One of the things I appreciated about Mandela's book was the props he gave to the whites and "coloreds" who fought alongside of the blacks, and also those who didn't fight but who he assumed were rational people who saw the basic unfairness of the system. Re your remarks about Mandela and Mr DeKlerk--one of the enjoyable things about the book is the delicate way in which Mandela manages to communicate his feelings about his opponent, explaining tactics that DeKlerk used that angered him or where he felt betrayed, but also trying to give him hs due for other steps.

Mandela's restraint in the way he talks about his opponents really impressed me.  He is a master of diplomacy--really brilliant.  As I age, the quality of restraint in others (and when I can pull it off, in myself)is something I appreciate more and more.

Parenthetically, the demonizing (what I used to see as "telling it like it is") of the wealthy and corporations hampers my old favorite Edwards' appeal.  There is a way to lay out arguments  without being quite so polarizing. I agree completely with the substance of what he says.  After reading Mandela's book, however, I see it as a self-defeating self-indulgence.  You can't demonize an entire class (and especially one who lives cozily with your Congress, Dem and GOP) and get anything done.

Weird how I'm coming to appreciate...er...my old nemseis... H clinton...