in prison. In fact according to 'Wikipedia' Robert Mugabe spent ten years in a Salisbury prison which could be the reason why he dislikes European authority even up until this day. In contrast Mandela took the opposite step and forgave his colonial masters and beg for peace, as if he wanted he could have told his people to take back their country, which led many people to say that 'Mandela stopped the revolution'. Many would justify this statement by saying: there are still suffering among the black people in South Africa while their apartheid counterpart descendants are still living off their parents' dogma. Aids is still an epidemic in South Africa and violence is still rife among the black citizens. All this is happening after years of apartheid.

Unsurpisingly there is a similar story with Zimbabwe and Robert Mugabe who fought and took power in 1980 and is refusing to give it tup at all costs. As a matter of fact the outside world was fine with him untill he dared to take back the land from the white farmers, which they agreed. Still the similarities between Mandela's South Africa and Mugabe's Zimbabwe is startling as the same problems that the black people in South Africa is going through today, the same can be said of the Zimbabweans. Not too long ago South africans were murdering Zimbabwean immigrants to their country, blaming them for unemployment and the destablisation of their ecnonomy. so I can safely say that the decisions of both these men reach some boling equilibrium point in very peculiar circumstances.

While Mandela is seen as the peacemaker, Mugabe is seen as a warmonger as he is accused of killing thousands of people from the Ndebele

tribe in his early career up until this day where he is said to have plotted against the opposition party 'Movement for Democratic Chane' (MDC) by masterminding the killing of their supporters. This is democracy turned on its head like places in Jamaica where political parties will sometimes arm their supporters to try an secure votes by intimmidating the opposition. A typical example of political gangsterism which seems to governs the world,yet evil. At the same time South Africa is one of the most dangerous countries even with Mandela's pleading for peace. So there must be another explanation for the violence, hardship and AIDS going on in these two countries when two of their 'leaders' are at opposite sides of the scale.

South Africa is the most progressive African state while economically Zimbabwe is suffering. Allegedly, because of 'Mugabe' outsiders withdrew foreign aid, which means the people of Zimbabwe suffer, while Mugabe is unscathed. Yet another case of political gangsterism as if Mandela took the turn that Mugabe did and took back the land the way Mugabe did then Mandela would be labelled a tyrant as the people affected and most offended would the colonial rulers. However as Mandela 'stopped the revolution' as many people would say, he is held in high self esteem by millions as despite being put in jail for 27 years and his people subjugated for many more, he still found it in him to lead by example and beg his people to keep the peace. On the other hand you have Mugabe who constantly use violence in his speeches to get his point accross and hold onto power and many will see this as a man gone mad or a dictator, a disaster waiting to happen? This is what happens when we use the same solutions for the same problem and expect different results. Yes, insanity as it is the same poliitcal system used to subjugate a people (Europeans on Africans) still being used after independence (Africans on Africans) with the same mindset, which places the blame on the individual and not the system that the individual is following. At the same time individual responsibility should be taken into consideration where the well being of the people en mass in concerned. we may never understand the actions of these two individuals unless we critically assess the way they were taught to govern and rule their people.

While these two 'freedom fighters' are very different, they are very similar and are coming from the same struggle. They had one common goal, to uplift and get justice for their people but due to time and old age it can be said that one got passified and the other got miserable. We could go on about how 'good' or 'bad' these individuals are but I believe we should concentrate on the well being of the people as a whole and the tactics and systems used to govern them which evidence is showing it is a bigger problem which we need to critically assess and adresss.

Send in your views to TWRToday Here