‘A better life for all’, social cohesion and the governance of life in post-apartheid South Africa

Ubuntu and social capital: a strong relationship and a possible instrument of socio-economic development

“…In other words, one might argue that tribes and ethnical groups work as the mafia's clans, and that the social capital and the ties within each group are used to increase the internal welfare and to disrupt the others'. Fortunately, this is hardly true for Ubuntu: this social philosophy is indeed shared by the vast majority of the sub-Saharan populations, and its inclusive power goes beyond ethnic and tribal borders (Barolsky, 2012 andRapatsa, 2014). There is indeed no evidence that the application of Ubuntu had historically fostered ethnic or tribal conflicts; on the contrary there is evidence of the opposite so, that the values derived from Ubuntu have been used as a main pillar to appease ethnic conflicts in Burundi (Spitzer et al, 2014).…”

Using theory from the Global South: From social cohesion and collective efficacy to ubuntu

“…The difficulty of operationalizing social disorganization theory under South African conditions has not prevented its government from adopting what amounts to its antonym, social cohesion, as a balm for many of the social ills besetting post-apartheid society (Barolsky, 2012; Lamb, 2019). The country's National Development Plan (NDP) for the period to 2030 published in 2012 makes over 20 references to it in a variety of contexts from promoting healthy lifestyles to spatial planning and the transformation of human settlements (National Planning Commission, 2012).…”

“…Both of these positions are problematic. In the first place, it is far from clear how the three levels at which social cohesion is to be achieved are supposed to connect with each other when, as Barolsky (2012) points out, the caring inclusive communities and united-in-diversity nation contemplated in the NDP and ISCPS rub up against the competitive individualism promoted as essential to success in a global neo-liberal economic environment. In a hard-scrabble world, the advancement of self and family may well trump more altruistic and communitarian impulses.…”

“…What is more, the idea of umuntu is a capacious one, incorporating not just a person's family and residents of the neighbourhood in which she lives, but the wider society to which she belongs. Lest it be contended in the face of such idealism that the ‘rawness’ of life (Barolsky, 2012 quoting Fiona Ross), and the need to look after oneself and one's family in post-apartheid communities like Khayelitsha, militates against the sociality of ubuntu , it is no less inimical to social cohesion and collective efficacy. In fact, Barolsky's (2016) own research suggests that, under threat though it is, ubuntu remains a powerful reminder of how communities, and society, can protect themselves.…”