7 minute read
Think piece
UBUNTU AND THE ROLE OF THE STATE
How might Ubuntu account for a good society?
Advertisement
By Dr Motsamai Molefe
Ubuntu is an African value system that offers its own conception of good by specifying the standard of what is deemed excellent, virtuous or permissible. Typically, Ubuntu is explained in terms of the aphorism ‘a person is a person through other persons’. There are at least two ways we can approach the idea of a ‘good society’. One way might emphasise the duties citizens have towards the comity. Another way may be to focus on the duties the state has towards citizens. We experience our lives under the influence of the state and its social institutions, which can improve or deteriorate the conditions of our existence. I define a ‘good society’ in terms of the duties the state has towards its citizens. The essence of a good society pivots on the overall social conditions that the state ought to create and sustain for human existence to be possible and meaningful.
To construct an Ubuntu-based vision of a good society, I divide this article into two sections. I begin by explaining Ubuntu. I will identify the two components of Ubuntu – human dignity, and human excellence. Secondly, I will explain the role of the state in relation to these two components of Ubuntu. Ubuntu defines a good society as one in which the state creates conditions to protect a person’s status of dignity and it equally provides empowering conditions for individuals to flourish in society.
Ubuntu as a value system
Scholars explain Ubuntu by appealing to the aphorism ‘a person is a person through other persons’. The word person occurs three times in the aphorism. To make my case, I will limit my analysis to the first two instances of it – ‘a person is a person’. The first instance of ‘a person’ refers to the ordinary use of the word, which simply refers to a human being. We might interpret the first instance of ‘a person’ qua humanity to imply the primacy of humanity in the moral domain. Ubuntu offers us at least two ways to recognise the primacy of humanity. Firstly, Ubuntu embodies a human-centred moral system. In a human-centred approach, the source and goal of morality essentially involve securing the human good. Steven Biko’s (1978) comment best explains the human-centred approaches typical of Ubuntu, when he opines –
One of the most fundamental aspects of our culture is the importance we attach to (hu)man beings. Ours has always been a (hu)man-centred society. We believe in the inherent goodness of (hu) man(ity). We enjoy (hu)man for himself … Hence in all we do we always place (hu)man first.
Ubuntu recognises the importance of humanity and equally prioritises it over other elements in nature. The priority of human beings does not imply that God and the natural community have entirely no place in the moral domain. Far from it, the point is that morality is the drama that plays itself out in the human domain. The divine will and environmental interests are intrinsically connected with human conduct and good.
Secondly, the first phrase ‘a person’ captures the idea hinted at by Biko when he talks of African cultures believing in the ‘inherent goodness of humanity’. The idea of inherent goodness denotes human dignity. ‘Human dignity’ denotes the inherent and superlative worth associated with the fact of being human. The notion of ‘inherent’ denotes that the value of a human being derives entirely from their nature. That is, so long as someone is human, they have intrinsic worth that is theirs entirely because of their human status. The notion of ‘superlative’ indicates that it is the highest value possible of its kind. That is, in the natural world - the vegetal and animal kingdom – humanity has the highest value. It is because human beings have this dignity, that we owe them the utmost respect.
Ubuntu ethics focuses on human persons. Firstly, it explains the foundation of morality in terms of human beings – morality derives from and about the human good. Secondly, Ubuntu is an ethics of dignity. It espouses the view that every human being is a bearer of inherent worth deserving of equal recognition and utmost respect. Ubuntu requires us to see persons for what they truly are, beings of dignity, and we ought to treat them as such.
The second phrase in the aphorism ‘a person is a person’ refers to the goal of morality. Ubuntu requires a human being, a person, as the moral agent, to become a person. No tautology is intended here since the second instance of the word ‘person’ is normative; referring to a good human being. According to Ubuntu, a good human being is one that achieves virtue i.e., a human agent that develops a good or virtuous character. When a human being actually achieves personhood, we say they have ubuntu. The goal of a person (a human being) is to become a person (to have ubuntu). To have ubuntu means to have a good character. Tutu (1999) captures the goal of Ubuntu in this fashion –
When we want to give high praise to someone we say, “Yu, u nobuntu”; “Hey, so-and-so has ubuntu.” Then you are generous, you are hospitable, you are friendly and caring and compassionate. You share what you have.
In summary, Ubuntu ethics is about a human being (a person), as a bearer of inherent dignity, becoming a person (achieving ubuntu). To have ubuntu means to have a character that exudes virtues like generosity, kindness, friendliness, and so on.
We can now reflect on the role of the state in light of this rough account of Ubuntu.
Ubuntu and the State
Ubuntu ethics has two crucial components – human dignity and human excellence. We can now proceed to define the role of a state, or a good society, in terms of human dignity and human
excellence. In relation to human dignity, the state ought to create social institutions, laws and policies, through which it exercises its agency, that recognise and protect the inviolability of human beings. We can understand this role negatively as far as it requires the state to remove social conditions that diminish or violate human dignity. By ‘social conditions’ I have in mind structural issues that have the potential to seriously undermine human dignity. Colonisation and apartheid are emblematic examples of structural conditions designed precisely to violate human dignity. When one refers to ‘violating human dignity’ in this context, it amounts to social conditions that denigrate our status as human beings, or ones that dehumanise us.
Other examples of structural conditions that undermine human dignity could be a state that fails to adequately address things like Gender-Based Violence (GBV), where women’s human status is subordinated through violence and femicide. It is (in part) the failure of social institutions like those that dispense policing and justice services that could be held responsible for the condition of women in our society. Structural employment can also undermine human dignity, particularly when it emerges as a result of the state’s failure to create favourable conditions for economic growth and job opportunities. Pervasive and ongoing unemployment humiliates citizens who fail to develop their talents and pursue their dreams. Dysfunctional public services, such as poor health services could undermine human dignity, where curable and preventable diseases can lead to unnecessary suffering, humiliation and death.
Given the history and legacy of oppression in South Africa, the state has a duty to create social conditions that counteract social evils like racism, homophobia, xenophobia, femicide, landlessness, and pauperism, among others, in the spirit of protecting human dignity. The persistence of these conditions represents a weak state that is failing to restore and protect human dignity.
In relation to human excellence, the state has a positive duty to create empowering conditions for citizens to pursue and achieve ubuntu. Empowering conditions enable individuals to develop their rational, relational and emotional capacities. This is crucial for the development and emergence of a robust agency. Hence, If Ubuntu requires human agents to achieve ubuntu then it makes sense to expect the state to create conditions that enable and facilitate its achievement. One of the powerful ways to empower citizens is for the state to provide robust public education, health services and economic conditions for individuals to survive and even flourish. Without the development of basic human capabilities, moral, social and economic development is impossible. It is human agency that is necessary and a precondition for any meaningful human existence. Without it the possibility of human excellence, as in the achievement of ubuntu, and other human excellence in arts and sciences, remains a chimera. The state has two duties, to protect human dignity and to create empowering conditions for humanity to flourish.
Conclusion
An Ubuntu-based account of a good society specifies at least two crucial roles the state must play. A good society is one where the state protects and empowers its citizens. It protects them from inferiorising conditions of existence. It also empowers them by creating enabling social conditions, where their agency is developed and they can freely exercise it for personal expression and development.
