Nelson Mandela: A rare breed

18^th July, Nelson Mandela's birthday was gazetted by the UN as Mandela day in 2009 and celebrated for the first time in 2010. 67 minutes of charity are encouraged in honour of Mandela's 67 years of fighting for social, political and economic justice. 

That is in a small part, the size of Nelson Mandela. When he turned 95 (the last age he would live to) I had wanted to put up a blog in tribute to this great son of Africa, but I couldn't find the words for this great man. I had nothing to write about the man so I decided to just reproduce the lyrics to John Clegg’s famous song Asimbonanga. When he died I equally didn’t have anything to write, so I decided to just share some famous pictures of Mandela and some of his famous quotes.

However, on the first Mandela day since his death, I've decided to discuss some aspects of this extra ordinary life as I have experienced it many kilometers away having never met the man or even been close as being within a 100 kilometers to where he may have been at any moment. But that was the influence of Nelson Mandela, you didn't need to be near him, you just felt his influence. 

Very few can deny that Madiba, as he was fondly called by his clan name, was a rare breed. I first came to know that there was a human being called Nelson Mandela in the late 80's when I was a very young boy. My friend's young brother who is my friend too and a family friend happened to be named Nelson. Funny enough, this Nelson, the other name Muyaba, many years later would be on my wedding ceremony bridal party. Without digressing, the story is that I had heard a few people refer to Nelson Muyaba as Nelson Mandela. 

So when I heard Nelson Mandela being mentioned a couple of times by many people who were older, I always wondered why my friend was called that too. My elder brothers would later explain to me that Nelson Mandela was a freedom fighter imprisoned for demanding equality and an end to apartheid. Aged just five, six or seven, the terms freedom fighter, equality and apartheid did not really bring any serious meaning home. However, there were a number of South African songs that depicted the fight against apartheid that were being played on Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation (ZNBC) TV and since some of the songs were too 'graphic', I started to fill the gaps in my understanding of apartheid. 

Then one day I sat down in front of the TV to watch the movie Sarafina, the epic film that stared Whoopi Goldberg, and my respect for the anti apartheid activists sky rocketed. There were many names that constantly made headlines, and my memory recalls the names Walter Sisulu and Oliver Tambo. Of all the anti apartheid activists and freedom fighters the name Nelson Mandela was one that sent the greatest repulsive waves across the world. Free Mandela was the common chorus out of Africa, Latin America, Asia Europe and just throughout the world. A FREE man, is what Mandela became on 11th February 1990.

Upon his release from prison, Mandela's first visit was Zambia where many of the Africa National Congress (ANC) activists who had fled the jaws of apartheid and fear of jail found refuge. Though I was quite young then, I still remember how big an occasion Mandela's coming to Zambia was. The preceding year had also seen the visit to Zambia, of Pope John Paul II which was another big occasion I remember.

While many people much older than me remember the Mandela of the 60's who was imprisoned for 27 years, many from my generation only remember the Mandela that came out of Prison. He was an ageing man but very much a self assured man who believed in himself and his way of things but never shied away from changing course every time he realized he was on the wrong side. He also had a tinge of arrogance about him but at the same time showed he was a humble man. One thing he did do after his release from prison was to embark on an extensive international travelling expedition where he addressed many forums including the OAU, World economic Forum, and many other summits as well as receiving various peace prizes together with F W de Klerk. However, while visiting the Scandinavian countries and Czechoslovakia in May 1992, Mandela shocked the world when his confrontational side emerged once more by suggesting that F W de Klerk was personally responsible for the political violence in South Africa at the time. 

He likened the violence in South Africa to the killing of Jews in Nazi Germany. Mandela also criticised what he felt was the stranglehold imposed on the South African press, which represented White-owned conglomerates. This attack had shocked many as Mandela had mostly taken the role of mediator of the different political factions in South Africa and signing many peace accords. Perhaps it was the case of 'old habits die hard', as he was one of the founders of the ANC military wing, Umkhonto we Sizwe.

In the time Mandela was in jail, there had emerged a cadre of youth who had lived through the struggle years and they believed in violence and confrontation as the number one solution in order to achieve anything. Most of these saw Mandela as having been softened by jail and did not approve of his no-violence stance. In April, 1993 Mandela was booed at a rally in Soweto’s Jabulani stadium when he tried to convey a message of peace and restraint following the assassination of Chris Hani.

Mandela also caused a political row after he had been voted ANC president to replace the ailing Oliver Tambo when he suggested that South Africa's voting age should be lowered to enable 14-year old children to vote.

As it turned out, Mandela would be the first president of a democratic election in South Africa barely 4 years after release from prison. Mandela's 27 years in prison I can imagine were dominated by tremendous hardship. There were freezing winter nights, suffocating summer days, poorly if not barely cooked food and back-breaking labor. On cold winter nights, a thin mat which has now found itself in a museum served as a bed, on a stone floor for most of his time behind bars. Winnie Madikizela Mandela had been to see her husband a restricted number of times only. In that same period he lost his First born Son & his mother but was not allowed to attend each of their funerals! In addition, none of his children was allowed to visit him in jail. In those 27 years there were moments of high drama, including aborted escape plans (Michael Scorfield Prison Break stunts).

Nelson Mandela is a rare breed not because he spent 27 years in jail, but because besides undergoing so much - he chose to forgive. That is not what other African freedom fighters did. The early freedom fighters became demi-gods in their own countries with most of them throwing out of the window all the democratic tenets they preached and putting on the entire dictatorial amour they sought to rid from their colonial masters.

Nelson Mandela chose a different path, embracing forgiveness, reconciliation as well as choosing not to keep hold of power for eternity. Perhaps he had the advantage of seeing what had happened to the other freedom fighter before him who held onto power for many years until they became irrelevant or their own citizens didn't want them anymore there by being humiliated out of office and a new breed of African leaders emerging in the 90’s. Some have even suggested that at the age of 76 when he was elected as president, Mandela didn't have enough fight left in him hence he chose to forgive all his oppressors, aggressors and enemies so that he could live his final years in peace.

Whatever the rationale behind his choices which led to the decisions of forgiveness and reconciliation, nothing can be taken away from his desire for a just society. In his own words, in court before sentencing in 1964, he chose these word; "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 will live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for. But, my lord, if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die."

Mandela's pre-occupation was not to change the skin colour of the ruling elite from white and replace with black. His ideology was to bring forth a democratic dispensation where ideals of the rule of law, one man one vote, equality and a free press were truly present. To him it didn't matter who was in power as long as the system promoted the ideals of equality. He didn't need to rule forever to make this happen. He just happened to have been the conduit through which the Republic of South Africa buried the hewers of hate and drawers of colour on one side and those who wield mastery over the countries resources on the other.

In 1999, after only a single term in office, Mandela handed over first the ANC presidency to Thabo Mbeki. He would later choose not to contest the Republican presidency, again paving the way for Thabo Mbeki to be elected president. At the time Mandela stepped down as republican president I was away at boarding school and we didn't get much news then, but Mandela stepping down was news that filtered through to us at a time when internet was not much developed in this part of the world.

I remember when I heard the news I was shocked! After all the years in jail, the least we could have expected him was to complete his mandatory two terms. We have seen other even try to subvert constitutions by going for a third term of office. This is what set him apart. He didn't want to rule for 27 years as compensation for being in jail. This is my greatest memory of Mandela. It was a first in my life time. We had gotten used to the likes of Kamuzu Banda and Kenneth Kaunda who had to lose an election in order to cede power.

In my younger days, much earlier I the 90’s, we would refer to Kamuzu Banda as the Kaunda of Malawi. In other words Kaunda was the term for president. “Who is the Kaunda of country X or country Y?”, we would ask each other. All the great sons of Africa who brought us freedom have been special in their own respective ways. Kwame Nkruma, Mobutu Seseseko, Julius Nyerere, Kenneth Kaunda, Samora Machel, Kamuzu Banda and many others, but Mandela was more relevant to my time. His relevance has made him all the more, a rare breed among his peers. Sixty seven years of fighting for social justice, and not even making any fortune out of it. Truly a rare breed.

That's just me.

A brief introspection of ‘me’ reveals that a few years ago I was able to define myself in many different ways using different gobbledygook (to borrow from George Mpombo’s words). Today, all I say is that I am just me, and unless I am attending a job interview or in a meeting delivering a business pitch, I really don't know how to define myself. That's just me.

All I know is that I am a unique individual. I love life. I love my wife. I love my son. I love the rest of my family. I love my friends. I love to write.  I love good music. I love sports.  I love to read.  I love to be random.  I love to love.  I love me. That's just me.

I’m no better than any other human, neither am I any lesser human.  I’m not one to think I’m high and mighty.  I’m just…myself. I’m a creation of what is in my mind.  I seek to find and understand myself everyday but never finding me. That's just me.

I certainly have people that understand me even when I myself still seek to find myself. I do have people with whom I connect with, with whom I can have a great conversation with and so on. But I still have many, with whom I struggle to develop bonds with. That's just me.

That's just me. Purposely or not, I have my comfort zones and people I have in close proximity (or is it within my circle) as I keep finding myself. To many people though, I am hard to understand, extremely hard to define, perhaps hard to hate, hard to love; and extremely hard to please. That's just me.

One thing I'd say is that over the years, I've chosen my friends and confidants carefully. Looking back, it could have been a conscious decision I made. I needed to find happiness from within myself and no where else. In a world where friends can stab you in the back or use your back to climb the many life's ladders, to get to whatever heights they want to get to, it's wise to sieve friends. That' just me.

I have learned that learning is an everyday process until the very last breath of life. Yes until the very last breath of life. Even on the death bed, there are valuable lessons one can pick up. So then if learning is an everyday thing, how can I find myself? Well that's just me questioning myself. That's just me.

I’m a strange person definitely.  Funny enough, I like to be different and that I am.  I like to make my own opinions of things. I like having my own personal view point and digesting everything from my own perspective. Don't get me wrong, I learn a lot from other people, but a big part of my everyday existence still remains finding myself. That's just me. 

Finding myself has been a big part of my life's journey. I guess it stems from the fact that I am a last born child and I grew up trying to be like all of my older siblings but each had some unattractive behavioral traits I saw in them hence I kept looking. In the end it became a big battle choosing who to be like. But, do I really need to be like anybody else? How can I find me? I will keep looking for me. That's just me.

Many a time within myself, has been a raging debate in my mind. The answer I have always arrived at has been to find myself, and not find in me, a part of my siblings or any other person for that matter. I have ultimately always found time to myself to think and enjoy moments of 'me' time.  That is just me.

In good times and in the worst times…I find some 'me' time.  However, in trying to find my space as a father and a husband, my 'me' time has become ever so limited. My time is for other people, and the 'me' time is a waste of time. Time for some changes within myself I guess. Well, that's just me.

I remain a rather unique individual.  An extremely loving, tolerant individual. The other side of me is different. I am an individual who cares not what people think about what I do. But how is that possible not to care when I am not an island? I am a believer in individuality and what a group of individuals can achieve as a united team. I am my own individual.  And I love it.  I love me.  That's just me.

So my path to finding myself continues. I'll keep learning, introspecting and keep walking. I need to keep understanding myself more, find myself, the self I keep departing from many times. That's just me.

Still looking for me

Monster in law, Bother in law & Sorry in law …

The recent events surrounding the famous Knowles-Carter Celebrity family have prompted me to discuss the issue of in-law relations. Difficulty subject definitely, but I’ll discuss it in the context of the events in that Standard Hotel elevator after the met gala ball.

Hip-hop and business mogul Jay-Z, real name Shaun Carter was recently attacked in an elevator by Solanje Knowles, the young sister to his wife Beyonce. A video from the hotel’s lifts that was leaked to US celebrity website TMZ, shows Solanje kicking and punching her brother-in-law while Beyonce stands seemingly disinterested. Even though the video which has been widely circulated on the internet has no audio, one can conclude that Solanje’s attack was expletive laden too. A bodyguard is seen trying to restrain Solanje but she pulls away and continues the attack on her brother-in-law.

Why Beyonce stands there with an apathetic or unconcerned reaction as her sister physically attacks her husband really bothers me. In addition, Beyonce is then pictured leaving with her sister in the same car while Jay-Z in a separate car. Hardly two days after the incidence, Beyonce shared a series of pictures of herself and the sister on her instagram account. Some of the pictures were from their childhood while others were from recent events like when they performed at a concert together. That in my eyes was an endorsement of the sister’s despicable actions. However, a few days later the family released a statement in which both Solanje and Jay-Z claimed they had resolved their differences and were a united family who just had a fight like every family does.

Nothing attracts attention and speculation like a celebrity family fight in a public place, especially a notoriously secretive family like the Carters. Jay-Z and Beyonce are perhaps the most notoriously secretive celebrity couple today. The couple had dated for close to eight years before they married but almost always denied they were a couple even when it seemed obvious to the whole world.

So as speculation of what might have led to the elevator attack became rife and plenty, I looked at two versions and even though they seemed like the worst case scenarios, that did not permit Solanje’s attack. The first rumour was that Solanje was cross with Jay because while he is a mogul who has lifted the careers of many, he seemed disinterested in her career. After a few drinks at the met gala party, Jay-Z mentioned he was going to attend Rihanna’s party that night and as Beyonce said she wasn’t attending, he mentioned he would go alone. This according to the speculation is what infuriated Solanje.

Another version is that Rachael Roy, a former wife of Jay’s former business partner Damon Dash, had been seen too close to Jay to an extent that two of Solanje’s friends who had been heard claiming they were there at the invitation of Jay-Z were bellowed by the rapper for pretending to be his guests after Rachel Roy brought this fact to the Hard Knock life hit maker. According to this version of speculation, Rachael Roy’s relationship with Jay has not been the most fancied friendship in the eyes of the Knowles sisters.

And the award goes to...Solanje!

The sister in law (sorry in law)

Whatever sin Jay-Z might have committed, I do not believe a sister-in-law has any right to attack her sister’s husband. It is my long held belief that when a problem stems up in any relationship, no third party should take a side least of all the side of a relative. In addition, it is the duty of a spouse to shield a partner from the scrutiny, attacks and ridicule of family.

When a spouse or partner does not do this for the other half, a pandora’s box of problems is opened. These are problems that are certain to make the ‘in-law relationship’ never a good one. African marriage counselors even advise couples not to confide their relationship problems to their families but instead to the families of their spouse. This is so in order to avoid a situation where the weaknesses and mistakes of one are constantly exposed to in-laws.

In most relationships, the sister-in-law many a time over steps her boundary in trying to protect the interests of her sister or brother when in her eyes their partner is seen to be leading her sibling in the wrong direction. In the case of Solanje’s attack on Jay-Z, notwithstanding the many speculated reasons as motive for the attack, the best she could have done is confide in her sister that she didn’t approve of the brother-in-law’s association with Rachael Roy, Rihana or whatever the real reason was and nothing more.

Even though latest speculation suggests that Jay-Z has been two-timing his wife with a New York hostess named Casey Cohen, who he reportedly sees at least twice a month, Solanje’s attack on the brother-in-law is still inexcusable. Without overly blaming Solanje, Beyonce’s nonchalant response is not one I'd have taken lightly when put in the shoes of Jay-Z. A wife should at all times protect her husband from the scrutiny and ridicule of siblings and then if need be, berate the husband in private. 

As a wife, or even as a husband, one's first allegiance is to the spouse. No matter how heavy a bond one may have shared with his/her siblings in the past. You recognize that you and your spouse are a couple, made into one entity by the marriage vows. By promising to love and honor one another, you have created your own family which must now come first. You are now a team, which must work as one, get hurt as one. This doesn't mean that one must throw out his/her family, but protecting the spouse creates a more unified new happy family.

The sister-in-law has also been known to cause trouble by engaging in sexual relations with the brother-in-law behind the sister's back. Many marriages have broken down once a sister became too familiar with her brother-in-law. If it gets to this level, you have yourself a sorry-in-law and not sister-in-law.

The brother in law (Bother in law)

While the sister-in-law may be a problem for either a brother-in-law or a sister-in-law, the brother-in-law (bother-in-law) is usually a problem to his brother-in-law - the husband to his sister. There are many stories where the brother-in-law has been known to physically attack his sister's husband. However, the brother-in-law is rarely found meddling in the affairs of his sister unless in situations where there is really a guilty party or he perceives it as such. However, that is no excuse for him to meddle in the affairs of his sister.

As is usually the case, the brother-in-law who is over protective of his sister is one usually who himself is guilty of the crimes he is charging the brother-in-law-with. Most times he will get on a moral high horse and gallop off into the self-righteous distance, burying his indulgences in the sand only to return with a barrage of cases against the brother in law and convicting him guiltily.

As is the case with the sister-in-law, even in the relationship between brothers-in-law, the key is for the third party to stay away and let the sister exist in that relationship without the due interference of a third party. I personally believe that the most healthy brother-in-law relationship is achieved when they treat each other as friends. The friendlier they become the better they will understand each other and be able to develop mutual respect towards each other.

I can attest to the fact that when brothers-in-law treat each other as friends, a very healthy relationship ensues. Recently one of my wife’s cousins confessed that he was amazed at the kind of relationship my wife’s immediate elder brother and I share. His amazement stemmed at the fact that I had been in my brother-in-law’s company at local holsters on a few times and we would relax while discussing various topics including very personal problems within our homes and how we overcome them.

In as much as the gentleman was amazed at this extra ordinary friendship between brothers-in-law, he admitted the fact that the key to such a relationship was mutual respect.

The mother in law (Monster in law)

Relationships with mothers-in-law are many a time said to be pretty complicated. Most of the times, the mother-in-law and the daughter-in-law live a real drama, plunging into an obscure universe of fears, intolerance and, in some cases, intrigues or hatred. She thinks she’s well-meaning, and the son's wife thinks she’s down right annoying. The proverbial mother-in-law / daughter-in-law conflict appears as an eternal tragedy.

There isn't a rule, that a mother-in-law and daughter- in-law relationship should be conflict laden, but, in most cases, the relationship is not a friendly one. The relationship is further strained if the two (mother-in-law and daughter-in-law) live under the same roof.

In as much as mothers-in-law are rarely a problem for the husbands of their daughters, there are isolated cases where such relations are strained. I know of a gentleman who has had to exchange harsh words with his wife's mother a couple of times until one day he barred her from visiting his home.

However conflict between a mother-in-law and her daughter's husband is far between, while the age old battle between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law rages on. One theory that has been floated around and has been given credence by German psychologists is 'the female complex theory'. The psychologists have issued a hypothesis according to which accentuated feminine complexes, both of the mother-in-law and the daughter-in–law, would greatly contribute to the generation of conflict.

Thus, in the space controlled by a mother-in-law, she will have a more powerful perception of her own complexes, due to a younger female presence. As a result, the psychic tension of the mother-in-law grows, whether she recognizes this or not. In this situation, mother-in-law shows a hostile attitude. Often, the daughter-in-law reacts with reciprocated appropriate behavior, which is the premise of a real conflict.

Another common theory is 'the beloved son that has been kidnapped by the daughter-in-law', which declares that; Like any woman, a mother defends her child from any intruders. Thus, unconsciously, some mothers-in-law may adopt a hostile attitude that leads to conflict.

There are a lot of theories that many psychologists and social scientists have come up with. However I truly believe that while many of these theories may have some aorta of truth, a big percentage of these conflicts arise as a result of stereotypical perceptions long harbored in our minds.

Sofas for in-laws? 

My views... my thoughts...

What stereotypical perceptions am I talking of? Because we know of an in-law relationship that wasn't exactly a great one then we expect to also have a strained relationship with our in-law! It is such stereotype perceptions that we all need to move away from so that we are as open minded as possible when it comes to in-law relations. 

I’ve never been a true fan of change.  It’s never been my thing.  Why?  I hate change that comes as a result of a reaction to society's perceived wrongs. I believe true change is only achieved at individual level by reacting to personal situations and giving personal thought to one's circumstances. Too many folks want to believe that a mother-in-law will be a monster, the brother-in-law a bother and so on. I do not share this perception. This is the perception many folks out there must change.

My point is that if you go into marriage expecting constrained in-law relations, that is exactly what you will get. You will react negatively to any little actions you will perceive as provocative even when it may be an honest joke. Most people that get into relationships with a pre-conceived thought that the in-laws will be trouble usually find what they are looking for -trouble. The fact remains that in life, whatever decision one makes it is going to upset another and that includes an in-law. Now if in one's mind they were expecting strained in-law relations, the very first time opinions are divided over an issue there will only be one outcome-trouble.

That is life. There are so many valid issues one can chew oneself over, so no need to make in-law relations one of them. Save the angst for other issues. Instead one must open their mind up and be expectant of the best in-law relations as they are one's newest family members. If you get into a relationship with an open mind you will enjoy your in-law relations.

I am the most open minded person when it comes to in-law relations thus I have enjoyed such relations for the last 18 months that I have been married. I do not want to portray rosy in-law relations, but my wife and I have appreciated open-mindedness and not letting popular perceptions without any recourse to personal judgment to become our own personal perceptions.

I am not one that picks up a phone every day to call my mother, but so many times my wife will do this and only inform me that mum was passing her regards. My mother also reciprocates by calling my wife so many times too. At least they are open minded and willing to enjoy their in-law relations and thus far have done nothing but enjoy this relationship. They are like mother and daughter and that is how it should be.

I have mentioned the cordial relationship I share with my brothers-in-law; I must also mention that I greatly enjoy my relationship with my mother-in-law too. She is like my own mother. In fact another of my wife's cousins who visited us at our humble abode in Lusaka having traveled from Glasgow Scotland mentioned she was surprised my mother-in-law and I, were eating from the same dining table.

Of course this was a light moment from her, as she later went on about how in-laws in her new home where she has spent close to 17years address each other on a first name basis. Had this been coming from a Sengahill or maybe a Mishulundu village in Kalabo dweller, I wouldn't be far from the truth if I said; it could have been representative of the general approach to in-law relation by most Africans. Generally Africans build brick walls in their relations with in-laws.

It is this brick wall I am really against. For this reason I reiterate the need for change in attitude in this regard. Changes that will see people look forward to seeing their mother-in-laws as their own mothers and enjoy life together as one family.

If some misunderstanding creeps into the family, there is no need to dodge or shelve it. Instead, bite the bullet and talk things over and move on as one family. There is no denying that this can never be an easy undertaking as things can be very tense under normal circumstances, but they can only be made better when treating each other as one family.

Having called for open minded relations between in-laws, the golden rule of non-interference by a third party in any relationship still remains the number one rule in order to maintain healthy in-law relations. Life isn't always black-and-white; there's a lot of room for gray between the lines. There is no reason for anyone outside of a marriage 'union between two people to the exclusion of all others' (as marriage is defined by the civic marriage registrar) to try and play umpire in the name of protecting a sister, son, brother daughter or whoever.

Such actions only create monsters, bothers or sorry in law, sadly Solanje has gone down as a sorry in law.