Lander Luyten

Ubuntu and Liberalism

In this essay I am going to take a closer look at the notion of Ubuntu as present within the
South-African apartheid reconciliatory process and its use by the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission (TRC). The main question I ask myself is whether Ubuntu could be useful in a
western liberal-democratic context. Could this notion be adapted or is it too uniquely African
to find a place in the west? I begin by taking a look at the exact definition of Ubuntu.

A quick look at the online version of the oxford dictionary gives us quite a simple definition
of Ubuntu: “A quality that includes the essential human virtues; compassion and humanity”1
Compassion and humanity are indeed critical to Ubuntu but this definition fails to point out
the complexity of a concept like Ubuntu. It goes deeper than that, Ubuntu defines what it
means to be human in a relation to other humans. In the words of Desmond Tutu:

“Ubuntu says not you are human because you think you are human but because you
participate in relationships. It says a person is a person through other persons.”2

This reliance on other people in order to become a person ourselves is the key to
understanding Ubuntu. Within this concept of Ubuntu it is also clear why Ubuntu plays an
important role in the reconciliation process. The task of the TRC was to bridge the gap that
generations of systemic racial discrimination had widened. Their task was to restore the
relations between people who had had none (or very little) positive interaction with each
other. Ubuntu as Tutu uses the word sees interpersonal relationships as that what makes us
human. Thus the TRCs task is in effect to restore humanity by restoring those interpersonal
relationships. I think this really shows the magnitude of such a reconciliatory process, not
only from a systemic point of view (it’s very hard indeed to heal all the wounds left by the
apartheid regime) but from a more personal point of view as well. People who follow the
Ubuntu philosophy believe that restoring relationships, opening paths of dialogue between
communities is an endeavour to become more human as it were.

1
“ubuntu - definition of ubuntu in English | Oxford Dictionaries”, Oxford Dictionaries | English, geraadpleegd
10 december 2016, https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ubuntu.
2
TempletonPrize, Who we are: Human uniqueness and the African spirit of Ubuntu. Desmond Tutu, Templeton
Prize 2013, geraadpleegd 10 december 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wZtfqZ271w#t=162.

1
 Lander Luyten

Etymologically Ubuntu originated from the Xhosa ethnic group in South-Africa.3 It can be
used however to refer to similar philosophies present on the sub-continent. This focus on
communal values was rather widespread in pre-colonial times. The importance of Ubuntu in a
communal sense also gives way for a more economic interpretation. To be human is to exist
in relationships with others. This means that success in life (whichever way you measure it)
can never be attained in isolation from others. Acting selfishly is also completely alien in the
Ubuntu philosophy because of our connectedness to other people. Our actions have immediate
consequences not only for ourselves but for our community. Thus success and failure are
experienced as a group. Success is measured by seeing how ones actions benefit the wellbeing
of all. Needless to say an economy fuelled by Ubuntu philosophy looks rather different from
the liberal capitalist economy which places little value in communal success and focuses
instead on individual success. This is also clear from a historical perspective. I already
mentioned that Ubuntu is a pre-colonial philosophy, it didn’t really fit in with the colonial
western sentiments. We can take this historical line of reasoning a bit further. The European
colonization of South-Africa is what lead to apartheid and the subsequent reconciliation
efforts. The Ubuntu reasoning of the natives was repressed in favour of western ideology. It
only makes sense that when the time came to heal the social divide Ubuntu would return as a
core concept in that healing process. To fix the problems of the (then) present they resorted to
old ideas. To move forward the TRC also had to take a few steps back (in an ideological
sense).
I mentioned earlier that Ubuntu had an economic aspect. In a piece by Joel Thompson, he
uses the notion of Ubuntu to characterize what he calls the ‘African economics of
permanence’.4 This traditional African economy was an integrated framework of philosophy,
religion, education, politics and societal and environmental well-being built upon
interpersonal human relationships. It promoted frugal use of community shared resources to
assure a sustainable system. These traditional economics of permanence in Africa are being
pushed aside however by globalized economic theory and practice. Great social and political
divides such as the apartheid regime and the North-Irish Troubles often go paired with
economic imbalance which only separates the different communities further. Part of the
reconciliation process according to Daniel Philpott are ‘reparations’ paid by the offenders to

3
Joel Thompson, “Recreating ‘Economics of Permanence’ in Africa”, in Responsible economics: E.F. Schumacher
and his legacy for the 21st century, bewerkt door Hendrik Opdebeeck, Frontiers of business ethics, v. 11
(Oxford ; Berlin: Lang, 2013),p. 268.
4
Ibid. p.268-269

2
 Lander Luyten

the victims to alleviate their suffering and also to recognize the fact that they indeed suffered
at the hands of the perpetrators.5 These reparations often come in monetary form. This can
also be linked to the economic side of Ubuntu as the reparations are an acknowledgement of
crimes committed and as such are an attempt to reform the relationships with the community
which was hurt.
Reconciliation and Ubuntu are very closely linked, in the words of Desmond Tutu himself:

“I contend that there is another kind of justice, restorative justice, which was
characteristic of traditional African jurisprudence. Here the central concern is not
retribution or punishment but, in the spirit of Ubuntu, the healing of breaches, the
redressing of imbalances, the restoration of broken relationships. This kind of justice
seeks to rehabilitate both the victim and the perpetrator, who should be given the
opportunity to be reintegrated into the community he or she has injured by his or her
offense”6

The last sentence of this quote strikes at the heart of Ubuntu in a reconciliatory context.
Reintegration into the community is the ultimate goal of political reconciliation. Ubuntu is the
ultimate goal of political reconciliation.
Ubuntu and its use by the TRC and Desmond Tutu isn’t without its critics however. Not all
Africans share this moral outlook of black South Africans, nor believe that ethics requires
such ‘supererogatory’ acts. Some see in Ubuntu an illusion of agreement of what Ubuntu
really means.7 They view Ubuntu not just as an ancient philosophy but also as a current
invention. This was then presumably created for the specific purpose of getting people to
reconcile and as such would carry less weight. This argument feels a little empty to me. I
think we should first and foremost look at Ubuntu as a philosophical concept ‘an sich’ and not
at its heritage.
German historian Christoph Marx criticised Ubuntu for fostering conformity, creating
nation-building tension from a process that should promote inclusion.8 R. Neville Richardson

5
Daniel Philpott, red., “Beyond Politics as Usual: Is Reconciliation Compatible with Liberalism?”, in The politics
of past evil: religion, reconciliation, and the dilemmas of transitional justice, Kroc Institute series on religion,
conflict, and peace building (Notre Dame, Ind: University of Notre Dame Press, 2006), p.23.
6
Desmond Tutu, No Future without Forgiveness, Nachdr., An Image Book (New York: Doubleday, 2000). P.51
7
Richard H. Bell, Understanding African philosophy: a cross-cultural approach to classical and contemporary
issues (New York: Routledge, 2002). p.88
8
Bernard Matolino en Wenceslaus Kwindingwi, “The End of Ubuntu”, South African Journal of Philosophy 32,
nr. 2 (1 augustus 2013): 197–205, p. 201

3
 Lander Luyten

argues that Ubuntu has been used in South-Africa in a decontextualized sense.9 Ubuntu has
taken on a universality, it is everywhere. From computer operating systems to companies
Ubuntu is used to give a sense of authenticity and positivity. This leads to the aforementioned
decontextualisation and generally less critical reflection on Ubuntu. Matolino and
Kwindingwi voice perhaps the most relevant critique of Ubuntu relative to this essay. It is this
critique that may prove it to be a bridge too far to be able to reconcile liberalism with Ubuntu.
In their own words:

“Furthermore, we suggest that for a worldview, ethic or system of Ubuntu to work

effectively and attain its stated goals, there is one crucial requirement that the advocates
of Ubuntu are wont to negate. The success of Ubuntu largely depends on
undifferentiated, small and tight-knit communities that are relatively undeveloped. …
Without the existence of such communities the notion of Ubuntu becomes only but an
appendage to the political desires, wills and manipulations of the elite in the attempt to
coerce society towards the same ideology reminiscent of the aforesaid earlier attempts
by some political leaders on the continent.”

The differences between reconciliation and liberalism (and their conflict with each other)
have been discussed at length by Daniel Philpott in the chapter I referred to earlier. My focus
lies more specific, how does Ubuntu stack up against liberalism? Within the economic
dimension of Ubuntu we can already clearly see that it doesn’t mix well with a liberal
democratic outlook on economics. This is shown by the quote above as well. Traditional ways
of being, doing and relating characterized by Ubuntu have no place in a global economy.
Economic approach aside Matolino and Kwindingwi pose a very relevant question. Is Ubuntu
too ancient a philosophy, not fitting to the modern times? Ubuntu originated in the small tribal
communities of South-Africa. I think this brings us to a very important flaw, whether it is a
flaw of Ubuntu or of humankind itself. I will explain what I mean by that. Ubuntu works in
small tightknit communities because of the ‘closeness’ too each other. Our relations to others
are right in front of us, constantly present. This closeness makes it easier to keep a clear
perspective and to empathize with the other. It is not as difficult to remain open minded and to
keep a perspective of forgiveness in such a small scale situation. When the scale becomes that
of a conflict spanning an entire country it is much harder to keep this perspective. The

9
Ibid.

4
 Lander Luyten

consequences seem (and are) larger, forgiving people you don’t personally know seems
dangerous. As a whole the situation seems more distant and we are unable to get a good grip,
much of what is happening is a mystery which makes it more difficult to support. Empathy or
rather the lack thereof is an important obstacle in the 21st century I think. By a lack of
empathy I mean mostly the difficulty of empathizing with people that are beyond our
immediate social circle. Humanity evolved into caring for a small particular community,
which is why I think that Ubuntu works so well on a small scale. This is also why I mentioned
that the flaw might not lie in Ubuntu but rather in ourselves. If we as humans could find a way
to successfully make small community values and personal sentiments work in a globalized
context, I think Ubuntu would be an invaluable tool in the reconciliation process. This
remains in the field of ‘could’ and ‘would’ however because to make such change happen on
such scale seems impossible.

The more I think about it, the more my conclusion mirrors Daniel Philpotts conclusion of his
chapter in which he asks whether political reconciliation is compatible with liberalism.
Mirrors might not be the right term. My conclusion ‘reaffirming’ or ‘assisting’ Philpotts
conclusion is a better way of putting it. The liberal tradition has strong differences from
Ubuntu that make it impossible to perfectly align the two. Ubuntu as a philosophy has a place
as a platform for reconciliation. To take this to a liberal political level though, changes would
have to be made. In his conclusion Philpott mentions that in order for political reconciliation
and liberalism to coincide liberalism would have to open itself to warrants and rationales that
lie outside of liberalism. I believe that Ubuntu (or potentially a regional equivalent) might be
one such rationales.

Bibliography:

Bell, Richard H. Understanding African philosophy: a cross-cultural approach to classical

and contemporary issues. New York: Routledge, 2002.
Matolino, Bernard, en Wenceslaus Kwindingwi. “The End of Ubuntu”. South African Journal
of Philosophy 32, nr. 2 (1 augustus 2013): 197–205. doi:10.1080/02580136.2013.817637.
Philpott, Daniel, red. “Beyond Politics as Usual: Is Reconciliation Compatible with
Liberalism?” In The politics of past evil: religion, reconciliation, and the dilemmas of
transitional justice, 1–44. Kroc Institute series on religion, conflict, and peace building. Notre
Dame, Ind: University of Notre Dame Press, 2006.

5
 Lander Luyten

TempletonPrize. Who we are: Human uniqueness and the African spirit of Ubuntu. Desmond
Tutu, Templeton Prize 2013. Geraadpleegd 10 december 2016.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wZtfqZ271w#t=162.
Thompson, Joel. “Recreating ‘Economics of Permanence’ in Africa”. In Responsible
economics: E.F. Schumacher and his legacy for the 21st century, bewerkt door Hendrik
Opdebeeck, 265–78. Frontiers of business ethics, v. 11. Oxford ; Berlin: Lang, 2013.
Tutu, Desmond. No Future without Forgiveness. Nachdr. An Image Book. New York:
Doubleday, 2000.
“ubuntu - definition of ubuntu in English | Oxford Dictionaries”. Oxford Dictionaries |
English. Geraadpleegd 10 december 2016.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ubuntu.