Bhlasen.com | Discussions

mdarakuda says:
Tinashes' article although insighful and clearly well researched, i feel falls short greatly in respect to its analysis on developnment, the question and the measures to such an extent that the argument, about the value and his suggestions with regards to foreign aid to africa from an economists perspective is inadmissible. Development, a term laden by ambivalence and ambiguity has been characterized by a bewildering assortment of policy that have made it enormously abstract and difficult to coin quantitative measures capable of capturing the various components of well being and development across national boundaries. A paradigm in itself, development, it is essential to have an understanding of its main objectives, before any quantitative measure can be ascertained. The primary objective of development is to benefit the people . Human development is a critical component when looking at the aggregate developmental progress of a nation. Longevity, the importance of life is one that should never undervalued. Life expectancy at birth as well as infant mortality rates, are two important indicators in capturing longevity, especially as there exists no comprehensive information about people?��Ǩ�Ѣs nutritional state and health . Knowledge, captured on a basic level by literacy indicators should also not be undermined. It serves as a gateway to societal empowerment and technical progress hence not only should we consider it at a tertiary level, but also elementary education, should serve as an indication of a nations development. Command over the resources needed for a decent living is a third key component of development. This indicator perhaps posses the greatest difficulty in quantifying as it requires data such as credit, income, access to land and other resources the scarcity of which presents all sorts of problems. In a nut-shell all factors considered development and well being can be taken to be the participation or control of people over the goals, direction and the pace of change processes. There is a natural inclination to equate development and well being to economic growth, but this is nothing more than a reductionist view, as there is clearly need for a multidimensional take that incorporates all the above mentioned realms. For as long as people have pursued the quest of development, many quantitative measures have been developed to help give a qualitative understanding and as a means of keeping track with progress. Furthermore advances in statistics and economic models over the past century have created comfort with such takes. However it is evident from the burgeoning movement to construct new development indicators that there is dissatisfaction in these prevailing modes and growing need for better measures to aid the understanding of this complexity called, ?��Ǩ��development?��Ǩ�Ѣ. Income is indeed a means not an end, GNP and GDP growth measures are indeed necessary but not sufficient measures of development. They only capture one side of development and well being but not in its entirety. It is a valid argument that higher income can indeed be a gateway, to better education, health system e.t.c. but just an aggregate count does not take into account such things as distribution of wealth and resource. Hence there is no justification of judging a countries development based on their GDP, and GNP growth, similar problems are encountered when purchasing power and per capita adjustments are made. The dilemma posed above points to the need to try and compute or construct a composite index for development. Having too many indicators will smudge and make difficult to use this single complex indicator. An example of such an indicator that is of great importance when measuring growth is the Human Deprivation and Development index. It balances the virtues of the broad scope in which we look at development but at the same time retaining the sensitivity to critical aspects. Cross-sectional and time series analysis with the later being the more important are also good ways of analyzing a broad range of factors that we consider as helpful in indicating a nations growth. Correlation analysis, graphical plots, and face off comparisons as in tables 1 and 2 give a trend picture and relative comparison juncture. This is important for policy distribution when deciding in which way you would like move in so as to balance out the broad spectra of factors that determine development and well being. All that has been said up to this can serve as platform to a broad view on development economics and philosophy, but when narrowed down to a single county there is no question, the measure has to be tailor-made. National accounts measures to start off with generalize and support the notion that rapid industrialization and improvements in material possession evoke a better life and social improvements for the people. The price of their attainment is at times overlooked examples of which are, massive pollution, urban congestion and monumental waste resources . Growth does indeed involve a trade-off the value of what is given up versus what is gained varies from community to community. Sub-Saharan Africa, cultural forces tend to sustain high fertility, and this is of great importance to the locals . However common development models would suggest that this weighs down on development, which brings me to an all most important question, on whose terms? Economic, the social ingredient and political dimension can all be generalized to some extend when we look at development measure. Culture on the other hand confers identity and self-worth of a people . Policy recommendations promoted for ?��Ǩ��growth?��Ǩ�Ѣ, range from tightened credit, budget discipline, wage freezes and export expansion . These are very stringent and limit how individual countries can function within their own confines and hence taking away part of their overall well-being. Debt accrued in pursuit of economic growth also increase dependence of developing countries on the lenders making them liable and accountable to them, hence flouting the notion of economic freedom. These are some factor often overlooked but if we are really to measure development and well being in the context that we have defined it, they are very important. The question of what the best measure for a country?��Ǩ�Ѣs development is, is one indeed that raises many conflicting ideas, model compete in defining the good life and the definition of development is one to which a straight answer can never be given. On the other a lot can be agreed upon as far as subtle indicators are concerned. Conclusively what can said is that the development and well-being of a nation can be measured based on a true understanding of the community values society, in addition to the prototypical views on development. I doubt very much, if you were to collectively put all these things in mind you would write an article in the same exact fashion. Rewrite your article and this time convince us, that aid forms such as for humanitarian benefit, in times of hunger, national disasters or aiming and rehabilitating health delivery in Africa should be done away with, as a gateway to a better tomorrow.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
The point of the paper is not to convince anybody, but merely to spearhead the effort to bring Africans to even think about the idea. I seem to have done that with you. So keep the ideas rolling.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
I will agree with Mdarakuda that we fall short on the best measure for development. We can use GDP per capita, but the current trend in many african countries is the formation of a very strong and lucrative informal sector that is unaccounted for when calculating GDP.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
I agree that outlawing all forms of AID would lead to disaster. There are some transfer payments that are necessary - like aid in times of disaster or war. Maybe it was necessary to define the specific forms of AID that I was targeting. However, some of the loans that nations have received from the IMF and the structural adjustment programs(SAP) they force fed us are to blame for some the woes that some African nations like Zimbabwe face today. have been imposed to ensure debt repayment and economic restructuring. But the way it has happened has required poor countries to reduce spending on things like health, education and development, while debt repayment and other economic policies have been made the priority. At this point though I feel that we beging to blur the lines between debt and AID, and that is indeed incorrect.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
when people dwell on the definition of development and how to quantify development and such, then it becomes more a question of semantics and all, and to me that's just folly because, no matter what yardstick one is using, the bottom of the line is that sub saharan Africa is underdeveloped, period. so Tinashe definitely raises a valid issue on questioning the effectiveness of aid to Africa; true we have been receiving lots of aid as a continent and we continue to live in poverty but does that mean aid is useless? i don't think so. firstly, in reference to the Asian tigers, i just want to point out that actually Korea has received the biggest loan from the IMF to date, and that came in the wake of the financial crisis. the contagion does actually offer a great basket case when analyzing the importance of aid on development and because those asian countries where indeed receiving vast amounts of aid from the world bank and the imf but they still failed! the question is why? simply put, those countries did not have the infrastructure and instruments laid down in place that made sure that the aid would be efficiently utilized. and those statutes should have been a prerequisite for aid. what we learned in the wake of the financial asian crisis is that most of the governments were corrupt and had irregular market system that do not fall under the capitalist system that the world bank and the imf assumes. the case in thailand for instance was that the president's son ran a monopoly one one of the major agricultural output (i forget the crop) and as long as such scenarios are in place then aid will continue to be misused because the aid was meant to benefit the poor farmers but in the end only the president's son benefited. and that is the problem we have in africa. and by mentioning the mediagate (i think that's what it's called) scandal, that is just one of the many instances when aid has been abused. so Tinashe's observation is great but i think the remedy is too drastic. i would rather see a situation where the world bank actually makes the recipient countries more accountable for the loans and i believe that with enough institutions monitoring the movement of the funds, eventually they will reach the intended targets and improve the quality of life in Africa. certainly learning how to make the fishing rods, and then fishing ourselves, to borrow your metaphor, is a good notion-the question, however, is do we have the capital to invest in such projects??

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
i think tinashe has got a point even though up to some extent he needs to understand that with Africans it will take a while for them to get their feet so we need to be patient with them.another thng is the leaders concentrate too much on rivalry with other countires tha they do getting something done in their countries!! but however i do applaud him on the good use of facts and his analysis. he also needs to understand that as he is an African himself and know what it's like to live in Africa he could have stated how Africans can then become self dependant

Offensive comment?

Post your comment:
	Log in to track comments through the members area.

Comments (3)

Guest says:
It took American democracy 100 years to recognise the rights of Blacks. I believe Africa will emerge in the next decade with powerful democrats and we elect younger and ambitous Presidents who will strive to leave a proper mark of History. The old generation time is almost over. By 2010, I can assure you, most of dictators would have died of old age. Bvuma iwewe

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
Citizenship in African countries is transforming to reflect the shifts in the dominant nationalistic ideology. In Zimbabwe the evolution is within the context of maintaining the nation state. The crisis of a weakening nation state ?��Ǩ�� Zimbabwe - is connected with the variety of identity forms that define national citizenship. The focus on identification with the state is not a new phenomenon however; the trend on what it means to be a citizen and above all a citizen in Zimbabwe may also have roots in consumerism. Your mention of ?��Ǩ��economic rights?��Ǩ�Ѣ is a good assessment on how the promotion of development has through the attraction of foreign investment produced consumerism as a substitute for citizenship.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
in African countries is transforming to reflect the shifts in the dominant nationalistic ideology. In Zimbabwe the evolution is within the context of maintaining the nation state. The crisis of a weakening nation state ?��Ǩ�� Zimbabwe - is connected with the variety of identity forms that define national citizenship. The focus on identification with the state is not a new phenomenon however; the trend on what it means to be a citizen and above all a citizen in Zimbabwe m

Offensive comment?

Post your comment:
	Log in to track comments through the members area.

Comments (1)

Guest says:
African brain drain, raises very critical issues that I took time to ponder over and thought why people had not responded to the article. Is it us in the diaspora that we fell the pinch of the articles. My attempt to comment is measured by beliefs that humanity or society's foundation starts with an individual and any changes, influences and attitudes or attributes that mark over the people are clearly defined character of the persons that make out that community. I find the author's reference of the unqeustioned or unexplored umblical cord between ones country and someone skills as a worthy point one can argue to defend an excuse of increased brain drain. But in the same wave length, who owns the identity of what. People identify themseleves and voluntarily as Malawian, Zimbabwean, Zambian or Tanzanian before anything else. It is not the country that identifies itself as such. I find therefore that rather than putting a question of assumption on hthe country that it assumes that skills gained by a citizen are worthy in the same country more than eslewhere, it is the individual who sticks around and maintians a proud association with the country. It is not vice versa. Laws allow you to change your citizenship at will anywhere in the world. If you dont feel an attachment and oblidged to a country, why not change the citizenship simply to detach yourself from the assumptions of this umblical cord. Further to this, the argument of this tie is interestingly only raised in Africa, where for ages has remained the largest contributor of resources to the developement of other continents other than its own. Is it the mind of an African, the history or the modern society that has no principles or ideologie sover its own. The early Africans, travelled outside their nations, but always came back home to rest and develop after a period. This is conspicously absent from the new generations which consider immigration as a priority of its own class. In sharp contrast, other developing continents such as India and China in Asia, Mexico and Brazil in the America's show a very contradictory pattern to the arguments raised in defense of brain drain. Succesful Indian doctors and scientists have returned from the Western world and developed pharmacies in India that provide generic options to the wetsern expensive versions. They have done the same for Singapore, Malaysia, Taiwan and China. From Nuclear to Rockect scientists, from University Professors to Music and Entertainment industry. They have learnt to learn and not get stuck in the places they go to learn. In simpler words, the have remained loyal to their nations where they are needed and used their skills to defy odds and make them places which they want to be. Where you have Nasa space station, the Chinese Tai Mang stations in out skirts of Ghaouzing proudly stand. Whether the country is a democracy or not, the scientists have retained their independence and developed the technologies. Where Hollywood was the world's only major entertainment industry, Bollywood the Indian version stands. This has seen a greater shift in all industry's, the Hong Kong Shangai Bank buying out Bank of America in Asia, Disney land opening in Japan and other Asian countries. Its because of the original Chinese, Taiwanese, Indians, Malay's and other who had belief in their nations and used their ability to develop their environments to global competitive levels. What gain will Africa have to explort its orginal labour, in form of slaves, its raw materials during colonialism and more now in form of brain drain. Why cant Africans change their mind and believe that it is possible to change a country's woes without your indulgence in politics. Even at political level, if Kwame Krumah, Mandela, Kaunda, Nyerere and others believed had no umblical tie to their nations, what would have become of the continent. Should we assume that these people had no options to stay in the places they had been educated in and leave their country's of birth to find a way from themselves. If money is all what matters, what about hundreds of Teachers that continue to be underpaid in belief that they are contributing to the future of the nation while they loose it to brain drain due to individual freedoms of choice? Let us be practical, the country does not demand anything from you. But you demand it as a source of your identity. You have a moral obligation to stand up and be counted among those that have invested back in their own nations. Why should you spend your skills trained and gain after a long and dusty path of education paied for by fellow poor citizens only to enrich the rich. Why should Indians, Chinese and Mexicans return to the country's and invest in cheaper technologies but with the same output, while Africans have no moral consience of returning home? If all the old groups, the real original Africans left the continent, who could have built the Great Zimbabwe ruins, Zanzibar and the Pyramids, the early settlements that makes Africa a proud inventor of civilization? Who if not you, owes his country, his nation, his community and his family more to stay and develop the environment compared to an American student sho volunteers a one gap year in the name of Peace Corps? I believe, its time those in diaspora returned home and those at home stayed to develop Africa to the levels we admire of others to have done for themseleves. I paraphrase this famous quote, "Ask not what your country owes you, but what you owe to it" If not us, then who?

Offensive comment?

Post your comment:
	Log in to track comments through the members area.

Comments (6)

Guest says:
The article touches on a lot of important points- unfortunately the whole system of politics is based on a system of patriachy. Governmental structures have their roots in the ancient senate in Rome where men ruled. The word senate itself is derived from a word meaning " old man" - therefore throughout recorded history the practice of patriarchy has become deeply rooted in society and has become normal. What we need in politics, is equal representation because women do make up over 50% of the world's population. It benefits a country economically and in other ways when we begin to utilise talents of a left out half the population. In the current state of affairs, men go behind closed doors and pretend to be states and make decisions for states whose make up they really do not reflect and whose needs they really do not understand. On a global scale, we also need this same representation in organisations like the UN: Under Koffi Annan's guidance beside the rhetoric, women were only 37% of those in proffesional positions, UNIFEM was the only organisation for women and the one with the smallest budget(a pitiful one too) and there was a very small gender component to other agencies. So thanks for bringing up this subject, this is a crime of inequality of status and thus violence against women.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
Here is an extract from Marie C Wilson's book: Closing the Leadership Gap: Why Women Can and Must Help Run the World (Viking 2004. She is also the founder and president of The White House Project, co-creator of Take Our Daughters to Work Day. "All of my adult life, I have preached the virtues of power sharing between men and women. The arrangement seemed not only fair, but also obvious: Women populate half the democracy; we should occupy half the positions of leadership - both for gender equity and because women, a natural resource, should be mined for energy. Now when I think of women in leadership, I think of it not only as the fair thing to do, but also as the only thing to do. In a few short years, the world has become very unstable. Terrorists attacked us on our soil; in response, we waged war against Afghanistan and Iraq. The formerly robust U.S. economy will soon sag under the biggest deficit in its history. Corporate greed has wiped out whole companies, along with hundreds of thousands of jobs. Millions of Americans continue to live without adequate health care. When I look at the issues we face, and when I think of the changes we need, I am as convinced as I have ever been that our future depends on the leadership of women - not to replace men, but to transform our options alongside them."

Offensive comment?

tshabalala says:
This week is part of the 16-day campaign to stop the violence against women ?��Ǩ�� perhaps if what Mitchelle was advocating for happened then women in positions of political power could be an avenue to fight on a policy level against the abuse and emancipation of women in political and social areas. Violence against African women has been long condemned but not dealt with at a legislative level. A husband battering a wife over conjugal rights is still something natural in the context of dubious cultural values and norms. A woman stripped for wearing a mini skirt in some societies deserved it because she provoked the men around her. There is need to recognize the importance of women in society. Perhaps this can be realized if legislation penalizes for the violence and discrimination of women through domestic violence bills. Violence against women has moved from being a family issue to a problem of society. Changing attitudes and behaviors, that perpetuate violence has become the responsibility of governments. Maybe a start would be to make legislation that prevents violence against women and girls.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
Nothing infuriates me more than when people say "Women and children." This sensitivity may be a result of my having taken a gender and sexuality class, but has anyone ever heard of anyone say "Men and children"? There was a case in Nigeria two years ago of a House of Reps member who slapped a female House of Reps member for disagreeing with him. How on earth are women supposed to be taken seriously in politics when they are deemed as one step away from children and can easily be slapped around in homes and figuratively slapped around in their places of work? What is sad, to me, is that we are even considering putting a quota system in place at all. The quota system may put women in positions of power, but what women need is not power but respect from their male counterparts. What does it matter if there are women in power and they go back to their homes still prisoners of societal norms that debase them? I believe that attitudes and cultural views of women need to changed for there to be any real progress concerning women in politics, else we would merely be mowing the lawn, not uprooting the plant that put us in this mess in the first place.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
I have not been able to answer every individual question that I received in the wake of my essay. I hope that by writing this -- I may be able to clear some of the confusion generated by my article ?��Ǩ?�Women and Political participation.?��Ǩ? Africa has some of the highest rates of female political participation in the world today. However, the talk on introduction of quotas attempts to move debates of women and political participation to encompass a variety of arguments for having women in politics. Among the arguments in support for gender quotas is the demand for gender balance, focus on women?��Ǩ�Ѣs interests and to tackle the discriminatory practice of politics. Gender quotas will not solve all the problems of women in politics. The mere definition of gender quotas is ambiguous because there is no distinction as to what level of politics is being discussed. However, quotas are an excellent example of expanding the idea of proportional representation in political system. Though many issues in politics are gender neutral and either gender can address them, women?��Ǩ�Ѣs concerns require women to represent themselves. Quotas are not a discrimination of men but an answer to the historical under representation of women. While, women on the continent have risen to high political positions with vice presidents in Zimbabwe, Uganda, South Africa and Gambia. There is still less representation in parliament and other political institutions. Gender quotas represent the change in politics to deal with structural discrimination that will afford women the opportunity to participate in political institutions. The growing change in politics to focus not on equal opportunity but on equality of result is what quotas try to address. Yes, quotas focus on the numerical representation of women instead of the merit of women because education and resources are no longer strong hindrances to women who want to be involved in politics. Women now have good qualifications and strong political beliefs. Our understanding of merit in politics has to be broader than levels of education. Instead we should try to tackle the direct discrimination that allows for the under representation of ?��Ǩ?�qualified?��Ǩ? women in politics. If quotas go with the electoral system set up in a country and are correctly implemented they could successfully lead to true women?��Ǩ�Ѣs representation. Thinking that women will serve, as symbolism is still assuming that politics is only for men and women will not be actively involved. We need to change our attitudes about the capabilities of women, by providing them with a mechanism that will take away some of the disadvantages that women have faced. Quotas will lead to proportional representation. Mitchelle Ajida

Offensive comment?

Post your comment:
	Log in to track comments through the members area.

Comments (5)

Guest says:
I do battle with the same questions why Zimbabweans fail to stand up for their own rights and their stolen lives. What I have observed is that in Zimbabwe's history, the nature of the colonial struggle was never a battle of the "masses" as is the case of eg South Africa rather it was a struggle of a select individuals who chose to sacrifice everything and go fight in the bushes. The freedom fighters fought while the ordinary Zimbabwean worked the land or worked for the colonialiser hoping that salvation would come. In recent history, this has been manifested in the failure of "ordinary" people to show up for mass action movements. Again, they leave it up to members of opposition and university students to fight for them. From my conversations with people on the ground, I find that the majority is frustrated with the status quo but at the same time they await a saviour (whether it is Tsvangirai, the US, Britain or Mutambara) to emerge from the night and save the day. What we need is a change in the social conditioning so that people know that a government is truly meant to be for the people by the people.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
TO add to the last comment, the problem in post-colonial Africa is that there is no real debate of the issues rather people follow a leader. Walk on the streets of Harare, Joburg, Nairobi and ask five people what the major policy issues of their leaders are and you will stand to be amazed. Come to think of it, even I don't know what the five major priorities of my President are. What most of us know is that Mandela,Nkrumah , Nyerere and Mugabe are/were the " big men" of our continent and it is in them as individuals rather than their policies that we place our trust in. Unless we address this, there will be little change and we will just blow with the wind.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
In reference to the previous post regarding citizens knowledge or lack thereof of their country's major policies, I have to agree that the number of citizens who keep abreast of the issues plaguing their country's is astounding. Knowledge is power. For example in Kenya the transition from Moi's regime to Mwai Kibaki's was supposed to be a sign of hope for the citizens who had endured years of poverty, incredible corruption such as the Goldenburg scandal, the educational, health care sectors were in deplorable condition and where ethnic identity was more important than ideology. Today a number of things have improved such as free education in primary schools, but the corruption scandals are still incredible and are not being addressed adequately e.g. Goldenburg scandal, mounting insecurity, political and economic instability among others are all unprecedented challenges for Kenya as well as other African countries. And as noted above failing to stand up and fight as Mandela, Wangaari Maathai, Mwalimu Julius Nyerere, Nkurumah and others, will render us powerless to the political antics in our homes and thereby allow the continued mismanagemnt of resources.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
Not merely for the sake of playing the "devils advocate" but just to present the other side of the coin that tends to be overlooked: change-although very desirable-doesn't have to come at the cost of precious lives. We are all aware what dissent against the government would bring forth. I mean, mere demonstrations attract the wrath of the government. And technically, demonstrations don't comprise confrontation, right? So what do you presume will happen when the masses dare challenge the government? It's going to be carnage and we don't want that. I realise Proud is trying to initiate dialogue but at the same time seems to be leaning towards confrontation. But the big question that Proud should be asking himself is why the Zimbabwean people have been reluctant to follow that route?

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
only zimbabweans will rise up to remove mugabe. unfortunately the sadc leaders remain passive when the economy of zimbabwe affects the region. what proud is asking is what many people have been asking why zimbabweans with highest literacy rate before mugabe 'projects' fails to stand up and prefer the way of silence. the immediate previous answer indicates the spirit people have about the situation. demonstration and confrotation is what is known as 'chimulenga'. some people were courageous enough to stand up against Ian Smith and his comrades. who shall liberate zimbabwe if they dont stand up. zimbabwe is for zimbabweans and waking up from slumber, exiling and frequent detentions would do a great service to this former giant of the region. our mothers, our women and our pride in WOZA have shown that the truth is sacred.

Offensive comment?

Post your comment:
	Log in to track comments through the members area.

Comments (2)

Guest says:
Let Botha go in his casket without much ado. State Funeral or not, he never felt remorse over his terror against black community. He will find peace with his maker not Africans. After all the boers still say, including a few misguided Africans, we are south africans not africans. k

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
a well reaseached article Ranga, im in zimbabwe and im reading this. Keep on keeping on Trust Munyuki

Offensive comment?

Post your comment:
	Log in to track comments through the members area.

Comments (4)

Guest says:
I think its BS. If these celebrities really cared they would help build an infrastructure to prevent kids from being orphaned. The Madonnas of this world do this kind of stuff mainly for their egos.

Offensive comment?

ranga says:
I would disagree with the last comment. I think we can all agree that children should be raised in family environments, not orphanages. So if Madonna gets an ego boost by adopting a child, should we really care? Similarly, if Madonna adopts a child in order to get an ego boost, we're no worse off, as long as the child actually gets taken care of.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
The image it brings to my mind is that of a little girl walking into a pet shop to pick up a pet puppy.As much as I would like to believe celebrities' motives for adoption are pure,there is something very disturbing about the whole affair;difficult though it is to put a finger on. Perhaps, it's because of the pet shop image and that fact that unlike dogs,people like David must not be made into pets--objects of celebs' vainglorious "humanitarian" affinities. It makes you wonder if it's really about Africa's poor orphaned children or the celebs themselves.And of course,those greedy dysfunctional African governments always stand to gain from the media hype and the tourism it generates. God save Africa!

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
Its really an intersting argument on Madonna. However, all should be tallied down to one fact. What would be David Banda, the orphan's best interests. An oprhanhood in an institutionalised setting or a family that provides everything. Leave politics and other factors aside: what is good for the orphan? Its not an acedemic question but a reality probe.

Offensive comment?

Post your comment:
	Log in to track comments through the members area.

Comments (6)

tshabalala says:
Read this article last month http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/5388182.stm

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
I believe that there are many sayings in Zimbabwe that reflect the spirit of ubuntu but we can not expect that they will all have the word "munhu" ie person in all of them. Some that come to mind for me are " chara chimwe hachitswanye inda" (literally: one finger can't crash lice :) or "rume rimwe harikombe churu" (a single person cannot surround an ant-hill). I could list more but the point is that yes, we have lots of equivalents.

Offensive comment?

Kondwani Munthali says:
Not only in Zimbabwe, ubunthu is a community way pf life among Africans. It origantes from the real meaning of 'human being' which is attributed to a particular human behavior. Africans have two distinguishing marks of human behaviour. "Munthu" in Malawian languages of Chichewa and Tumbuka which comes closer to 'Umunthu" translated literally as a human basically referred to a distinguished behaviour one has displayed which makes him a human. When one misbehaves, the opposite of 'umunthu" is 'nyama" meaning literally an animal. From these behavioural distinctions of what is expected of man and what is not 'humanly correct" in the eyes of society breeds the concept of ubunthu. Shall man live alone? The language basically mean that one cannot live alone but with support of freinds. This is the orgin of communal life. Life of sharing. Life of suffering together that includes mourning together during funerals and dancing together during weddings. This is what makes an African a complete Christian, a complete lover of a brother! Clinton adopted it when he addressed the Labour conference in London in September, what remains is that all of us should just work together write books and push for an african philosophy study of ubunthu!

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
Munhu munhu- means, literally, "a person is a person", and this is usually used to show or emphasize that all human beings are equal. The meaning of the statement also depends on how you pronounce the second "munhu", such that it could also imply ubuntu. However,a shona phrase that I think is closer to the concept of ubuntu is, "munhu munhu wevanhu", and when loosely tanslated will be , " a person is a person of persons'. I think this refers, albeit symbolically, to the idea of not living in a vacuum.It used to be a very common Zimbabwean and more specifically my village culture that one's children could be fed/disciplined/looked after by strangerss, because we all belong to one another in some sense. The concept of "munhu munhu wevanhu", has been very important when I was growing up, especially in my village where those who could not afford food could just send their children to neighbors' houses at meal times, and I don't remember people ever complaining.It's sort of like everyone is accountable not only for their actions and inactions, but everybody else's. Fadzie!

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
"....ubuntu alone will not lead Zimbabweans out of their current *darkness*." Are we still viewing Africa as the "dark continent"? The use of that metaphor is an interesting reflection of colonial mentality.

Offensive comment?

Guest says:
stanlake samkange wrote a book (with his wife, around 1980 or so) on HUNHUISM as our indegenous philosophy. it's exactly the same as ubuntu, and predates the recent debates from SA. of course, the basis of both philosophies is the same, that is, the social organization of traditional african societies that placed community welfare above that of the individual. one can actually compile proverbs that extoll the virtues of community cooperation (such as 'chara chimwe hachitswanyi inda' or 'imbwa mbiri hadzitorerwe nyama') and sayings that shoot down individualism (zano ndoga akasiya jira mumasese, or humbimbingoga hwashe Ndyire, or hushe hunoda asiri mberera). same fanana ubuntu. but i'm not quite sure i understood the application of ubuntu to current zim politics, for in my opinion either side can legitimately claim some aspects of ubuntu.

Offensive comment?

Post your comment:
	Log in to track comments through the members area.

Comments (3)