What do you guys think of Ubuntu? (The African Philosophy)

[Guardia Rossa]

Accordingly to Wikipedia [and to Michael Onyebuchi Eze] Ubuntu can be summarized as
A person is a person through other people' strikes an affirmation of one’s humanity through recognition of an ‘other’ in his or her uniqueness and difference. It is a demand for a creative intersubjective formation in which the ‘other’ becomes a mirror (but only a mirror) for my subjectivity. This idealism suggests to us that humanity is not embedded in my person solely as an individual; my humanity is co-substantively bestowed upon the other and me. Humanity is a quality we owe to each other. We create each other and need to sustain this otherness creation. And if we belong to each other, we participate in our creations: we are because you are, and since you are, definitely I am. The ‘I am’ is not a rigid subject, but a dynamic self-constitution dependent on this otherness creation of relation and distance

Seems interesting!

More:


Ubuntu induces an ideal of shared human subjectivity that promotes a community's good through an unconditional recognition and appreciation of individual uniqueness and difference
and the usual anti-communist ideology:

On this view, Ubuntu it is argued, is a communitarian philosophy that is widely differentiated from the Western notion of communitarian socialism. :rolleyes: lol

[Aslan]

I see no problem in recognizing a person's uniqueness and difference. We are all different in our makeup, the electro-chemical signals in our minds are different, our culture and psychology is different. However I am not a objectivist who wants competition and general reactionary suffering. I think the key to achieving socialism is to establish a connection between the individual and the collective. A group of individuals with one will -class will- to reject capitalism and fight together.

I also think that nationalism causes alienation with you common man. A state of mind where the synthesis between you and your fellow man is broken. where a person outside of your specific nation or religion is not cared for. A idea that is just another side of the coin of capitalism.

Creativity and scientific criticism is also important. However too much of a good thing can be bad. Yesterday I listened to seminar with Noam Chomsky. He stated that the reason why socialist didn't win in Spain is because they were too busy critiquing to fight the common enemy. That is the reason why people need to balance their individual with their collective organization. So we don't get into either a mess or a objectivist hell with too much individualism, and we don't get a brainwashed Orwellian state with too much collective.

I don't really know what that would be called.

[blake 3:17]

I only know of it via Desmond Tutu, who was a very key figure in my radicalization. I understand it as a generosity of spirit or a longingness for community. And maybe that generosity and longing is realized! We find it where we may.


“A person with ubuntu is open and available to others, affirming of others, does not feel threatened that others are able and good, for he or she has a proper self-assurance that comes from knowing that he or she belongs in a greater whole and is diminished when others are humiliated or diminished, when others are tortured or oppressed.”

“If the world had more ubuntu, we would not have war. We would not have this huge gap between the rich and the poor. You are rich so that you can make up what is lacking for others. You are powerful so that you can help the weak, just as a mother or father helps their children.”

Archbishop Desmond Tutu

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

First of all, a lot of it is simply empty verbiage, as can be seen from the paragraph you cite. God knows what "we... need to sustain this otherness creation" means. Or "otherness creation of relation and distance". It's not an "indigenous African philosophy", which is how it's usually promoted, but mostly something thought up in the eighties and the nineties, to provide some sort of intellectual cover for the ANC's fronting for neo-apartheid and the brutal repression of workers (much like Siad Barre's half-baked "Islamic socialism", Mobutu's "authenticity", Musharaff's "enlightened moderation" and so on).

[Comrade #138672]

You know, this sort of reminds me of a quote of Karl Marx:

"Society does not consist of individuals but expresses the sum of interrelations, the relations within which these individuals stand."

Followed by:

"Reason has always existed, but not always in a reasonable form."

In other words, the philosophy correctly asserts that we are defined by our interrelations (thus rejecting individualism). However, it is not entirely reasonable, since it falls back on idealism and a fetishism of the other as a mirror for oneself.

[Guardia Rossa]

You know, this sort of reminds me of a quote of Karl Marx

Well, it reminded me of it too.

870, sad to know that, I though it was really an autonomous indigenous development of a humanist philosophy.

[blake 3:17]

According to wikipedia it is a concept from the mid 19th century.

When I heard Desmond Tutu preach there was no neo-apartheid, there was just full blown apartheid. Thatcher and Reagan were loving it up with South African fascism.

Of course Zuma needs to go. He's a straight up thug, who's gotten rich on the back of the Black South Africa.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

It's not a concept which is contemptible in itself, at least as it is articulated here. However, we should be careful, as it is vague. It could as easily be used to justify class collaboration (respect the uniqueness of your employer, who brings different talents to their role in society from yourself, and see yourself in them, etc etc) as it could be a basis for respect and understanding of other nationalities, ethnicities, genders, etc.

In other words, like any concept, it depends on how (and how well) we use it. We can make use of the concept. I think such an ethical stance could make for a useful base to organize with other people. However, we shouldn't be uncritical of its use, its limitations and its meaning in certain contexts.

[blake 3:17]

I'm quoting from memory, might be off, from Brother Tutu:"A person becomes a person by recognizing other persons as persons." That is it's only possible to find a meaningful life or way of being in the world by respecting that others have that same right, will and desire.

I wish I could laugh -- it's more like a sad moan -- at the rejection of this by those who wish for collective justice. Collective justice takes a long time. Justice takes time. Much love to those who hurry it up! Sometimes we score a victory! A lot of the times we just do our best.