Welcome to Post Scriptum

MANKIND has gone through more or less four significant phases; hunting and gathering communities, agricultural man, industrial man and currently the much-hyped post-industrial or knowledge society.

Inasmuch as they appear theoretically distinctive in terms of their production structures, these phases have a tendency to co-exist in many societies. That explains why Namibia would exhibit features of a highly mobile urban class in Windhoek linked to the networked society in terms knowledge-intensive employment – their taste in high-tech electronic gadgets, cars and haute couture.And in Tsumkwe, a static endangered San species, invoking notions of what the celebrated Spanish critical sociologist Manuel Castells termed the “fourth world” and its “black holes of social exclusion”.Of course, one should salute the exemplary work of our Deputy Prime Minister Libertina Amathila and her small team in bringing the plight of the San to the centre of our socio-economic debate.At every turn in the process of evolution, man has been confronted by challenges from his environment and about two options have been available; confronting problems through cognition and innovation, ignoring the problems and the ultimate reward being failure.This potently brings to the fore another related problem common to most emerging countries, that of three types of citizens; those who choose to ignore problems (the fatalists); the denialists who say it’s Disneyland, everything is perfect; and the third citizen who argues that we need to confront problems as a means to construct a better society.Manifestly, Namibia is a liberal form of democracy in terms of political institutions, the Constitution, rights, regular elections, and safeguards for private property.So there are no fatalities in that sense.But if there is to be a liberal form of life, more needs to be done in the realm of rhetoric, ideas and argument.This is where Juergen Habermas finds utility because in his work, he weaves the ethic of discussion as essential to the good functioning of a democracy.In our case, what is proving vexatious is a certain political correctness which has become an anathema to that ethic of discussion: The lawyer would be indifferent to the dangers of amendments to the Stock Theft Act, as long as he or she is making money.The Cabinet minister, a ruling party politician, would be indifferent to the moral questions raised by the genocide debate or the dungeons of Lubango and the consequent threat these may pose to the social cohesion of society.And worse, university professors or lecturers (who have now become businessmen and women) will insulate themselves from such debates and lose in the process even their own utility.Certainly, we are witnessing the triumph of narrow individual interests over society.The idea being postulated here is that we need to start interrogating critically the future of our common experiment.It is our ethical duty as professionals and citizens.The impasse that we see in Zimbabwe, our close political ally for whom Swapo cadres would take up guns and defend against a politically constructed enemy, is revealing of a leadership that denies that problems exists, or that mistakes were made, and it’s time to correct them.I have the distinct unfortunate disadvantage of not having read John Stuart Mill’s philosophical masterpiece ‘On Liberty’, but more privileged enough to have read recently ‘The Ethics of Identity’ by one of Africa’s most exceptional scholars and philosophers; the Princeton University based Kwame Anthony Appiah, whose other chef d’oeuvre ‘In My Father’s House: Africa in the Philosophy of Culture’ accompanied me as a student of political science at the University of Namibia more than a decade ago.This recent offering is indeed instructive as a critical Millian text in search of understanding our identities as individuals, but also how they interact with society at large.If we paraphrase Kwame, what Mill taught us to call individuality is one term, but it does not take place in a vacuum, it is shaped by social forms.Without any pretence to being a catalyst for change (mea-culpa), Post-Scriptum as an exercise in individuality, though shaped and informed by those Millian social forms situates itself as the third citizen.One of the great figures of early 20th century economics- Arthur Cecil Pigou, avowed that the purpose of his discipline was to provide heat, not light.For its part, philosophy is invariably more helpful in framing questions than in framing policies.What is on offer in Post-Scriptum is more in the spirit of being useful and illuminating (even if dim or foggy).After all, ideas and opinions in a democracy like ours are futile if they are not to be tested in the marketplace of ideas.Post-Scriptum will appear bi-monthly in The Namibian from next week Friday.* Alfredo Tjiurimo Hengari is a former teacher and served as senior special assistant to the Prime Minister.He holds a BA in Political Science and Sociology from the University of Namibia, an MA in International Studies from the University of Stellenbosch, South Africa.He also holds an MPhil in Political Science (International Relations) from the University of Paris-Pantheon Sorbonne, France where he is a PhD fellow in political science.That explains why Namibia would exhibit features of a highly mobile urban class in Windhoek linked to the networked society in terms knowledge-intensive employment – their taste in high-tech electronic gadgets, cars and haute couture.And in Tsumkwe, a static endangered San species, invoking notions of what the celebrated Spanish critical sociologist Manuel Castells termed the “fourth world” and its “black holes of social exclusion”.Of course, one should salute the exemplary work of our Deputy Prime Minister Libertina Amathila and her small team in bringing the plight of the San to the centre of our socio-economic debate.At every turn in the process of evolution, man has been confronted by challenges from his environment and about two options have been available; confronting problems through cognition and innovation, ignoring the problems and the ultimate reward being failure.This potently brings to the fore another related problem common to most emerging countries, that of three types of citizens; those who choose to ignore problems (the fatalists); the denialists who say it’s Disneyland, everything is perfect; and the third citizen who argues that we need to confront problems as a means to construct a better society.Manifestly, Namibia is a liberal form of democracy in terms of political institutions, the Constitution, rights, regular elections, and safeguards for private property.So there are no fatalities in that sense.But if there is to be a liberal form of life, more needs to be done in the realm of rhetoric, ideas and argument.This is where Juergen Habermas finds utility because in his work, he weaves the ethic of discussion as essential to the good functioning of a democracy.In our case, what is proving vexatious is a certain political correctness which has become an anathema to that ethic of discussion: The lawyer would be indifferent to the dangers of amendments to the Stock Theft Act, as long as he or she is making money.The Cabinet minister, a ruling party politician, would be indifferent to the moral questions raised by the genocide debate or the dungeons of Lubango and the consequent threat these may pose to the social cohesion of society.And worse, university professors or lecturers (who have now become businessmen and women) will insulate themselves from such debates and lose in the process even their own utility.Certainly, we are witnessing the triumph of narrow individual interests over society.The idea being postulated here is that we need to start interrogating critically the future of our common experiment.It is our ethical duty as professionals and citizens.The impasse that we see in Zimbabwe, our close political ally for whom Swapo cadres would take up guns and defend against a politically constructed enemy, is revealing of a leadership that denies that problems exists, or that mistakes were made, and it’s time to correct them.I have the distinct unfortunate disadvantage of not having read John Stuart Mill’s philosophical masterpiece ‘On Liberty’, but more privileged enough to have read recently ‘The Ethics of Identity’ by one of Africa’s most exceptional scholars and philosophers; the Princeton University based Kwame Anthony Appiah, whose other chef d’oeuvre ‘In My Father’s House: Africa in the Philosophy of Culture’ accompanied me as a student of political science at the University of Namibia more than a decade ago.This recent offering is indeed instructive as a critical Millian text in search of understanding our identities as individuals, but also how they interact with society at large.If we paraphrase Kwame, what Mill taught us to call individuality is one term, but it does not take place in a vacuum, it is shaped by social forms.Without any pretence to being a catalyst for change (mea-culpa), Post-Scriptum as an exercise in individuality, though shaped and informed by those Millian social forms situates itself as the third citizen.One of the great figures of early 20th century economics- Arthur Cecil Pigou, avowed that the purpose of his discipline was to provide heat, not light.For its part, philosophy is invariably more helpful in framing questions than in framing policies.What is on offer in Post-Scriptum is more in the spirit of being useful and illuminating (even if dim or foggy).After all, ideas and opinions in a democracy like ours are futile if they are not to be tested in the marketplace of ideas.Post-Scriptum will appear bi-monthly in The Namibian from next week Friday.* Alfredo Tjiurimo Hengari is a former teacher and served as senior special assistant to the Prime Minister.He holds a BA in Political Science and Sociology from the University of Namibia, an MA in International Studies from the University of Stellenbosch, South Africa.He also holds an MPhil in Political Science (International Relations) from the University of Paris-Pantheon Sorbonne, France where he is a PhD fellow in political science.