Chinese and Vietnamese Communists Helped Persuade Mandela To Liberalize Markets

In the wake of the news of Nelson Mandela’s
death some people predictably hastened to remind us that despite
his status as a symbol of peace, reconciliation, and freedom
Mandela had associations with groups that were not
sympathetic to capitalism and were hardly afraid of committing
acts of violence. Comments criticizing Sen. Ted Cruz’s Facebook
post after Mandela’s death in particular were
widely reported.  

Over at The New York Times’
DealBook, Andrew Ross Sorkin notes that while Mandela may have
believed in the nationalization of industries after his release in
1990, his attitude towards markets did change, ironically thanks in
part to talks with Chinese and Vietnamese communists at the 1992
meeting of the World Economic Forum:

But as the five-day conference of high-level speed-dating wore
on, Mr. Mandela soon decided he needed to reconsider his long-held
views: “Madiba then had some very interesting meetings with the
leaders of the Communist Parties of China and Vietnam,” Mr. Mboweni
wrote, using Mr. Mandela’s clan name. “They told him frankly as
follows: ‘We are currently striving to privatize state enterprises
and invite private enterprise into our economies. We are Communist
Party governments, and you are a leader of a national liberation
movement. Why are you talking about nationalization?’ ”

“It was those decisive moments which made him think about the
need for our movement to seriously rethink the issue,” Mr. Mboweni
said.

Mr. Mandela’s push toward free markets opened up his country to
become the fastest growing in Africa and eventually brought in
billions of dollars of investment from large companies outside the
country. Barclays, for example, acquired Absa, South Africa’s
largest consumer bank, in 2005. Iscor, the country’s largest steel
maker, was sold to Lakshmi Mittal’s LNM in 2004. Industrial and
Commercial Bank of China bought a big stake in Standard Bank, South
Africa’s largest financial services company, in 2008. And Massmart,
a South African supermarket chain, sold a majority stake to Walmart
in 2011.

After former House Speaker Newt Gingrich received hostile
reactions to a personal statement he made expressing his
condolences to South Africans and Mandela’s family following
Mandela’s death he wrote
a response in which he addressed Mandela’s connections to
communism and armed struggle. In the statement, Gingrich rightly
asks those who criticize Mandela’s actions before his imprisonment
on Robben Island to consider not only how they would have acted in
the same situation but also how some of the Founding Fathers
behaved in response to British tyranny. Gingrich’s response was
praised by
Jim Antle at The American Conservative, who wrote:

The Founders’ sins are worthy topics of discussion that should
not be whitewashed out of American history. But neglecting the
context of the times, the specific injustices they fought, the
institutions they built, and the principles they imperfectly
embodied is ideologically motivated malpractice.

Similarly, it is right to point out that many fawning Mandela
obituaries ignore the injustices he tolerated himself, his kind
words for terrorists and dictators, the violence of the ANC toward
blacks as well as whites, even the sins of post-apartheid South
Africa and the virtues of the country before it was transformed.
But any reference to these things that neglects or minimizes the
injustices of apartheid is woefully incomplete—and unlikely to
result in a meaningful dialogue about the very facts such
contrarian commentary hopes to expose.

Too often prominent political figures are lazily characterized
both during their lives and after their deaths, whether it is
calling Obama a “socialist,” Thatcher a “fascist,” or Tea Partiers
“anarchists.” It’s a shame to see Mandela, a praiseworthy as well
as imperfect man, being given similar treatment.