27 pages • 54 minutes read
Nelson MandelaI Am Prepared to Die
Nonfiction | Essay / Speech | Adult | Published in 1964A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Themes
Justification of Political Violence
One of the central themes that Mandela’s speech engages is whether and under what conditions political violence can be justified. Though Mandela is speaking in his defense, his goal is to question larger political ideologies and ideals in order to put Umkhonto’s actions in context.
Mandela does not to deny the charges against him, as they bear the political intentions of the freedom struggle. Rather, Mandela aims to recontextualize the violence as necessary and strategic. Paradoxically, it is a form of violence that seeks to stop further harm. This is contrasted against the state’s violence, which is malicious and seeks to silence and even kill those who oppose its white supremacist oppression.
Mandela’s persuasive rhetoric allows him to explain Umkhonto’s sabotage as the most humane form of necessary violence, as it is aimed at buildings and prioritizes the sanctity of human life. Mandela states that “Umkhonto was to perform sabotage, and strict instructions were given to its members right from the start, that on no account were they to injure or kill people in planning or carrying out operations” (37). This emphasis on violence against state property, not people, continues throughout his speech. Even though Umkhonto prepares for military training abroad, in case of having to resort to guerilla warfare, Mandela assures his audience that “it would be a long time before the possibilities of sabotage were exhausted” (51).
This humane approach stands in contrast with Mandela’s accounts of state violence. Mandela makes clear that decades of peaceful protest have been met with either indifference or the exertion of force. By the time Umkhonto was founded, “scores of Africans had died as a result of racial friction” (43), a point Mandela underscores with specific examples of protests that resulted in police violence.
In justifying his actions against his oppressors, Mandela uses the state’s own violence against it. He says, for example, that “the Government resorted to a show of force to crush opposition to its policies, only then did we decide to answer violence with violence” (9) and that “a Government which uses force to maintain its rule teaches the oppressed to use force to oppose it” (21). Despite the eye-for-an-eye sentiment in these lines, Mandela also contrasts Umkhonto’s violence with that of the National Party. Whereas the government’s violence is carried out against people to perpetuate oppression, Umkhonto’s violence is carried out against property to eliminate oppression in favor of racial harmony.
Racism and Oppression Under Apartheid
Mandela’s speech is directed against the racism and oppression of the apartheid government. Apartheid was a system that instilled violent racism through the construction of segregationist laws and policies. This extreme manifestation of racism could only be maintained through the use of excessive force and censorship. By imprisoning Mandela and his political comrades, the government was actively silencing and threatening all political opposition and protest.
As this was thought to be Mandela’s final public speech, he uses his platform to highlight many of the racist injustices that were prevalent in South Africa. First and foremost, he highlights the violence and killings that have been imposed against Africans who have chosen to defy the system, such as the massacre of 69 people at the Sharpeville protests against Pass Laws.
The final parts of his speech show how racism operated in South Africa. Again, Mandela utilizes contrast to paint of a picture of the South African’s plight. He states that South Africa is a “land of extremes and remarkable contrasts,” and that while “whites enjoy what may well be the highest standard of living in the world… Africans live in poverty and misery” (86). Therefore, Mandela not only focuses on the poverty that Black South Africans are forced to endure but chooses to directly contrast it with the relative privilege of the white South Africans.
As part of his rhetoric, Mandela uses statistics to illustrate the wide gulf between Black South Africans’ standard of living and that of their white South African counterparts. In addition, Mandela uses anecdotes to strengthen his points on an emotional level. For example, he shares that “[w]hen anything has to be carried or cleaned the white man will look around for an African to do it for him, whether the African is employed by him or not” (96). Mandela uses this common experience to comment on how South Africa’s racist policies have robbed Black South Africans of dignity.
In the final parts of his essay, Mandela states that “the white man fears democracy” (100), as it will result in a majority black voting pool. However, Mandela reasserts the message of peace and cooperation that the ANC was founded on. He says, “The ANC has spent half a century fighting against racialism,” and when the struggle is over, “it will not change that policy” (101). Mandela does not wish his own oppression upon any other race. His wish is for complete liberation from oppressive racialism.
Democracy and the Sanctity of Life
A throughline in Mandela’s speech is the sanctity of life and its importance in maintaining a democratic society. Umkhonto’s choice to use sabotage was inspired by their respect for preserving life and their belief that their countrymen and women deserved freedom from oppression.
An especially pertinent example is the repeated mention of the government’s use of the death sentence. For example, Mandela mentions that, after Umkhonto’s initial acts of sabotage in three major South African cities, the apartheid government made sabotage a crime punishable by death—using fear to deter dissent. Mandela himself was on trial for sabotage, and his closing declaration, “I am prepared to die,” should thus be interpreted as a repudiation of this tactic of intimidation. Throughout the speech, Mandela equates democracy with respect for life. He wants to build a society in which everyone is free to speak out and to organize without fear of government violence. Paradoxically, he is willing to sacrifice his own life in the service of this cause. By refusing to fear death, he robs the government of its power to use the threat of death to silence opposition.
Many argue that the international attention the trial received swayed the prosecution to not request the death penalty. Activist Winnie Madikizela-Mandela has said: "Had it not been for the Observer coverage, those men [Mandela and Oliver Tambo] would have faced the death penalty" (Mulholland, John. “Without the Observer, and David Astor, Mandela would have hanged.” The Guardian, 7 Dec. 2013). Madikizela-Mandela, Mandela's former wife, is referring to the trial's coverage in the British newspaper The Observer, which reported on the proceedings weekly and advocated for the men's release.
In closing his speech, Mandela asserts that he is willing to sacrifice his own life for the cause, even if it means he does not get to see the liberation that he has fought for. He is not threatened or defeated by the possibility of death, and his defiance suggests that the apartheid government will no longer be able to use violence as a means of oppression.
Related Titles
By Nelson Mandela
