Ndumiso Dladla
African (Social, Legal and Political) Philosophy ~ Black Liberation ~
[South] African History.
Member of the Azanian Philosophical Society.
[South] African History.
Member of the Azanian Philosophical Society.
less
InterestsView All (24)
Uploads
Our argument throughout the book is that a correct understanding of racism is necessarily historical and that dislocating racism from its historical basis, purpose and development necessarily produces untenable results bothhermeneutically and ethically.
in terms of which victory in war entitles the victor both to the title to territory of the vanquished as well as sovereignty over them. Far from being a mere event, however, conquest is an ongoing process, structure, and relation of domination. Despite the widely celebrated “transition to democracy” and the supposed triumph of popular sovereignty in South Africa in the past three decades, we argue that South Africa’s “democratic” constitutional order remains firmly rooted in the dubious right of conquest asserted since the defeat of its indigenous people in the unjust wars of Western colonization, which began in the mid-seventeenth century. In this article we critically reflect on South African historiography by asking “Who conquered South Africa”? The question is necessary because sovereign power is both misunderstood and obfuscated in South African contemporary history and
public discourse. We argue that conquest, and its attendant concepts of sovereignty and war, are deliberately underemphasized in South African historiography despite being at the root of problems regarding economic sovereignty. Our argument considers the problem of succession to conquest, in terms of which both the title to territory and sovereignty over the conquered is transferred from the conqueror to another party who then enjoys these entitlements and powers. We trace various successors in title to Conquest South Africa, and show that their economic power originates in the right of conquest. Their ownership of South Africa’s natural resources originates in the title to territory acquired through its disseisin following the conquest of the indigenous people, and in the same way their continued de facto sovereignty over that population now takes the form of the wanton and relentless exploitation of their labor power.
In this article we will argue that beyond its general status and identity as the supreme law of South Africa, the 1996 constitution (hereinafter the constitution) is also a historiographical paradigm. We shall begin by providing general description and overview of Azanian critical philosophy focussing on its relationship to the constitution. This will be followed by a discussion on the nature of history itself and the relationship between historical knowledge and power. We will then turn to the history of South Africa in particular, which is understood both as a history of conquest as well as the conquest of history. The final parts of the article will argue that the wholesale resumption of the history of liberation is the most crucial possibility condition for the liberation of history itself.
in South Africa, we will discuss the political ontology of Blackness
by focusing upon the question of time. We show that around the world,
wherever Blackness exists, it is accompanied by its own horology, which
we will examine by focusing on three of its components: ‘lifetime’, ‘age’
and ‘free time’.
In South Africa since the early 1990s, Ubuntu has been employed by the elite parties involved in the “negotiations” for transition to justify the new society. This perverse employment of Ubuntu has been largely supported with the aid of sophistic academic posturing by the largely white academic establishment in South Africa and its network of international allies. However, Mogobe Ramose’s body of work on Ubuntu, at least since the publication of his 1999 African Philosophy Through Ubuntu, marks an altogether different and relatively rare tendency within the discourse to understand Ubuntu as a philopraxis for liberation. In this article we exposit Ramose’s interpretation of Ubuntu which has ts basis in two interrelated roots. The first root is his firm understanding of and engagement with the Bantu languages and cultures which are the philosophical basis of Ubuntu. The second is the history of Ubuntu as lived and continually living philosophy, responding to the challenge of the conquest of the indigenous people in the unjust wars of colonisation.
Our argument throughout the book is that a correct understanding of racism is necessarily historical and that dislocating racism from its historical basis, purpose and development necessarily produces untenable results bothhermeneutically and ethically.
in terms of which victory in war entitles the victor both to the title to territory of the vanquished as well as sovereignty over them. Far from being a mere event, however, conquest is an ongoing process, structure, and relation of domination. Despite the widely celebrated “transition to democracy” and the supposed triumph of popular sovereignty in South Africa in the past three decades, we argue that South Africa’s “democratic” constitutional order remains firmly rooted in the dubious right of conquest asserted since the defeat of its indigenous people in the unjust wars of Western colonization, which began in the mid-seventeenth century. In this article we critically reflect on South African historiography by asking “Who conquered South Africa”? The question is necessary because sovereign power is both misunderstood and obfuscated in South African contemporary history and
public discourse. We argue that conquest, and its attendant concepts of sovereignty and war, are deliberately underemphasized in South African historiography despite being at the root of problems regarding economic sovereignty. Our argument considers the problem of succession to conquest, in terms of which both the title to territory and sovereignty over the conquered is transferred from the conqueror to another party who then enjoys these entitlements and powers. We trace various successors in title to Conquest South Africa, and show that their economic power originates in the right of conquest. Their ownership of South Africa’s natural resources originates in the title to territory acquired through its disseisin following the conquest of the indigenous people, and in the same way their continued de facto sovereignty over that population now takes the form of the wanton and relentless exploitation of their labor power.
In this article we will argue that beyond its general status and identity as the supreme law of South Africa, the 1996 constitution (hereinafter the constitution) is also a historiographical paradigm. We shall begin by providing general description and overview of Azanian critical philosophy focussing on its relationship to the constitution. This will be followed by a discussion on the nature of history itself and the relationship between historical knowledge and power. We will then turn to the history of South Africa in particular, which is understood both as a history of conquest as well as the conquest of history. The final parts of the article will argue that the wholesale resumption of the history of liberation is the most crucial possibility condition for the liberation of history itself.
in South Africa, we will discuss the political ontology of Blackness
by focusing upon the question of time. We show that around the world,
wherever Blackness exists, it is accompanied by its own horology, which
we will examine by focusing on three of its components: ‘lifetime’, ‘age’
and ‘free time’.
In South Africa since the early 1990s, Ubuntu has been employed by the elite parties involved in the “negotiations” for transition to justify the new society. This perverse employment of Ubuntu has been largely supported with the aid of sophistic academic posturing by the largely white academic establishment in South Africa and its network of international allies. However, Mogobe Ramose’s body of work on Ubuntu, at least since the publication of his 1999 African Philosophy Through Ubuntu, marks an altogether different and relatively rare tendency within the discourse to understand Ubuntu as a philopraxis for liberation. In this article we exposit Ramose’s interpretation of Ubuntu which has ts basis in two interrelated roots. The first root is his firm understanding of and engagement with the Bantu languages and cultures which are the philosophical basis of Ubuntu. The second is the history of Ubuntu as lived and continually living philosophy, responding to the challenge of the conquest of the indigenous people in the unjust wars of colonisation.