On Mandela: Et Tu James Antle? Et Tu TAC?

I plan a post with a series of links to articles from conservatives that are contrary to the current Mandela hagiography that we are witnessing in the wake of his passing, but I am having router problems and have had limited internet access the last few days, so that post is coming. In the meantime, I wanted to get this quick post up since the subject matter is right in our wheelhouse.

Newt Gingrich has criticized conservatives who have expressed contrary and politically incorrect views about Mandela. The generally paleo friendly James Antle has an article up at TAC that says Newt Gingrich is right. It doesn’t surprise me that TAC posted such an article. In fact, I was almost certain they would. I have been checking back regularly looking for one. I am a bit surprised that it is James Antle who wrote it, however. Antle usually walks a fine line between nuancing tricky issues on the one hand but without overtly embracing the PC side on the other. This article is not finessing a touchy subject. It is embracing the other side.

Antle makes a fair point that people need to be judged in context. I made that same point in my post below, when I said that I don’t necessarily condemn Mandela for being a (small c) communist per se. (Meaning he believed Marx was on to something with regard to economics.) There were a lot of small c communists in that time and place. I do hold it againts him that he was a member of a brutal Communist party (SACP) (which he lied about) and headed an organization that used and endorsed terrorism and brutality.

Again, as I said before, in the 80′s conservatives took for granted that Mandela and the ANC were the bad guys, so to speak, in this drama. Now, conservatives must sing pre-emptive praise for Mandela just to ward off charges of racism. This illustrate the ever tightening grip of political correctness on our culture and especially our political debate. This tigtening grip must be resisted on every front rather than acquiesed to. Whatever other criticism of Antle may be in order, I think he and people like him are missing the big picture. Their efforts to finesse these issues for what they see as the benefit of conservatism actually empowers the Zeitgeist even if there may be some merit to the finesse. Appearances are key here. If it might look like a cave to PC, you should think long and hard about whether it is worth it even if your motives might not be caving to PC.

Update: This morning I posted a comment at TAC that simply said “Et tu James? Et tu TAC?” It has yet to appear. My hunch is that it won’t appear because it’s been a while and several other comments have been approved since. Also, normally it will say “Your comment is awaiting moderation” before it is posted, but you can still see it. I can no longer see my own comment which suggests to me it has been deleted and not just neglected. If so, that’s weak. Censoring critical but non-vulgar or otherwise innappropriate comments is bush league. I have posted another comment that is a modification of my last paragraph above. Let’s see if that makes the cut.

delicious | digg | reddit | facebook | technorati | stumbleupon | chatintamil

7 thoughts on “On Mandela: Et Tu James Antle? Et Tu TAC?

  1. RedPhillips Post author

    Here is the comment I made at TAC. It did make the cut.

    “In the 80?s conservatives took for granted that Mandela and the ANC and the SACP were the bad guys, so to speak, in this drama. Now, conservatives must sing pre-emptive praise for Mandela just to ward off charges of racism. This illustrate the ever tightening grip of political correctness on our culture and especially our political debate. This tightening grip should be resisted, not acquiesed to. Antle is clearly trying to finesse a tricky issue here, but I’m affraid he and people like him are missing the big picture. Their efforts to finesse these issues for what they see as the benefit of conservatism (protecting conservatives from themselves) actually empowers the Zeitgeist. Stop empowering the Zeitgeist.”

  2. Matthew Walther

    “It did make the cut.”

    You were whining for no reason.

    PS: If you’re interested in a skeptical take on both Mandela and the manner in which his death has been handled by press and pol, read Peter Hitchens in the forthcoming January/February issue of The American Spectator.

  3. Richard Channing

    I rarely travel over to TAC. I did this time and found out why I avoid going over there. It may as well be the Huffington Post. Far more lefties commenting than conservatives. The comment threads are terrible.

  4. William Gaunt

    Amconmag is full of triangulating centrists, desperate to keep their careers afloat by doing everything they can not to offend the left.

    What lessons can we draw from the hagiography of Nelson Mandela? First of all, it should tell us, if we didn’t already know, that, for white liberals, ethno-nationalism is laudable—so long as it is practiced by non-whites at the expense of whites.

    Notice also that much of the Mandela mythologizing has centered on his not engaging in a genocidal bloodbath upon coming to power. Now, I should have thought that not committing genocide was the bare minimum of competent statesmanship, but I guess the standards in Africa are so low that white liberals are only too happy to find an African leader not flecked from toe to top in his victims’ blood.

    Is South Africa better off today than it was during the era of apartheid? It is not for nothing that the Western media, in describing the present state of South Africa, has been suitably vacuous and abstract in its language: “democracy,” “human rights,” “multiculturalism,” “rainbow nation,” etc. This is because the actual facts tell a different tale. Crime is up, life expectancy is down, infrastructure is crumbling, whites (as well as a large number of educated blacks) are fleeing. Mandela’s legacy, on which he should be judged, is that he helped wrest control of his country away from those who ran it competently, in order to hand it over to those who could only run it into the ground.

    Those who argue against policies like segregation in the Old South and apartheid in South Africa must prove that blacks are as competent as whites in creating and maintaining an orderly, prosperous Western society. Proof, however, requires evidence, and all the evidence we have points to a conclusion decidedly at odds with egalitarian dogma.

    Ultimately, the legacy of South Africa is that it proves the fatuity and folly of a multiracial society—a lesson, I’m sorry to say, that America and Western Europe seem not to have learned.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>