A Critical Review of "NELSON MANDELA: THE STORY THEY TRIED TO BURY, THE MANDELA THEY NEVER WANTED YOU TO KNOW," by Chris Kanyane
 
1. Introduction: Unmasking a Counter-Narrative
 
Chris Kanyane's book, "NELSON MANDELA: THE STORY THEY TRIED TO BURY, THE MANDELA THEY NEVER WANTED YOU TO KNOW," immediately signals its confrontational stance against the globally accepted narrative of Nelson Mandela as a symbol of peace and reconciliation. The very title, "NELSON MANDELA: THE STORY THEY TRIED TO BURY, THE MANDELA THEY NEVER WANTED YOU TO KNOW,," serves as an audacious challenge to the prevailing hagiography, promising a raw, unsanitized "truth" that aims to dismantle a deeply ingrained public image.
 
Chris Kanyane's central thesis posits that Mandela was not the saintly liberator often portrayed but rather a deceptive, Marxist-trained revolutionary who fundamentally corrupted the African National Congress (ANC) and laid the groundwork for South Africa's current societal and political crises.1 The book contends that Mandela was "a man of coded orders, targeted killings, and orchestrated fear," and notably, "a man of smiles for the camera and fire behind the curtain".

The author, Chris Kanyane, is introduced as a Black South African born in 1971, whose perspective is profoundly shaped by a traumatic personal experience: witnessing the brutal "necklacing" of an old woman at the tender age of fifteen.
 
This harrowing eyewitness account serves as the emotional and moral core of his critique, positioning him as a unique voice challenging established historical narratives. The book's initial impact stems from its deliberate use of emotional and confrontational language. By starting with such a provocative title and the graphic account of violence, Kanyane aims to bypass conventional intellectual defenses, appealing directly to the reader's visceral reaction.
 
This approach suggests that the book's primary effect may not be purely academic but rather a profound emotional disruption of a deeply ingrained public image. The "hate" expressed in the title is not merely personal animosity; it functions as a deliberate rhetorical device designed to compel a re-evaluation of a revered figure, leveraging shock value to ensure engagement from readers who might otherwise dismiss the content.
 
This strategy underscores the potency of personal testimony in challenging dominant historical accounts, particularly when those accounts are perceived as sanitized or incomplete. It compels a consideration of the emotional cost of historical narratives that may omit uncomfortable truths, and how individual trauma can become a powerful catalyst for historical re-examination.

This report aims to critically examine Kanyane's claims, analyze his motivations for writing, dissect his rhetorical strategies, and assess the potential impact of his controversial narrative on the established historical discourse surrounding Nelson Mandela and post-apartheid South Africa. It seeks to provide a scholarly and balanced analysis of this deeply personal and polemical work.