The revisiting of the above statement has been prompted by a student who has asked for my opinion on the broad question of why the majority of African nations struggle to prosper and develop like other former colonial states including Botswana which she argues was one of the few “successful” post-colonial independent transitions.
The issue of identity and its causal link to Africa’s current economic and political state is what she is seeking to focus on. This naturally prompted me to re-examine my contribution on this subject.
Although one cannot deny the role of colonialism in defining the geography of post-colonial Africa, it is important to underscore that identity in post-colonial Africa can be chosen rather than being exclusionary as was the case where white was considered right and black was subservient.
After 53 years of independence, it is important for us as Africans to take some responsibility for the failure to transcend the post-colonial nation state in the creation of an African citizenship and in so doing enable social citizenship to retain a link with Africa’s multicultural existence.
Identity as it relates to Africa cannot be confined to just one set of value orientations but must be diffuse and open ended. For instance, one can be simultaneously of an African, a member of an ethnic community, a class, a social movement, and a citizen of a particular nation state.
An argument can be made that Africa’s quest for a better life can be advanced if a new connection is made between democratic identification and constitutional norms as a basis of a new African identity than the one based on a static definition of national culture.
It is important to recognize that national culture ought not to be a fixed and homogeneous set of beliefs, ideologies and traditions as they manifested themselves before the intrusion of colonialism and its attempt to substitute and in many cases subjugate African civilization; but must and should be a regarded as a dynamic and open ended framework of cultural choices and should, therefore, never be separated from other post-colonial cultural developments.
Africa needs a post-colonial nationalism whose normative reference ought to be a democratic constitutional order rather than a romantic reference to culture, the state, geographical areas, or a dominant ethnic tradition.
This kind of constitutional patriotism is the only kind of national identity that should be compatible with the requirements of Africa’s multicultural existence and relevant to the challenges of building a functional and responsible post-colonial state.
Approaches to the question of identity merely on the basis of geographical territory, language, a dominant ethnic group can be toxic to the development agenda that Africa must adopt in order to reduce the frontiers of poverty, disease and ignorance.
It is important that a new African identity be built on the recognition of diversity that already exists in the continent not necessarily on racial but ethnic, language, religious and geographical grounds etc.
Such identity can be best articulated by an acceptance of the link between the democratic constitutional order and a new citizenship.
The political culture in post-colonial Africa ought to anchor the cultural diversity founded on generally acceptable democratic constitutional principles. This will allow for the seamless assimilation of immigrants in Africa without asking such candidates to give up their cultural traditions.
In my case, the choice to be a South African citizenship, for instance, did not involve the giving up of my Zimbabwean name, language, and culture all of which give me an identity but all I was required or should be required is the acceptance of a minimum political culture inherent in South African citizenship.
Although I am a full citizen of South Africa, it cannot be denied that I am also a Zimbabwean in as much as a white immigrant originating from Europe, for instance, can retain both a European and South African identity.
However, many African states have not been able to embrace this kind of social citizenship, as citizenship has been primarily defined by birth and in some cases by blood or ethnic descent.
The limitation of this kind of citizenship is self-evident as it precludes the participation of other people who may add value to the nation building experience.
For example, the United States of America as an idea was created as a platform for multicultural existence and citizenship was linked to the constitutional order and in so doing the construction permitted the growth and development of the model underpinned by migrant labor.
There must be a kind of citizenship that Africa’s post-colonial experience with the exception of South Africa has failed to create that should be commensurate with the needs of a progressive continent.
This kind of citizenship must necessarily be residency based, as this should transcend the notion and limitations of national citizenship.
For instance, an Indian who decides to reside in Tanzania must be given the option to acquire citizenship as this will give him/her a sense of belonging and it will invariably strengthen the host country through accessing skills and experience that would otherwise not be available to the nation.
However, the recent emergence of xenophobic nationalism in South Africa is more a product of the breakdown of communication than a functional derivative of nation building. It is a product of the crisis of the nation state and the challenges of building an inclusive nation.
A nation state needs the creative energies of its actors who through incomes generated from commercial activities contribute to the financing of the state.
Therefore, at the transaction point i.e. tax paying point, it is and should be irrelevant whether a person is a black or white citizen but what is and should be important is the income earned by the individual from whom the tax is levied.
Progressive nations naturally see the need to assimilate more taxpayers through granting citizenship.
The reasons for Africa’s democratic deficit can also be traced to the limitations imposed by a narrow definition of identity and citizenship and their susceptibility to political manipulation by a growing crop of Africa’s unaccountable leaders.
Populism in post-colonial Africa like in any other part of the world thrives on the inability of social programs to be realized in political programs. The failure of democracy to penetrate post-colonial African societies reflects the failure of civic and political citizenship to grow into full citizenship.
Opposition politics in post-colonial Africa can be seen as a frustrated counter populism, which mobilizes people against the state.
Citizenship ultimately implies membership of a polity while identity implies the recognition of common ties.
Nationality has often been causally linked to citizenship and the key question, therefore, for Africa is whether citizenship can be separated from nationality.
Many of Africa’s brightest minds have chosen to give up their natural citizenships and are now living and working in the diaspora.
It must be accepted that the human asset is the most complex of God’s creation. Whereas the decolonization struggle sought to assert civil rights on the majority, the post-colonial state has not been a reliable defender of citizen rights to the extent that a significant number of Africa’s citizens would rather find and celebrate the meaning of life in the West.
The brain drain and its debilitating impact on Africa’s promise have to be situated in the broader menu of the challenges of nation building.
The majority of African policy makers and politicians continue to work within categories of race, ethnicity and class to allow for the creation of a universalistic ideology of national citizenship.
Who is an African? This will continue to be a contested construction but it is instructive that the majority of African states have invested heavily in an Africa that is not diverse and inclusive even after the end of colonialism.
A new definition of citizenship is a sine qua non for Africa’s renewal and progress.
Globalization has and continues to challenge the notion of citizenship and identity to the extent that an African ethnocentric policy will not materially advance the African promise.
What is required is a more dynamic and open-minded approach to the issue of identity.
