POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

by

Adeleye Oladimeji Adesina

Philosophy Unit
Redeemer’s University
Redemption City, Mowe
Ogun State

1
 POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

Adeleye O. Adesina

Africa needs political philosophy prior to any other kind of philosophy. It must be so long as its
major battle today is that to wage against crude poverty, ignorance, political violence and
injustices…

--- Ngoma Binda (2003: 99)

Introduction

Political philosophy is a sub discipline of philosophy that addresses issues that are of crucial

importance to us today as ever. Political philosophy among other fundamental issues addresses the

problem of how we can best arrange our collective lives in order to fulfill our needs and desires.

This assumption is predicated on the notion that we (humans) are social animals as shown by our

social proclivities. We all need the ‘safe shelter’ of the society both for our survival and pursuit of

happiness. In fact, our tendencies to a very large extent define us and render us in true light as

gregarious beings. As humans, most of us seek the company of one another either for one reason

or the other. This reason could either be for physical, emotional or spiritual needs. Nature has made

it in just a way that we cannot help but need the company of other fellow humans in order to

survive, be content and happy. Perhaps this explains why family arguably, is regarded as the

smallest unit in any society and the foundation of all societies and not the individual. Even at that

however, the family still cannot fully provide and satisfy all our needs. Hence, the need for a larger

unit- a community, a state- where our needs and the development of our potentials can be better

guaranteed. For this essential reason therefore, we can say that our need for society is greatly

motivated by the desire for a good life where we can be safe, our needs met, and our happiness

guaranteed.

2
The overwhelming desire for a good life therefore informs the necessity to have a well organized

society where its members are given the opportunity to maximize their potentials and enjoy other

inherent and extrinsic benefits. This (organized) society however, will not necessarily materialize

out of thin air. It would have to be built on the best socio-cultural values of the people and it is the

primary duty of the political philosophers to fashion out a vision of this good social life. Creating

this vision represents the most fundamental task of the political philosopher; and such vision is

often based and influenced by the consideration of what ought to be the ruling set of values and

institutions that can bring about this much desired El Dorado (Golden State).

In order for the political philosopher to carry out this onerous task, he must employ the tools of

other branches of philosophy like ontology (philosophical study of the nature of being);

epistemology (nature and scope of knowledge); ethics (the concept and principle of right and

wrong conduct), and logic (the rule of clear thinking and language) so as to understand the nature

of man and his society; best values and how best it could be organized so that it can guarantee a

good social order i.e., the common good of the society. It is to this end that political philosophy is

seen as the vehicle by which the promotion of the common good in the society can be actualized.

In this chapter therefore, we shall examine what political philosophy means and its tasks in the

society. We shall also try to identify some fundamental issues of political philosophy. Thereafter,

we shall be exposed to some select political philosophers’ ideas from the Western and African

backgrounds particularly on how they have over the ages, strived in their respective societies to

achieve a certain social order. However, it should be pointed out that there would be variations on

the scope and issues discussed by these political philosophers. These variations may be attributed

first, to the basic assumptions on which their political philosophies proceed and equally

3
importantly, the burning political issues they were preoccupied with. These variations, we can say,

is responsible for the development of all regional political philosophies like African political

philosophy or Asian political philosophy which addresses peculiar socio-political problems due to

its experience and the interpretation of same. Nevertheless, there still remains from antiquity to

contemporary times and across all regions, some recurrent questions that political philosophy

addresses itself to. To conclude this chapter, we shall look at the role of political philosophy as it

concerns the perennial problem of development in Africa since this appears to be the most critical

task facing us today in Africa. The reason for doing this it is hoped, is that political philosophy

may serve the intended purpose of guarding against all forms of ignorance and injustices in order

to enable a social order where development and happiness can be maximized.

What is Political Philosophy?

Political philosophy can be defined as the philosophical reflection on how best to arrange our

collective life- our political institutions and our social practices, such as our economic system and

our pattern of family life (D. Miller, 1998: par 1). As earlier mentioned in our introduction, political

philosophy is a sub discipline of philosophy that (in order to arrange our collective life,) attempts

to understand the nature of man and society with a view to recommending values and institutions

that should guide the establishment of an ideal or good society. These values and institutions

recommended are usually ethical based depending on the socio-cultural orientation of a people.

Such values could be for instance, Divine rule which supports monarchical institution or

Utilitarianism which preaches the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.

Political philosophy can also be said to be the study of the political ideas and theories of

philosophers (Omoregbe, 2007: xii) which underlies political practice. And political practice in

4
turn, leads to political changes which affect (either for good or bad) the socio-political progress of

any society. Political philosophy using the philosophical methods, investigates the principles of a

proper social system (F. Miller, 2014: par 1). It also

in general, studies the nature of human communities, in order to evaluate their aims and

modes of cooperation. In particular, it is concerned with the government or the state i.e.,

the institution that possesses the exclusive power to enforce rules of conduct in a particular

geographical area (ibid).

Political philosophy however, should not be confused with political science. This usually happens

when concepts such as government, state, power, authority and so on are being discussed. The two

disciplines though related are quite different, both in conception and methodology. While political

philosophy deals essentially with political ideas and how the ideal state ‘ought’ to be organized,

political science is empirical and attempts to be precise in describing the ‘is’ of existing political

institutions and structures. In this regard, the former is concerned, at the most abstract level, with

the concepts and arguments involved in political opinion (Arneson, 2013: par 1) while the latter

focuses on the study and analysis of political institutions and structures like the state, government,

political systems, government policies and so on. Muyiwa Falaiye puts the difference between the

two disciplines succinctly:

The political philosopher is essentially a thinker of political ideas; his major task is to

prescribe the ideal… This is in contradistinction to the political scientist whose essential

interest is to describe existing political institutions and structures. Political philosophy is

much more concerned with the big questions that may be described as ‘meta’ than political

science. It is such questions that often give rise to the so-called abstractness that

5
 philosophy has been associated with. Political science, in order to be exact and universal,

waves aside the big or fundamental questions because the big questions do not seem to

have definite answers (Falaiye, 2012: 4-5)

One important thing to note here is that, political philosophy may thus be viewed as one of the

most important intellectual disciplines, for it sets standards of judgment and defines constructive

purposes for the use of public power (Arneson, op cit: par 3). In other words, it is political

philosophy that dictates how political practice or behaviour should be modeled in order to achieve

a set of goals which usually should be for the common good of the people in any given society.

This may then be the reason some regard political philosophy as a discipline that provides general

answers to general questions to concepts and theories such as justice, right, the distinction between

the is and ought, and the larger issues of politics (Mukherjee and Ramaswamy, 2007: 2)

The history of political philosophy is full of political ideas prescribed by political philosophers.

However, to what extent these political ideas or philosophies affect the political practice of

societies at any such given milieu or period is another debate altogether but that the importance of

generating ideas which can be used for organizing societies to guarantee freedom, equality. Peace,

justice and happiness- which political philosophy represents- cannot be over emphasized.

Central Issues of Political Philosophy

There are some fundamental issues involved in political philosophy. Among them are the issues

of justice, liberty, equality and authority. These political concepts are at the very heart of political

6
philosophy because they represent, largely, the platform on which a just and happy society rests.

That is why some political philosophers attempt to give a lucid and coherent explanation of these

political concepts because according to Dipo Irele, they help us to describe, comprehend, and also

explain political phenomena. It would be impossible to do any worthwhile theorization in political

philosophy without them (Irele, 2012: 101). However, how do these concepts constitute the central

issues of political philosophy?

We can say that the above mentioned concepts i.e., justice liberty, equality are central to political

philosophy, since the core of political philosophy revolves around the notion of the ‘common

good’. This notion of the common good itself cannot be comprehended without those erstwhile

mentioned concepts. In fact, we can say that political philosophy is essentially concerned about

the establishment of justice in the society. It was the problem of justice that led Plato to postulate

the Ideal State in his book, Republic. It is also the attempt to finding social justice in various

societies over the centuries that led to the idea and practice of different political systems. However,

these concepts or ideas are not straight jacketed. This accounts for the reason political philosophers

“try to determine whether these ideas are consistent with, or conflict with, one another whether for

instance, equality and liberty are competing values, or whether a society might be both free and

equal at once” (Miller, 2013: 6). For instance, some political philosophers believe that justice can

only be well served when individual rights are protected over the group while others argue that

justice is only served when the will of the group supplants that of the individual. This is probably

what informs Miller’s (op cit: par. 3) partitioning of the central issues of political philosophy into

five broad areas:

(a) Individual and Society- what is the relationship between the individual and society? Should

the individual rights supersede the rights of the group?

7
(b) Justification of Government- can the existence of government or the state be justified?

(c) The Functions and Limits of Government- what abstract principles should guide the operation

of government, regarding its aims and the limits of authority?

(d) Constitutions and Laws- what sort of constitution, political institutions and legal systems

should a given government have?

(e) Political Philosophy and Public Policy- what practical public policies should apply to specific

areas such as police, defense and international relations, economics, public finance, and

welfare?

The issues raised above are therefore central to political philosophy, and it would only take the

political philosophers, using their power of transcendence to be able to come up with veritable

political ideas and theories that may aid in the achievement of social justice and the common good

as determined by their spatio-temporal orientations and conditions.

Political Philosophy: A Historical Survey

The history of political philosophy is quite vast taking into consideration that political philosophy

has existed as far back as the early periods of the evolution of society or state where humans have

faced vital questions of politics that today, still remains very germane to the socio- political

organization of our society. Arneson (op cit) reveals that:

Questions concerning the aims of government, the grounds of political obligation, the

rights of individuals against the state, the basis of sovereignty, the relation of executive to

legislative power, and the nature of political liberty and social justice have been asked and

answered in so many ways over the centuries.

As such, it will not be an easy task mainly due to the constraints of space, to carry out a

comprehensive survey of political philosophies over the centuries. In view of this, what we shall

8
do in this historical survey is, to briefly highlight some select political philosophers whose political

ideas touch on some of the most salient issues of political philosophy. We shall restrict ourselves

only to a few Western and African political philosophers partly because political philosophers in

the West have played a very momentous role in their civilization while that of Africa are envisaged

to make more significant contribution towards the social reconstruction and development of our

continent. In discussing Western political philosophy therefore, we shall select one outstanding

philosopher’s political thought from the ancient, renaissance, modern and contemporary periods

while for African political philosophy, focus shall be largely on contemporary political

philosophies which accommodates both the pre-independence and post-independence political

thoughts.

Western Political Philosophy

Western political philosophy is a sub-set of political philosophy which can be seen in the mould

of other regional political philosophies such as African political philosophy, Asian political

philosophy, Caribbean political philosophy, and so on. Each regional political philosophy is

peculiar in its approach, problems and methodologies since they emerged from different spatio-

temporal conditions. They exist to serve identical purposes of consciously understanding and

possibly solving the problems of group life particularly, the notion of governance. To reiterate,

what distinguish political philosophies majorly from one another are: one, the basic assumptions

that underlies it; two, the methodology applied and three, the issues or problems under

consideration. Prominent Western political philosophers cutting across different periods include

Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Hegel, Mill,

Marx, Rawls, and Nozick.

9
Ancient Period: Plato on Justice

sThe political philosophy of Plato (427-347 B.C.) is contained in three of his major works: The

Republic, the Statesman and the Laws. However, it is in the Republic that his theory of the ideal

state is best exposited. In his ideal state, Plato recommended four cardinal virtues of wisdom,

courage, discipline and justice. His theory of ideal state arose out of two reasons; one, that the

individual man is not self-sufficient and therefore need others to survive and that (two), humans

need to survive by combining different individual traits and efforts. This necessitated the society

or state and, for the state to be well or ideally organized, these aforementioned virtues must be

present.

In order to make this kind of society functional and just, Plato advocated for the division of the

state into three different classes namely, the Guardians, the Auxiliaries and the Artisans. The

guardians are the rulers of the state; the auxiliaries are expected to defend the state while the

artisans are the common people who are to provide the material needs of the state. This division

of the society into three levels must be observed according to Plato for justice to be achieved.

Justice in the individual according to Plato therefore meant that every individual was assigned a

place in society according to one’s natural aptitudes and skills (Mukherjee and Ramaswamy, op

cit; 70). On the other hand, justice in the state meant that the three social classes perform their

respective tasks without any form of interference from the others. Justice was one class, one duty;

one man, one work (ibid; 7)

To give his argument a basis, Plato drew a parallel between the three classes and the tripartite

nature of the soul in his psychology. To him, each soul has a corresponding social class. The

guardians who are the ruling elites (who must be philosophers) correspond to the rational part of

10
the soul (i.e., reason), which should rule man. The auxiliaries, who are the soldiers, correspond to

the spirited part of the soul (i.e., the higher emotions) characterized by courage; and the artisans

(the common people) correspond to the appetitive part of the soul (the lower emotions). In other

words, justice to Plato is, “giving to every man (according to) his due” (Sabine, Thorson, 1973:

65)

In perusing Plato’s conception of justice, it would seem that he advocates among other things, for

collectivism, class distinction and rule of the privileged few over the majority. This stand, many

argue, portray him as anti-democratic and absolutist. In fact, many criticized the omission of law

in his ideal state as a deliberate ploy to ignore the conception of justice as ‘equality before the law’

thereby creating an elitist society. However, many others disagree. Some argue that his

stratification of the society is hinged on promoting the general well being of the society since

people are differently constituted and therefore suited for different roles. On the argument that he

is elitist and anti-democratic, Plato himself argued that, it is not everybody that knows what

constitute goodness; and as such, leadership requires special skill and training, so that the right

person can perform the task accordingly for the benefit of the whole society. It is in this vein that

Plato regards democracy as a mob i.e., “the worst of all lawful governments, and the best of all

lawless ones” (Omoregbe, op cit; 103)

Renaissance Period: Machiavelli on State and Power

Niccolo Machiavelli’s political philosophy is hinged on a theory of human nature that took leave

of the Christian virtues and ecclesiastical issues characteristic of medieval political thought but

11
rather, sought to justify the attainment and preservation of political power by any means possible.

Machiavelli (1469-1527) in his writings: The Prince (1513) and Discourses (1516), subscribed to

a consistent theory of human nature which he regarded as “inveterate selfishness” that drives man

towards self glory. In The Prince, he argues that human nature is characterized by an evil

disposition which makes humans abhor doing good deeds for the benefit of others other than for

selfish interests. On this basis, Machiavelli argues that politics is not for the purpose of cooperation

and harmony nor is it for the common good which many political philosophers often argue. Politics

rather, is essentially about grabbing power and retaining it even though at the end, the common

good could be achieved.

The lust for power by individuals according to Machiavelli is rooted primarily, in the desire for

self-preservation and security which leads man to its pursuit and induces man to do anything

immoral so long power is achieved and retained. Therefore, the Prince or the ruler is only mindful

that the results are good, not minding the means he used to achieve the results. Further, Machiavelli

urged the judicious use of force and deceit by rulers in order to preserve their power because it is

assumed that men are slaves to their selfish emotions and would therefore respond to the dictates

of passions rather than to reason. A good ruler to him should as a maxim knows how to manipulate

the four passions of love, hatred, fear and contempt that govern human behaviour.

In the final analysis, Machiavelli’s political philosophy revolves round how to manage power; how

a state can channel the selfish vigour of its citizens in publicly beneficial ways and, the

establishment and maintenance of a strong state in the face of foreign aggression and domestic

upheaval.

12
The major criticism leveled against Machiavelli’s political thought is the question of morality.

Many have accused him of relegating or sacrificing morality on the altar of power. In the same

breath, he is accused of absolutizing power, i.e., making power the ultimate goal of politics

whereas to many, the ultimate goal of politics is to enable an ideal society where the peoples’

interests are better guaranteed.

Modern Period: Locke on Civil Society and Political Authority

John Locke (1632- 1704) is arguably the most influential of all English political thinkers of all

times. His political theory, espoused in Two Treatises of Government, has played a crucial and

pivotal role in the development of Western democracies (op cit Mukherjee and Ramaswamy: 189-

190). Like almost all political writings, Locke’s (political) ideas are a response to political issues

and events in his own time. In this case, Locke, in the First Treatise was reacting against Sir Robert

Filmer, who in his book, Patriarcha had argued for the divine right of kings as the source of

political authority. Filmer in this book had argued that the divine right of kings was derived from

the rights conferred on Adam and his heirs as the rulers of the world in the Old Testament. In his

reaction, Locke rejected the central positions of Filmer declaring it as absolute and patriarchal. It

was however in his Second Treatise properly titled, “An Essay Concerning the True Original,

Extent and End of Civil Government” that Locke advanced his own political philosophy.

Locke, like Hobbes and Rousseau adopted the social contract theory not only to explain the origin

of political power but as well as to build his political theory on. According to Locke, man lived in

a state of nature prior to civil society. This state of nature (unlike Hobbes chaotic and gloomy one)

is one of peace, goodwill, mutual assistance and preservation (op cit Sabine, Thorson: 485).

Locke’s state of nature is predicated on the laws of nature which are made known to human beings

13
though the power of reason that guide their conduct. These laws of nature according to Locke, also

directs them towards their ‘proper interests’ (op cit Mukherjee and Ramaswamy: 199). Further,

Locke holds that the laws of nature bestow upon human beings three basic rights: right to life,

liberty and property. Though these rights are inalienable, Locke still holds that they do not confer

absolute freedom as all are expected to act within the bounds of the laws of nature.

Irrespective of the relative peace being witnessed in the state of nature, the need to form a civil

society according to Locke, became necessary consequent upon the “corruption and viciousness

of degenerate men” (ibid: 200) due largely to growth of inequalities in property distribution and

unreliable ways to settle such arisen disputes. As such, the defects of the state of nature lies merely

in the fact that it has no organization, such as magistrates, written law, and fixed penalties, to give

effect to the rules of right (op cit Sabine, Thorson). Hence, men decide to submit their individual

rights to enable a civil government imbued with the greater possibility of impartiality in

implementation and execution of laws to govern the society and thereby “increase the chance of

peace that impartiality entailed” (op cit Mukherjee and Ramaswamy: 200).

In his theory, Locke advocated for the establishment of three institutions to oversee the affairs of

the society viz the Legislative which is saddled with making and enactment of laws; the Executive

who enforces and adjudicates the law and the Federative power given the power to make treatises

and carry out external relations. Among the three arms, the legislative is accorded the highest status

as it directly represents the people. Even in his advocacy of a limited sovereign state without

pandering to political absolutism, Locke asserted that supreme power still resides with the people

and therefore the government has no right to interfere in domain strictly outside the political. To

show that the real power is with the people, Locke affirmed that the people as a community reserve

14
the absolute right to institute and dismiss a government without necessarily leading back to a state

of nature.

Many regard Locke’s political theory, above all, as a theory of resistance or revolution (op cit

Adams and Bryson: 51) especially as it appears to have defended the end to the reign of

monarchical rule in England. For Locke, government was established by men to defend and uphold

their natural rights and liberties and as such any government that violates such rights have no

legitimacy to continue hold on to power. In many quarters, Locke is regarded to have instituted

the rise of capitalist class. He has considerable impact on many contemporary liberal political

thinkers.

Contemporary Period: John Rawls on Justice

John Rawls (1921-2002), like some political philosophers before him, attempts to develop a notion

of justice that is fair and just so that conflicts resulting from inequality in the society can be

minimal. In his book, A Theory of Justice, Rawls enunciated how this can be realized. Like the

early social contract theorists (Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau), Rawls built his theory from a

deliberate pre-society position he calls “Original Position” (as against the ‘state of nature’ of the

social contractarians) where an agreement on principles to be used in the society need to be reached

by all parties without any prejudices or preconceived notions. In this Original Position, men

according to Rawls, are covered with a “veil of ignorance” and have no inkling where they will

fall in the social hierarchy in the proposed society in terms of race, class, sex and other factors. As

a result, they are motivated by the need to ensure that justice and fairness be done since no one

knew where they will find themselves.

15
In his theory, Rawls proposes two principles to guide the making of the social arrangements in the

‘new’ society. The principles are:

1. Each person is to have equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties

compatible with a similar system of liberty for all.

2. Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) to the greatest

benefit of the least advantaged, consistent with the just saving principle, and (b) attached

to offices and position open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity. (Rawls,

1972: 215)

From the principles above, what Rawls aims at is the possibility of social justice. He envisions that

no matter what, the society cannot be equal. But that in any case, the system should be such that

will allow for the satisfaction of basic requirements. Particularly, the first principle should

guarantee liberty which should “encompass a range of basic rights, such as freedom of conscience

and movement, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and so on” (Miller,

op cit: 181). The second principle which Rawls calls the ‘Difference Principle’ is to enable a

situation where distributive justice is made possible. Here, even the worse off in the society are

still provided with the minimum standard of living paid from the taxes levied on the rich- a kind

of welfare system put in place to improve the difficulties encountered by the poor in the society.

Despite some criticisms leveled against Rawls theory, it could still be argued that it is a realistic

theory that admits the inevitability of inequality in any society, either capitalist or socialist. Lastly,

It is seen more as a theory that aims to promote fairness and the possibility of guaranteeing that

conflicts resulting from social inequalities are reduced to the barest minimum.

African Political Philosophy

16
Like other regional philosophies, African political philosophy is a sub set of political philosophy.

This is because it addresses issues concerning the political organization of the African society for

the purpose of governance and social living. It is also said that African political philosophy is a

response to the different (political) experiences of the African, and his interpretation of such

experiences (Falaiye, 2009: 132).

The central task of any political philosophy including, African Political philosophy is to prescribe

how an ideal state ought to be organized. In prescribing how an ideal state ought to be organized,

African political philosophy puts into serious consideration the socio-cultural attitudes and

experiences of the people towards evolving an ideal state. To this end, many contemporary African

political philosophers regard socialism as a system well suited to the nature of the Africans because

socialism is seen as an off-shoot of traditional African communalism where existence is predicated

on interdependence and a genial web of relationships which is heightened by togetherness,

community of existence, familyhood, co-operation, justice and solidarity. This partly explains the

reason many African political ideas are socialist in nature. Another reason for the adoption of

socialist doctrines among African political philosophers stem from the slave trade, colonial and

neo colonial experiences which they considered to be synonymous with capitalism. The socialist

system to them is exploitative and therefore not ideal as a basis of governance for most African

political philosophers. It was the combination of these experiences that nudged many of them

towards the ideals espoused in socialism, Marxism and humanism.

Nyerere on Ujamaa- The Basis of African Socialism

Julius Nyerere (1922-1999) first articulated what he called Ujamaa in the Arusha Declaration of

1967 as a principle by which Tanzania could achieve self-reliance, liberation and development.

17
“Ujamaa” (which means “familyhood” in Kishwahili) according to Nyerere “is opposed to

capitalism, which seeks to build a happy society on the basis of the exploitation of man by man;

and it is equally opposed to doctrinaire socialism which seeks to build its happy society on a

philosophy of inevitable conflict between man and man” (Nyerere, 1987: 10). He sees Ujamaa

therefore as a basis of African socialism, which is based on the communalism of traditional African

society. Nyerere envisages an ideological system based on the mutual cooperation and

collaboration of the family unit. Ujamaa to him is rooted in our past- in traditional society. In other

words, Nyerere canvasses for the adoption and adaptation of our traditional African societal life

which is based on freedom, equality and unity as the proper way towards rapid economic

development and the creation of new values.

Nyerere sees Ujamaa as the right path to a desired egalitarian society, not European or Marxist

socialism that is based on perpetual conflict and tensions between classes but African Socialism

based on the principle of egalitarianism in the distribution of its wealth. He envisages a society

made up of family units who would live and work on a co-operative basis in organized villages all

around Tanzania. Development, he believes, can only come to Africa if the whole society works

towards the production of wealth which can liberate the Africans from the shackles of colonialism

and the evils of neocolonialism. To realize this, Nyerere preaches development from two

perspectives; the personal and societal. Development on the personal level can only be achieved

through self-reliance. It is the aggregate of personal development that contributes towards the self-

reliance development at the societal level.

To attain the development associated with freedom, Nyerere argues that all forms of exploitation

must be checked. As a result, Nyerere argues against capitalism and its evils, saying that the system

18
is exploitative as it aids the wealth and comfort of a few at the expense of many. Capitalism breeds

acquisitiveness for power and prestige of the few at the detriment of the larger society and as such,

it is anti-social because it corrupts. Socialism on the other hand, is distributive and ensures that the

critical factor of wealth production i.e., land be communally held so as to prevent the exploitative

tendencies of a few at the detriment of the many.

Lastly, Nyerere argues that the equality of all men in the society is paramount to the true

development being sought for in his Ujamaa. To be a leader is to serve, initiate and create. It is

therefore not a question of leadership and superiority but leadership and equality. Further, Nyerere

believes that the logical conclusion for a true socialism is the unity and security that comes from

been united and connected beyond the family, tribe, community, nation or even the continent to

embrace the whole society of mankind (ibid: 11).

Senghor on Negritude and African Socialism

Leopold Senghor (1906-2001) is synonymous with the concept of Negritude. Negritude represents

a historic development in the formulation of African diasporic identity and culture. The term marks

a revalorization of Africa on the part of New World blacks, affirming an overwhelming pride in

black heritage and culture as championed by Aimie Cesaire, Leon Damas along with Leopold

Senghor. Negritude was primarily a cultural movement devoted to defining and expressing the

special, distinctive, cultural characteristics of black people and then to asserting the worth of these

distinctive characteristics.

Senghor in postulating Negritude rejected the notion of the superiority of Europeans culture over

that of the Africans which was partly manifested in the French colonial policy of assimilation-

which seeks to make French men out of Africans. His emphasis was on the assertion of the value

19
of African culture, identity and world view. In further elaboration, Senghor distinguished

differently the African cultural and world outlook from their European counterparts. While the

Africans give prominence to the intuitive and spiritual, the latter places emphasis on reason. He

also distinguishes how the Africans are monistic-dualist and the Europeans dualist. To Senghor,

Africans unlike their European counterpart seek synthesis of experience as opposed to knowledge

founded on separation and opposition.

Negritude according to Senghor then becomes “the sum of the cultural values of the black world;

that is, a certain active presence in the world, or better, in the universe” (Senghor, 1970: par 3). It

is on this basis that he sees Negritude as a philosophy of rediscovery and cultural re-awakening, a

philosophy of cultural emancipation aimed at giving the African people a sense of pride and dignity

as Africans.

After Negritude has run its course, he thereafter developed his idea of African socialism as a way

forward for the people of Senegal. His idea of African socialism shares a lot in common with

Nyerere’s Ujamaa. He believed that Africa has a glorious past built on communalism and

collectivity and as such rejected capitalism and orthodox socialism. He however differs from

Nyerere because he did not believe that we should throw away everything European but instead,

we should fertilize the African values with the positive aspects of European legacies. According

to Senghor, the essential task is to eliminate the flaws of colonial rule while preserving its positive

contributions. These positive contributions should be rooted in Negritude and fertilized by the

social spirit in order to put an end to the exploitation of man by man and as such bring economy

democracy back to life.

Nkrumah on Consciencism, Socialism and Development

20
The political independence of African states according to Kwame Nkrumah (1909-1972) does not

guarantee a holistic development especially without economic independence. Africa’s road to true

development is fraught with many challenges. First, Africa must contend with the effects of

colonialism and its twin evil- neo-colonialism. Africa is also confronted with the problem of

identity as Africans no longer know who they really are. As such, Nkrumah identified as problem

the violation of the African egalitarian view of man and society where the spirit for the collective

good has been altered for the promotion of crass individualism as one of the negative effects of

colonialism. He claims further that the culture of class and individualism as exemplified by

capitalism (which was alien to African traditional society) is being furthered by the imperialist

economic policies of the ex-colonialists and that cannot allow for true development.

Another major problem militating against Africa’s development according to Nkrumah is the

emergence of a new alien African society as a result of conflicting cultures. He believes that the

present-day African society has lost its identity as it has to accommodate three rival ideologies:

the traditional beliefs and practices, which, in turn, are engaged in a tug-of-war with Euro-Christian

tenets, on the one hand, and Islamic tenets, on the other. This struggle has generated a crisis of

conscience in the African since one ideology upholds what another spurns, and the African is

expected to cope with all.

Nkrumah therefore calls for a radical transformation of the society by revolution and the

establishment of socialism since it (i.e. socialism) shares the same spirit of communalism. He did

not call for a return to the traditional past as Nyerere did but for the harnessing of the

communalistic and egalitarian spirit of Africa traditional past to guide the needed ideology towards

development. This ideology, he says, cannot be capitalism as it is based on creating class and

21
exploitation of the majority by the few. Nkrumah therefore believes that the restoration of Africa’s

humanist and egalitarian principles of society can only be achieved through socialism. In the

tradition of Marx and Lenin, he believes that for rapid development of the African continent,

industrial and agrarian revolution are a must. Consequently for him,

socialism in Africa introduces a new social synthesis in which modern technology is

reconciled with human values, in which the advanced technical society is realised without

the staggering social malefactions and deep schisms of capitalist industrial society. For

true economic and social development cannot be promoted without the real socialisation

of productive and distributive processes. (Nkrumah, 1966: p 18)

Nkrumah’s call for a socialist revolution is based on his ideology of “Philosophical Consciencism”

because to him practice without thought is blind and thought without practice is empty. As such,

he believed that Africa’s socialism must be built on a solid foundation and be given a guiding

principle. This foundation and principle for Africa’s socialism is embedded in his ideology and

based on philosophical materialism. This philosophical materialism affirms the primacy of matter

over spirit and maintains that spiritual realities developed from matter through a dialectical tension

inherent in matter and that matter is always in a process of change and it generates different kinds

of itself as its products. From this dialectical tension, new factors such as spiritual entities emerge

and radical changes take place. This, Nkrumah calls “categorical conversion”. In other words,

changes in society is caused as a result of the dialectical tension that results in conflict, struggle,

strife and wars and are therefore the conditions and laws by which change, progress and

development come by.

22
Philosophical consciencism then becomes the basis of African socialism: "a philosophical

standpoint which, taking its start from the present content of the African conscience indicates the

way in which progress is forged out of the conflict in that conscience." (Nkrumah, 1964: 14) This

ideology according to Nkrumah must crystallize with a philosophical statement from the prevailing

crisis in the African conscience as its theoretical basis. The ideology aims at containing the African

experience of the collective presence of the Euro-Christian, the Islamic and the African tradition

in tune with the original humanist and egalitarian principles underlying African society for

harmonious growth and development. This requires the restitution of those original principles of

African humanist egalitarianism in the first instance and a deliberate plan of massive

industrialization. Nkrumah however, believes that this ideology cannot be successful if

implemented only in Ghana; it must be an ideology for the whole of Africa if it is to succeed.

Awolowo on Democratic Socialism

In seeking an ideology that will emancipate the African peoples from oppression and poverty,

Obafemi Awolowo (1909-1986) advocated for what he called “Democratic Socialism” First, he

argued against the regional colouration of socialism as toed by his contemporaries who believe

that African socialism is different from classical socialism and all other forms of socialism.

Awolowo in his book, the People’s Republic believes that socialism is normative and not culture

bound and should therefore not bear the mark of any region that is, socialism as obtained in Russia

should be what is obtainable in Nigeria and elsewhere. He also argued against the use of violence

to enthrone socialism -as postulated by Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, and others.

Awolowo in his political postulations, made a distinction between the primary aim of a state and

the purpose of a state; the former (i.e. aim) according to him, is the maintenance of internal order

23
and the prevention of external aggression while the latter (purpose) is to enable its citizens enjoy

the fruits of their labour and to live a full and happy life including the enjoyment of their

fundamental human rights. Awolowo in further espousal of his political thought critiqued the two

existing systems (capitalism and socialism) before pitching his tent with socialism albeit with some

modifications.

He believed that capitalism has done more harm than good to mankind. He accepts the fact that

capitalism has over the time encouraged the growth of science and technology through the

provision of funds for scientific research which eventually brought about the industrial revolution.

Through this development, modernization of production tools like machines, locomotion, etc were

enabled thereby internationalizing commerce and industry. Capitalism also brought about the end

of feudalism and the abolition of slave trade as a result of the industrial revolution.

However, Awolowo believes that the demerits of capitalism outweigh its merits. Capitalism

according to him has led mankind to waste and disaster because the inequality embedded in the

system makes very few productive and rendered many unproductive and poverty stricken.

Capitalism therefore encourages the legitimization of stealing which in the long run produce greed,

anger, resentment, and jealousy. Hence, capitalism is bound to fail or collapse.

In advocating his own brand of socialism which he calls Democratic Socialism, Awolowo called

for the attainment of socialism not by revolution or violence but through democratic reformation.

In his Voice of Reason, Awolowo presents his thesis on democratic socialism thus:

…In my considered and settled opinion, the best political ideal for mankind is democratic

socialism which is founded among others on the principles of well being of individual and

24
 brotherhood and among all men, irrespective of creed, colour, and race. (Awolowo, 1981:

p 182)

In Democratic Socialism, emphasis is laid on the democratic installation and change of

government as no cabals should cease power without the consent of the people under the guise of

socialist revolution. He disagrees with Chairman Mao Tse Tsung of China who says that “power

flows from the barrel of the gun” and others that violence can be a means to achieving socialism

or power. He says: “In my own opinion, power flows from the leadership that is sustained by the

will and approval of the people freely articulated and given” (Awolowo, 1968: 199)

Concluding Remarks- Political Philosophy and Development in Contemporary Africa

There is an overwhelming need in Africa today to move from the present parlous state of our

society to one where desires are fulfilled and happiness maximally derivable. In order to do this,

there is the need to bridge the seeming disconnect between political theories and practice and

governance. More often than not, most African countries have no adopted theoretical framework

for political action and this is partly responsible for the plethora of challenges we are facing today.

Paramount attention needs to be paid to the wide gap that exists between theory and practice. It is

the duty of the political philosophers to rigorously think and postulate ideas that can the transform

society for good while it is the duty of the politicians to appropriate these theories for the common

good. The people too need to be alive to their onerous duty of guarding and guiding the politicians

towards the common good.

Politics holds the key to the attainment or otherwise of any good ideal in any society since it is

through it that decisions affecting all members of the society are made. It is therefore expected

that politics should be seen by all as a purpose driven activity towards the common good. However,

25
the ideal need be such that it is humanistic enough to ensure concepts like liberty, justice and

fairness are guaranteed without pandering to negative values like crass individualism, egoism,

selfishness and elitism. Politics should be human development centred. It should take the love and

welfare of all humans as its centre point.

References

Arneson, Richard, “Political Philosophy,” in Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/467661/political-philosophy.

Awolowo, O., (1968), The People’s Republic. (Ibadan: Oxford University Press)

--------------------- (1981), Voice of Reason. (Akure: Fagbamigbe Press)

Binda, Ngoma (2003), “Philosophy and Political Power: An Essay on Inflectional Theory,”
Polis. Retrieved from http://www.polis.sciencespobordeaux.fr/vol11ns/arti4.html. Accessed

Falaiye, O. A., (2009), “Social-Political Philosophy” in E.K. Ogundowole, (ed.), Philosophy and
Logic. (Lagos: Department of Philosophy, University of Lagos)

---------------------- (2012), “A Philosopher Interrogates African Polis: How Can We Get It Right?”
Inaugural Lecture Series (Lagos: University of Lagos Press)

Irele, Dipo (2012), “Political Concepts” in Philosophy and Logic (Ibadan: General Studies
Programme Unit, University of Ibadan)

Miller, David (1998), “Political Philosophy” in E. Craig (Ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of

Philosophy, (London: Routledge). Retrieved from http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/S099.

Miller, Fred., “Political Philosophy,” in Ayn Rand, Objectivism and Individualism. Retrieved from
http://www.atlassociety.org/foundations_guide_political_philosophy

Mukherjee, S., Ramaswamy, S. (2007), A History of Political Thought: Plato to Marx (New Delhi:
Prentice Hall of India Private Limited)

26
Nkrumah, Kwame (1966), “African Socialism Revisited” in African Forum Quaterly, Vol.1, No.3,
(New York: The American Society of African Culture)

--------------------------- (1964), “Consciencism: Philosophy and Ideology for Decolonization and

Development” in the African Revolution (London: Heinemann)

Nyerere, Julius, (1987), Ujamaa- The Basis of African Socialism. The Journal of Pan African
Studies, vol. 1, no.1. Retrieved from http://www.jpanafrican.com/edocs/e-DocUjamaa

Omoregbe, Joseph I. (2007), Social Political Philosophy and International Relations (Lagos: Joja
Educational Research and Publishers Limited).
Rawls, John, (1972), A Theory of Justice. Revised Edition (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press)

Sabine, H.S., Thorson, L.T. (1973), A History of Political Theory, Fourth Edition (New Delhi:
Oxford & IBH Publishing Co.Pvt. Ltd)

Senghor, Leopold, (1970), “Negritude: A Humanism of the Twentieth Century” in the African
Reader: Independent Africa. Retrieved from http://www.ricorso.net/tx/ENG312/Teaching
/Resource/Critics/Senghor_L/Negritude.htm

27