Both the Right and the Left (as conventionally defined in America) are too busy pushing agendas to provide the full story of Nelson Mandela's life and the evil he struggled against. Conservatives found it easy to condemn Mandela as a terrorist and a communist, while minimizing or ignoring the violence perpetrated by the South African regime against blacks (and other nonwhites). The establishment Left also leaves out a big piece of the story: the precise nature of apartheid. What progressives and mislabeled liberals don't understand — or don't want to admit — is that apartheid was a legislative prohibition of the free exercise of choice in a marketplace unfettered by government-bestowed privilege. Indeed, one cannot conceive of apartheid without official interference with markets. Sheldon Richman argues that, while Mandela was crucial in ending apartheid, the he and his movement did not do enough to free the economic system to benefit working people.
Reason's Annual Webathon is underway! Donate today to see your name here.
Reason is supported by:
Ok Boomer Norm
"I refuse to construct some kind of character who is going to appease everybody."
New York City, Which Defended Its Onerous Gun Transport Restrictions As Necessary for Public Safety, Concedes They Weren't
Several justices seem skeptical of the claim that revising the rules after SCOTUS agreed to consider a challenge to them made the case moot.
The officer turned his body camera off, but the incident was still recorded.
Plus: Twitter terms seem to permit "shadowbanning," the case for Craigslist sex ads, and more…