Nelson Mandela was considered a criminal and imprisoned for 27 years for standing up for freedom and equality. It just goes to show that the term "criminal" is relative to the situation.
He also committed several organised violent attacks before he was imprisoned. He may have been fighting against brutal oppression, but he was no Gandhi. In comparison to Malcolm X, who was maligned for advocating, but never perpetrating, violence, the hero worship of Mandela appears lacking legitimacy. Malcolm X eventually renounced violence altogether; Mandela simply never addressed it (in respect of his own transgressions, at least)
All his past misdeeds ended up attributed to his wife at the time, Winnie Mandela. If you want an account of the less presentable side to Nelson, look at the acts she was accused of. Nelson collaborated with her in most if not all of it, apparently.
Yeah, you are right, I looked that up so I guess that was a bad example. It was just the first that jumped to mind. A better example would be Rosa parks maybe. She was a "criminal" because she was black and did not want to give up her seat to a white person.
That is indeed an excellent example.
How did we all end up arriving at this prevalent view of Mandela, though? How could it be that his nuances were left behind when he was on the television news, or in the newspapers? I also subscribed to the view that Mandela was an unblemished hero, until I was aware of the alternative view.
