Kizito Michael George

A number of Africans had anticipated the establishment of emancipatory Pan-African states after the exit of overt colonialism. These post-colonial states were expected to end colonial oppression, exploitation and subjugation. It was also hoped that the newly independent African states would be entrenched on Pan-African leaders, Pan-African ideas and Pan-African Institutions. However, post-independence African leaders essentially transformed into Iscariots that betrayed the emancipatory African dream. For pieces of silver, they handed back post-colonial African states to white neo-colonial Pharisees and High priests. These Judases surrendered African mineral resources, land, agricultural resources and economic policies to colonial exploitation and plunder. In order to insulate themselves from extermination, they constructed ethnically oriented democracies that are funded and remotely controlled from Western capitals. In alliance with white imperialists, they persecuted and killed African leaders and citizens who were committed to the fruition of an emancipatory Post-colonial state. These leaders and citizens are picturistic of Jesus Christ who came to usher in complete freedom for mankind (John 8:36). This study argues that the problematic of realising an emancipatory Pan African state is concealed in the construction of a black skinned African with a white mind. This white mind in a black skin is the fundamental precursor and reinforcer of covert imperialism in Africa. Using an existentialist and phenomenological critique, this paper contends that despite the eminence of a cataclysmically neo-colonial buttressed post-independence African state, the African dream of an apocalyptic emancipatory state is alive, real and eminent analogous to the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The hegemony of the natural and biological sciences in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries coincided with the entrenchment of positivism as a superior methodology in knowledge acquisition and justification. Positivism exalted empiricism or experiential knowledge from sense perception. This not only led to the sciencization (empiricization) of humanities like ethics but also social sciences such as sociology, anthropology, economics, law, education and political science. Unfortunately, the radical empiricism embedded in positivism (scientism) bred a plethora of racist and sexist scholars who hid under the facades of positivistic science to justify slavery, colonialism, racial segregation and gender discrimination. The abolition of slavery and slave trade in the nineteenth century led to anti-colonial sentiments and agitations for independence in Africa, Asia and Latin America. A number of African countries attained independence in the 1950s and 1960s. This ensconced Pan-Africanism and its related nuances such as Pan-African governance, Pan-African development and Pan-African education. Consequently, Pan-African scholars embarked on the deconstruction of colonial methodologies and modes of knowledge embedded in the positivistic mono-perspectival schema in favor of post-colonial multi-disciplinary methodologies and interpretive philosophies of method. Feminist scholars in both the global North and South also used the post-colonial methodological paradigm to further expose the positivistic scientific methodology as androcentric and gender blind. This chapter therefore argues that multi-disciplinarity and inter-disciplinarity are simply a logical consequent of decoloniality and post-coloniality. The chapter contends that post-coloniality and decoloniality dethrone positivism and all its quantitative superiority pretexts in favor of interpretivism, multi-disciplinarity, mixed methodologism, qualitative analyses, epistemological justice and epistemological realism.

Pan-Africanism is a philosophy that postulates that African ideas and practices about development, economics, politics, art, religion, law, morals, science and technology are as equally valid as Western ones. Although Pan-Africanists do not condemn the democratic influences of African culture from Western culture, they detest and denigrate the treatment of African social realties as barbaric and inferior to the Western lot. In the 1950s, Pan-Africanists like Kwame Nkrumah and Patrice Lumumba embarked on the campaign to emancipate Black Africans from neo-colonialism. They argued that although the colonialists had physically left and allowed native Africans to take over the governments of newly independent states, the new states were still trapped in the racist politics and economics of the imperialists. They therefore advocated for socialism as an appropriate system for African development governance due its close affinity to African communitarianism. This chapter argues that African neo-colonies are still trapped in the Western racist paradigm of development conceptualisation and management. The chapter contends that neo-liberalism has fundamentally paralysed ethical Pan-African development governance by relegating development to the whims of the positivistic market which is deterministic and scientific. Consequently, neo-liberal capitalism has transformed a number of African leaders from Pan-Africanists to neo-liberal oligarchs.

One of the fundamental fallacies of racism is the confusion between biological accidents such as: body, colour, environment, size, shape, and melanin with metaphysical essences like; soul, mind, and intellect. Personness for instance is an essential category that does not depend on the above accidental attributes. Since time immemorial, racism has been reinforced by deeply entrenched social structures. These structures are the offspring of both overt and covert racism. Structural racism is epitomised by ideologies that have been well disguised under facades of science. These ideologies include: Eugenics, Social Darwinism, Modernisation theory and Neo-liberalism. This paper critically analyses the religious, political, psychoanalytic, historical and economic construction of structural and institutional racism that reinforces honorary whiteness in the African social milieu. The paper argues that the purpose of racism is constructing Black and Brown people as entities in dire need of White Saviourism and White Paternalism. This consequently culminates into imperialism, neo-colonialism, subjugation and exploitation. The paper further contends that racism is crystalised through mental colonialism which rides on socially constructed racial binaries, dichotomies and hierarchies such as: White (righteous) and Black (evil), North (top) and South (bottom), West (Sun-rise) and (Sun-set), Aryan and Honorary Aryan, White and Honorary White.

To a large extent, the liberalness of Protestant Christianity has been central in the entrenchment of colonialism in Africa. Although Uganda became a British protectorate in 1894, the Anglican missionaries from the Church Missionary Society arrived in Uganda in 1877 and through their association with the British Empire, they ploughed the ground for colonial capitalism. The Cross as a Christian symbol was used to conquer the spirit and mentality of African rebellion against imperialism. The moralities in the Ten Commandments such as do not steal and not kill helped the British colonialists to rob resources, kill and enslave Africans with impunity. In 1962, British colonial capitalism went out of Uganda through the door only to come back through the window in what is now called neo-colonialism. To date, the Ugandan economy continues to be funded by Britain and Uganda (satellite) became a consumer of European goods(metro-pole). This paper argues that from 1986, a new kind of capitalism fronted by the Prosperity Gospel and speared by the USA took root in Uganda. In this sort of capitalism, the Prosperity Gospel is used to hide the flag of American neo-liberal imperialism. The paper contends that although Neo- Pentecostal churches in Uganda have been used as an opium to cushion the masses from the neo-liberal evils of land-grabbing, corruption, unemployment, dictatorship as well as army and police brutality, they have become an instrument for perpetuating these neo-colonial vices.

The communal characteristic of African Societies has frequently been juxtaposed with the individualistic tenets of Western polities. However, the evolution of African societies into liberal democracies with the obligation to promote and protect constitutionalism and individual liberties calls for a philosophical niche to bridge between communality and individuality. This paper argues that Africa’s moral and political philosophy is in an urgent need of a Kantian Copernican revolution to ameliorate the conflictual interface between sociality and individualism. The paper opines that the revolution will help to harmonize the dilemmatic relationship between communitarianism and individual rights. The paper also contends that the Kantian categorical imperatives are necessary in eliminating the unclear deontological/teleological situatedness of African ideological philosophies.

The development discourse has been thrown into a disarray and paradigmatic quagmire by the impasse of neo-liberal transnational social cartographies. There are calls within the development discourse fraternity to deterritorise the concept of development so as to grapple with it sufficiently and effectively. Failure to adhere to this call, various development discourses have been accused of methodological territorialism. This paper uses critical hermeneutics to argue that the trajectory from Trickle Down and Basic Needs Theory to Human Rights, Capability and Functionings approaches to development is fundamentally a paradigm shift from territorial to social cartographies. This paper further argues that despite the significance of social cartographies occasioned by neo-liberal globalisation, territorial cartographies as envisaged by structuralists, post-structuralists, post-developmentalists, post-colonialists and global ethnographers are still vital because of their thorough critique of the power discourse behind structures that disadvantage individuals. The paper contends that in order to realise engendered development, it is pertinent to ultimately look at the individual who is the basic ingredient of a moral society (ethical individualism) as well as the structures and strictures that disempower and vulnerablelise individual moral agents.

This paper argues that there is a need to reconstruct a new paradigm for poverty policy planning in Africa because Neo-liberalism, Ubuntu ethics and African Socialism as proposed paradigms for Africa’s development are untenable. This is so because the above trio are sexist, androcentric and oblivious to structural injustices that feminize poverty in Africa. The paper further argues that even in the Western world, the neo-liberal GDP metric has been challenged and the search for alternative development indicators and paradigms is on. In addition, there is a fully fledged post-neo-liberalism movement in Latin America and a de-growth and post-growth social movement in the West against neo-liberalism and its nebulous economic growth understanding of wellbeing. The paper contends that Africa cannot afford to remain aloof to all these developments. There is therefore a need to develop Pan African paradigms to articulate an endogenous perspective to African development. The paper thus advocates for the Dignified Humanness Paradigm (DHP) as an alternative to neo-liberalism, Ubuntu ethics and African Socialism. The paper also surmises that the actualization of the DHP requires an immediate awakening of the Pan African Moral Consciousness since this will militate on decolonization of the African mind from the amoral neo-liberal economism.

This paper elucidates and illuminates the notion of post colonialism and post-modernism as an epitome upon which discourse on development related issues in the post-colonial world is premised. Secondly, the paper situates the emergence post colonial critical perspectives generally using development in the South as a point of reference. The paper specifically focuses on feminist postcolonial critical perspectives on gender, race and class. Accordingly, the paper explicates the implications of intersectionality on the development discourse in the South and its multiplicative (not additive) effects on gender discrimination, women subordination and women agency with particular reference to the feminization of work and allocation of resources. The paper then looks at the indispensability of the intersectional methodology in the understanding of development related issues in the South before concluding accordingly. It ought to be born in mind that the paper envisages the North and South in terms of the Brandt commission(Klaus, 2002,p.5) demarcation or description but does not only look at the South in terms of territorial cartographies but also social ones(Robinson, 2002) as well in the sense that South race connections will greatly contributetothe marginalisation of Southerners or people of colour even if there are territorially situated in North for various reasons such as migration, slavery etc

This paper situates the Sub-Saharan African state amidst the conflictual interface between the forces of political and economic globalization that have been ushered in the state milieu by neo-liberalism . The paper argues that states are situated in an imperialistic globalization with capitalistic economic extirpation as central concern and social justice as a peripheral one. This categorically explicates the persistence of globalised economies and localized oppressive state apparatuses, ideologies and practices. The paper also contends that the forces of economic globalization have superimposed the cultural mantra in the Sub-Saharan Africa state milieu, rendering it virtually impossible to pursue a Rights Based Approach to Development (RBAD). The apparent assault by this globalization from above (economic globalization), continues almost unabated due to absence of an afro centric globalization from below to mitigate the homogenizing effects of economic globalization. Worse still, the inability of political globalization to check the daunting implications of economic globalization using a human rights antidote and the consequent slumber of the glocalisation dialectic in the African state locale explicate the problematic of Africa in the wake of erosion from above (global pillage) and devolution from below.

For over two decades now, Sub-Saharan Africa has been superimposed in a coercive and contradictory neo-liberal development economism agenda. According to this paradigm, markets and not states are the fundamental determinants of distributive justice and human flourishing through the promotion of economic growth that is believed to trickle down to the poor in due time. Despite the global intellectual criticism of this neo-liberal development economics orthodox of measuring development and wellbeing in terms of market induced economic growth, autocratic states in Sub-Saharan Africa that have accumulated un-dimensional growth continue to be applauded as role models on poverty reduction, wellbeing and social justice by donors and global development institutions such as the World Bank and international monetary fund (IMF). This is basically because they have wholly embraced the implementation of the anti-pro-poor neo-liberal structural adjustment tool kit. This study uses a critical hermeneutics methodology to expose the distortions embedded in neo-liberal gross domestic product (GDP) growth cartographies and how these disguise the social injustices against the poor in Sub- Saharan Africa with particular reference to Uganda. The study contends that in measuring development and wellbeing, human rights and social justice must take precedence over economic efficiency and GDP growth for that matter.

Since time immemorial, poverty reduction interventions in Sub‐Saharan Africa like everywhere in the South, have focused on the individual as the basic ingredient of a moral society (ethical individualism). According to this perspective, in order to lift human persons out of poverty, it is imperative to integrate poor persons into poverty eradication interventions irrespective of sex, social status and gender. Scholars and institutions that subscribed to this conception of poverty thought that individuals were poor because of personal weaknesses (case poverty).This perspective has been greatly challenged due to the upsurge of gender and human rights scholarship in the 20th century. Gender scholars have painstakingly argued that in order to understand poverty, we need to look at society (ethical collectivism). They have rejected the Women in Development(WID) discourse that aims at integrating women into the development process in favour of the Gender and Development(GAD) approach to development and poverty reduction that aims at confronting power relations between men and women (empowerment).This GAD perspective looks at poverty in terms of the powerlessness speared head by prevailing structures in society (structural poverty) and hence the need to empower vulnerable persons such as women to challenge structures and strictures of oppression. The International Monetary fund (IMF) and World Bank as vehement promoters of economism in Sub‐Saharan Africa for decades have urged governments to include the perspectives of the poor in poverty polices through what they call participatory poverty assessments (PPAs). Despite its deceptive appearance, this PPAs stance of the IMF and World Bank tacitly looks at poverty as a case and not structural issue and that is why Uganda’s ambitious poverty reduction policy though greatly informed by Participatory Poverty Assessments greatly ignores structures and strictures that render women vulnerable to poverty. This paper critically assesses the obliviousness of Uganda’s Agricultural poverty policy to structures and how this has militated on the gender poverty production in Uganda. The paper contends that in order to realise engendered poverty eradication in Uganda, it is pertinent for the agricultural policy to ultimately make paradigm shift from focusing on the individual as the basic ingredient of a moral society (ethical individualism) to confronting structures and strictures that disempower and vulnerablelise individual moral agents (ethical collectivism).

Since the early 1990s, Uganda has been cajoled by the IMF and World Bank to pursue a neo-liberal approach to development as opposed to a liberal development modus operandi. However, in theory the World Bank has pursued a liberal, rights based approach to poverty reduction policy but, in practice, it has implemented a neo-liberal, market centric approach to poverty reduction. This is the reason why pro-poor poverty reduction in Uganda is more of rhetorical than practical. This paper critiques the epistemological pre-suppositions characteristic of the ethics of the current pro-poor poverty policy in Uganda. The fundamental premises of this critique are: Can the views of the poor in Uganda influence poverty policies given their asymmetrical disadvantage? Who knows the views of poor? Do the elites interpret the views of the poor as they are or as they think them to be? Do the poor have poverty knowledge or poverty opinion? Are some of the views of the poor simply adaptive preferences? What constitutes poverty knowledge as opposed to poverty opinion? Is it ethical to eradicate poverty using opinion riddled poverty polices? Is it ethically sustainable for poverty policies to persistently aim at integrating women in poverty eradication interventions while largely giving lip service patriarchal power relations that asymmetrically disadvantage them?