Mandela: A Step Forward Out of a Broken Past

Nelson Mandela is 94 years old; he spent 27 years as a political prisoner in his own country before becoming president. Most of the time I lived on the African continent, in Cameroon, Mr. Mandela was still imprisoned. His name, and the struggle of the African National Congress, were topics not so much discussed at the time as described in music. The battle of native people versus colonial interloper had already been resolved in Cameroon, at least at the level of state control. The resonance of Mr. Mandela's situation took hold at a personal, emotional level rather than at a political one.

The force against which Mr. Mandela and his organization fought was the physical separation of South African citizens according to race. A settlement of European people had traveled to the southern tip of the African continent over two centuries in the past. But through exclusionary policies based on economics, culture, force and ultimately violence, the settlers worked to establish a multitiered system which proffered advantage to themselves and then left the remains to the ethnic native people.

This policy, along with the exceedingly brutal force used to sustain it, was unspeakably cruel both to individuals and to whole segments of society. Yet, at the behest of Mr. Mandela, after he was elected president, the country established a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, despite one side who considered truth only a revelation of accounting and reconciliation a concept grounded more in preservation than capitulation. Mr. Mandela was the symbol of an unyoked people who also knew his jailers as people. He commanded respect and authority by his words and actions. He showed that a black African could preside over a diverse population without resorting to violent suppression and separation.

While South Africa pursued its policy of separation, the country had economic ties with the United States and invited American companies to operate there. A group of Americans at home wanted to be sure the American companies did not behave like others in South Africa and a Philadelphia pastor named Leon Sullivan drafted a set of guidelines that became known as the Sullivan Principles. According to Bob Galvin, the first draft of the Sullivan Principles were written with the tone of "stop beating your wife." Bob said he helped reword the Principles with Pastor Sullivan before their issuance.

An author who recently wrote about South Africa in the years since Apartheid ended, said that indeed many black South Africans were displeased with the lack of reconciliation that was exchanged during the time of the commission. However, what they did receive was an opportunity to find out the location of the body of a loved one who was "disappeared" by the government security forces. What resulted was not a grand settling of scores and cross cultural understanding but instead small increments of closure that gave enough firmness to allow a step forward out of a broken past.

When Governments Surreptitiously Listen

The recent news about government getting phone records from Verizon users and having access to the servers for most telecommunication and internet service providers is sad to hear but not surprising to those of us familiar with some of the provisions of the Patriot Act. I hope there is a chance for discussion of the Patriot Act and a recognition that the powers it gives the government should be reduced or eliminated.

 

It should also be noted that the government had the ability to listen to phone conversations before 9/11 and the Patriot Act. There is a statute called CALEA (Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act) which forced telecommunications companies to design into their products a way to access phone calls and internet traffic so they can be monitored and recorded by law enforcement.

 

Short of discussing the merits of the Patriot Act and the implications it has in terms of our liberty and the energy it gives to our national security apparatus, there are other reasons to be unhappy with what is going on. I offer a few criticisms. 

 

The first is that it must take a lot of time and resources to store and scour all of the phone and emails produced by even a small portion of the American people. And I don't want my government wasting its time and resources going through every phone conversation and email it receives or collects.

Secondly, it is very alarming at how clueless some of the people who have been elected and have approved the Patriot Act are about what has happened. Perhaps they don't realize what has been unleashed. It is hoped that it is not too late to restrict the reach of the government.

And thirdly, this *is* scary when the government has access to this information; it is the only authorized entity which can detain and kill you without telling anyone. I am fearful of government agencies whether national or local who have special access to information and the technology to examine and parse it.

Perhaps this is just a matter of having the right restrictions or the proper safeguards in place that will constrain the actions of those who have access to information and can authorize force in response. But with the bloated national security complex in place, it does not take much imagination to see how any restrictions on behaviors and actions could be ignored or forgotten.

When a government targets people and groups based not on what they say, but on what they believe, great care must be taken to limit its reach into the lives of the people whom it governs.