Nelson Mandela: Violence Advocate, Reconciliation Enthusiast

Following the 1948 election of the South African National Party, South Africa became entrenched with oppression under the newly elected apartheid regime. This regime was characterized by the legal segregation of its citizens as an effort to solidify the country’s political power, as well as economic benefit. Motivated by the emerging injustices, an anti-apartheid movement spurred that fought to replace the legal systems with equality and to drive out the National Party.

As one of the most significant anti-apartheid advocates in South African history, Mr. Nelson Mandela, born July 18^th, 1918, played a major role in the development of the movement’s rhetoric. He now stands out as a global icon fighting for peace and equal rights for all. Central to Mandela’s argument against apartheid was that it directly violated the ideas of true democracy.

Directly following the rise of the National Party, the 1950’s were a time of active political participation for Mandela, most notably with the African National Congress (ANC). Drawing from Marxist theory, Mandela asserted ‘labor power’ as an tool of resistance against unjust laws during the Defiance Campaign of 1952, empowering the masses to recognize its natural power: “there is a mighty awakening among men and women of our country and the year 1952 stands out as the year of this upsurge of national consciousness”. The Defiance campaign was said to have awoke the “political functioning of the masses” (Mandela, 4). This evokes the memory of Fanon, who believed that, “The living expression of the nation is the collective consciousness in motion of the entire people. It is the enlightened and coherent praxis of the men and women” (Fanon, 144). By educating the masses to understand their potential efficacy, Mandela was able to incite national consciousness. Much later in 1964, Mandela goes on to further reflect Fanon’s notion of national consciousness as a source of motivation during his speech at the Rivonia trials: “I have done whatever I did, both as an individual and as a leader of my people, because of my experience in South Africa and my own proudly felt African background, and not because of what any outsider might have said.”

Opposed to the use of violence, Mandela spoke out against guerilla warfare. Instead, he believed in the power of democracy. Central to Mandela’s notion of democracy was the basic dignity of the individual, the right to a political consciousness. Among the many legal inequalities was denying the oppressed their language in schools, and instead replaced it with Afrikaans, the language of the oppressor. Fundamentally undemocratic, this inherently denied many people the opportunity to maintain tradition, which according to Mandel, is essential to the success of any democracy (Mandela, 19). Again, Mandela reflects the thinking of Fanon, who sees the imposition of language as part of the internalizing processes of decolonization; he also posits that the oppressor’s primary form of language is violence (Fanon). Soon enough, Mandela comes to discover this himself. After being arrested in 1956 for high treason, Mandela was subsequently acquitted. Then, in 1959, Parliament passes the Promotion of Bantu Self-Government Act, which forces the resettlement of blacks into eight separate “tribal homelands”, which the ANC adamantly opposes. Tensions rise as both the government and ANC refuse to concede in any way, leading to a culmination of pressure to act.

While Mandela’s approach to the anti-apartheid movement began with hopes of nonviolence, there came a point at which he ultimately recognized that this was futile after having exhausted all potentially peaceful and legal channels. By the beginning of the 1960’s, the ANC turned to force as the only apparent potential source of change, when on 69 are killed at Sharpeville for protesting the apartheid and the ANC is banned. In June 1961, Mandela described the limitations of legal struggle with the traditional proverb: “The attacks of the wild beast cannot be averted with only bare hands” (Boehmer, 109).

Faced with callous obstacles of colonization, racism, oppression, and dehumanization, Mandela’s turn to violence is reminiscent of the same logic used by Frantz Fanon, who believed in the use of violence as an inevitably necessary force in fighting for one’s freedom. He says, “The colonized man liberates himself in and through violence. This praxis enlightens the militant because it shows him the means to the end” (Fanon, 44). Similarly, Mandela speaks to this same kind of certainty, saying that not did the government policy make violence inevitable, but that “…there would be no way open to the African people to succeed in their struggle against the principle of white supremacy….only then did we answer violence with violence” (Mandela, 1964). This is also similar to the words of Malcolm X from his speech “After the Bombing”, in which he condones violence in the name of self-defense: “So I don’t believe in violence—that’s why I want to stop it. And you can’t stop it with love….So, we only mean vigorous action in self-defense, and that vigorous action we feel we’re justified in initiating by any means necessary” (Malcolm X, February 14, 1965).

Mandela’s beliefs of violence finally merged after the Sharpeville massacre with active efforts to liberate the masses when, in 1961, he left the country and went underground to organize an armed struggle. He and other ANC leaders formed Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), a militant wing of the ANC. Beginning on December 16, 1961, MK, with Mandela as its commander in chief, launched bombing attacks on government targets and continued to make plans for guerilla warfare. Upon returning to South Africa, Mandela is arrested, convicted and sentenced to five years. While in prison, he is then brought to trial along with other ANC leaders and charged with sabotage and attempting to overthrow the government; they are sentenced to life in prison and sent to Robben Island in 1964 (PBS). In his speech before beginning his sentence, Mandela ends with this statement,

“During my lifetime I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.”

Mandela maintained his position while serving this sentence that he would rather sacrifice his right to freedom than condone the atrocities of the apartheid. Again, Mandela emulates the sentiment of Fanon who believes the “…spirit of self-sacrifice and devotion to the common interest fosters a reassuring national morale which restores man’s confidence in the destiny of the world and disarms the most reticent of observers” (Fanon, 56). And while Fanon speaks to a different type of self-sacrifice, that is, of labor, his words still carry the same predilection for commitment to equality and true democracy. Mandela’s willingness to sacrifice is a sure sign of his efficacy as a leader and an intellectual, in or out of prison.  Mandela’s perseveres for a total of twenty-seven years, during which time the resistance escalates and violence continues. After the government declares a State of Emergency in response to widespread unrest in black townships, the government approaches Mandela for consultation. Ultimately, President Botha resigns and the new President F.W. de Klerk dismantles the apartheid structure in 1989; the ban is lifted from the ANC and Mandela is released from prison in 1990. Since then he has been rewarded the Nobel Peace Prize and has also been elected South Africa’s first black President (PBS).

Mandela’s sense of duty towards equality is reflected in his refusal to renounce armed struggle as a necessary means to freedom. His patience and openness for national reconciliation by the end of his term in prison is suggestive of a superior moral stature. While he was a very strong political activist, his philosophical legacy has made a significant impact on he intellectual tradition as a whole. And though his arrest and subsequent imprisonment might suggest a passive resistance, his enduring dedication to a just democracy is what classifies him as intellectual; he was willing to sacrifice everything he knew for something he had never even really experienced.

Umkhonto we Sizwe

Seen revisiting his jail cell above in 1994, Nelson Mandela reflects on his life sentence in prison for his involvement with the militant wing of the African National Congress called “Umkhonto we Sizwe”, or Spear of the Nation.

“The attacks of the the wild beast cannot be averted with only bare hands” -Mandela

A Young Nelson

Growing up in a small tribal village in South Africa, it wasn’t until Mandela left to escape an arranged marriage that he came directly into contact with the apartheid system.

An Introduction to Nelson Mandela

Lauryn Hill: The Vernacular Meets Feminism

As a form of resistance, music, and more recently, hip-hop, has been used as a creative channel enabling the sharing of experiences. It is a space to express one’s voice against injustices, thus constructing a new form of political and social ideology. Furthermore, it is also used as a means of personal reflection, through which one can empower a personal identity while simultaneously constructing collective solidarity. However, much of hip-hop’s expressions have been boldly centered on a black masculine identity that has subsisted of racial and gender markers. This hyper-masculine style has maintained a distinct exploitation of women, and in particular, black women, thereby reinforcing their subordination of both ‘woman’ and ‘other’ as culturally normative. Recently, however, female rappers have emerged on the scene with conviction, actively contesting this male domination using their attitudes and talent. Among these artists is Lauryn Hill, whose role as a musician has surpassed the cultural sphere and into the space of vernacular intellectual. Reflecting the experiences of black womanhood, Hill empowers men and women alike in deconstructing patriarchal social structures while also embodying traditional black spirituality.

Hill’s first big break onto the music scene came with the Fugees, a group known for their racial and political overtones. It was Hill’s involvement with the Fugees that propelled her to fame status, and gave her the ability to spread her political and social messages to a huge following through vernacular (Grant, 2003). Following this, Hill released her first solo album The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill, a title that was seemingly meant to reflect the ways in which society had failed her both socially and intellectually. This debut album not only received critical acclaim, but also won her five Grammy awards. Interestingly, her award for album of the year was the first given to a hip-hop album (Ogbar, 92). She is known for her neo-soul approach to hip-hop, expressing her roots using a religious consciousness. Much of Hill’s music speaks to issues including freedom, creation, choice, relationships, authenticity, and sexual agency. Often, Hill maintains a theme of connectedness of these aspects of life throughout her music, mapping a strong womanist consciousness rooted in black diaspora history and culture. In an interview with Rolling Stone, she recognizes music as a powerful social force, saying, “We’re in this war…. There’s always a spiritual war, but there’s a battle for the souls of the black folk, and just folks in general, and the music has a lot to do with it” (Touré, 1999).

An iconic image of female empowerment, Lauryn Hill subverts the combative style of many MC’s, which has stemmed from an attempt to assert dominance and masculinity. As Ogbar describes, “These MC’s have carefully formulated a fanciful world of self-absorbed conspicuous consumption, profound sexual prowess, fearlessness, pugilistic skills, and an uncanny willingness to kill anyone who attempts to get in their way” (77). A number of early female rappers, such as Foxy Brown and Lil’ Kim, attempted to appropriate the male voice by adopting the dominant misogynist sexual tropes that pervade hip-hop, in which men become the sexual objects to be exploited and used (Ogbbar, 90). However, mirroring the arrogant behavior of male rappers does not present the world with any kind of resistance to the social, political, or economic conditions these women faced before their music careers. Instead, these public images simply strengthen hegemonic constructions of both the female identity and black identity as a whole.

In her song “Adam Lives in Theory” from the album Miseducation of Lauryn Hill, Hill speaks to the simultaneous exploitation of women and black people alike. Hill appropriates the biblical story of Adam and Eve, using traditional scripture to describe modern day issues. She writes this song without any discernable chorus; it’s as if she’s telling a story. She writes,

“Caught up in emotion/Burning in her devotion/To the king of exploitation in the field/She handed him her virtue/Cause he told her ‘I won’t hurt you’/So she lay with him to see how good it feels”.

Here, Hill speaks to the ways in which black women have been manipulated at the hands of black men who felt the pressure compensate for their powerlessness by reflecting the very same social structure that has controlled them. Jeffrey Ogbar speaks to Hill’s capacity for exposing these power-laden social structures, “…including exhortations to women to demand respect from men and for men to assume responsibility and maturity in their relations with both women and men (92). However, while gender relations are constant throughout the song, the underlying story remains between “the white man” and a kind of “mother Africa” and the corrupt relationship between the oppressor and oppressed. Hill writes,

“Making pilgrimages, thinking he’s religious/Like he’s got all the light, and no one else/ He takes the unsuspected/Cause he knows they’re not connected/And he shows them how to be just as he is/Virtually real, and commercially appealed”.

In these lines, Hill expresses a post-modern outlook, deconstructing the process of colonization, domination, and capitalism using Christian tradition to present the Afro-American experience.

Central to black feminism, and crucial to the struggles against racism is collective identity politics. Through music, black women experience a kind of consciousness-raising, wherein they learn both to love themselves (feminism) as well as expand their understanding and loyalty towards shared history, culture, religion, and ethnicity. As Patricia Hill Collins writes, “Preoccupied with notions of the ‘self’ at the expense of the ‘social’, many classrooms as a result embrace a impoverished personal identity politics of simple storytelling that mimics the personal politics of wider American society…” (185). Instead, for many young black women, music becomes their classroom, by which they learn not only the intersectionality of their lived experiences, but also begin to carve a space for themselves where collective solidarity meets community action.  Lauryn Hill contributes to this, using her music to express an African American woman’s voice as autobiographical in both personal and collective.

In a song entitled “Everything is Everything”, also from the album Miseducation of Lauryn Hill, Hill speaks to the masses, encouraging them to recognize the social structures within which they have been living, and furthermore, to envision a positive future for themselves. She writes, “I wrote these words for everyone who struggles in their youth/Who won’t accept deception, instead of what is truth/It seems we lose the game/Before we even start to play/Who made these rules?/We’re so confused/Easily led astray/Let me tell ya that”. In these lines, Hill speaks to those children whose opportunities have been limited by the circumstances in which they have been born. “And the ones on top, won’t make it stop/So convinced that they might fall/Let’s love ourselves and we can’t fail/To make a better situation/Tomorrow, our seeds will grow/All we need is dedication/Let me tell ya that”. Hill promotes the power of solidarity, the power of collective identity as having the potential to cultivate success. “Now hear this mixture, where hip-hop meets scripture/Develop a negative into a positive picture”. These words resonate with the value of music as having the capacity to teach and thus empower African-Americans as a group to realize their potential as active participants in the struggle for equality.

 

Bibliography

            Collin, Patricia Hill, From Black Power to Hip Hop: Racism, Nationalism, and Feminism (Philadelphia: Temple University Press), 2006

Farred, Grant. What’s My Name?. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2003.

Ogbar, Jeffrey O.G., Hip-Hop Revolution: The Culture and Politics of Rap (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2007), 72-104.

Touré, “Lady Soul”. Rolling Stone, 18 February 1999, 46.

Hill, Lauryn. The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill. Sony Records, 1998.

 

Strong Heart, Strong Will

“Nobody’s going to force me to do something against my will. What do I owe anybody that I should submit my will to them?” -Lauryn Hill

Lauryn’s Official Website

To see all the rest of her video and listen to her music for free, this is her official website link below:

http://www.lauryn-hill.com/

An Independent Woman to be Reckoned With

Often embodying afro culture through her fashion, Lauryn Hill seeks to empower young black women to embrace their afro-heritage.

“From the first time someone says ‘who do you think you are?’ We learn to repress” -Hill

Everything is Everything

Singing for those who cannot choose what world they are born into, Hill makes an important critique on the construction of race relations and class difference

“I wrote these words for everyone who struggles in their youth/Who won’t accept deception, instead of what is truth/It seems we lose the game/Before we even start to play/Who made these rules?/We’re so confused/Easily led astray/Let me tell ya that”

Adam Lives in Theory

 

A song discussing the complexities of racism from a black woman’s point of view. The victims of white hegemony and male hegemony, Lauryn Hill tries to articulate the tough situations that many of these women must persevere.

“Caught up in emotion/Burning in her devotion/To the king of exploitation in the field/She handed him her virtue/Cause he told her ‘I won’t hurt you’/So she lay with him to see how good it feels”.