(Repost from 23 Nov 2020)
As I write this, Dr Amupanda and the members of Affirmative Repositioning (AR) stand in protest on Olof Palme Street in Eros (Saturday, 21 November). They are calling for an end to the closed door interviews for the appointment of the national Prosecutor General, to promote the transparent and open recruitment process and the whole country, or at least those of us with little to do on a Saturday evening and a mounting interest in politics, is watching. The rise of political associations such as Affirmative Repositioning, the Landless People Movement and new popular socio-political movements show the Namibian manifestation of an African wind of change – a shift discussed by scholars and politicians alike. Lets quickly discuss the post-independence space by looking at questions on the locus of power and change; and see what changes have occurred since independence and how theories on power discourse can help explain these changes.
Two decades unlike any other
Post-colonial Namibia, particularly the stage between 1990 and 2010 can be described as a political liminal space. Because besides the critical transition phase from white colonial to politically independent Black rule, this time was occupied by the independence bubble which focused on social and economic development and the legalistic redressing of colonial structures, rather than any meaningful political organisation.
Many post-war successes were achieved, perhaps even in stark contrast to Namibia’s southern African counterparts; Press Freedom was protected, the country’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI) was ranked the 6th best in Africa and the second best in Southern Africa and the integration of a number of Namibian expatriates as well as the assimilation of PLAN fighters into the Namibian Defence Force was a success. Economically, Namibia’s per capita income was very impressive in the few years following independence (about U$ 2,200 in 1994), four times higher than the average in sub-Saharan Africa), and the Gross Domestic Product in Namibia grew from N$ 6.1 billion in 1990 to N$ 92.2 billion in 2010. Moreover, employment opportunities increased with the number of posts in the public service increasing by 50% in just five years, going up from 42,500 in 1990 to 62,500 in October 1995.
It was a stellar time, and although many say that after independence there generally is no where to go but up, that has been empirically disproved. Countries such as Angola and Mozambique who descended into post-liberation civil war, showed that the movement was bidirectional and that anything could trigger post-independence collapse. Thus, the successful economic, cultural and social transition was something to celebrate.
However, peaking post-colonial status also meant that political mobilization was at an all time low, and this is where we hit this feeling of liminality. Liminality as discussed in schools of discipline such as anthropology and on the niche sides of Tumblr, is a state of ambiguity or disorientation. It is a label that perfectly fit that part in our history because we were between a passed time when the only thing to do was mobilize, against colonialism, apartheid and white imperialism and the bellowing future which was draped in sheer optimism and hope. And even though there was nothing but hope and active development, the conditions were far from optimal.
Large numbers of people were still living under the hand of poverty and 2005-2006 even had some of the highest records of suicide to be recorded at the time – yet the need to organise extensively by using the hand of the participatory frameworks of democracy was not invoked often.
The Unravelling Ties
This post-independence acquiesce of the population can be academically analysed by utilizing a mixture of theoretical concepts from Gramsci and Foucault, as done by Muvingi in his 2008 analyses of Zimbabwean state failure. Foucault’s theories on the utility of power discuss the idea that power, in and of itself, "subverts the possibility of refusal and resistance through selective pre-formation of the premises on which decisions are based." Power enables desired outcomes, whether it is applied coercively or persuasively– because firstly, the two forms are not necessary mutually exclusive and secondly, in a political landscape where the psychological remnants of colonialism still remain, power can lie in subtle overtures towards solution because of the underlying emotional upper hand which recalls the liberatory motif through independence and liberation struggle rhetoric, discourse and imagery. While in supplement, Gramsci's Marxist analysis denotes the importance of persuasion in power relations between a populace and the rulership. Through the persuasive element, the governing elite can either, mount a concerted discursive effort to build a consensus behind its governance or use emotionally loaded discourse to erase or overlook shortcomings.
And thus, variations of 'We fought for everything that people are enjoying today, the education and health system' – become the sentiment echoed by different names and faces and it settles with a bitter taste in many marginalised mouths because it comes in response to a number of concerns including political competition, corruption scandals and questions of service delivery. It however, works playing on the Gramscian negotiation and the transactory nature of meaning creation through assertion of the knowledge that liberation from colonization was the ultimate good - a pattern that finds itself repeated across the African political landscape from Zimbabwe, South Africa to Kenya. A reminder and a promise of ever-increasing potential, but most importantly an objectively valid tool in the campaigning kit.
But eventually, even the most concise execution of power and neat serving of acquiesce can unravel. And just as the truth comes out to tango with anyone that denies loving to dance, the post-colonial reality is put to question at the coming of the next decade in our post-independence tour and breaks our residence in this liminal space. One of Namibia’s most prominent break-away parties, The Rally for Democracy and Progress, is formed in 2007 by Hidipo Hamutenya and Jesaya Nyamu, both former leading members of the ruling SWAPO party and cabinet ministers with claims of breaking away because of corruption in the party. Throughout the years, corruptions scandals erupt, questionable maintainance of anti-LGBTQ+ laws, gender-based violence numbers mounting alongside youth unemployment and on-ground service delivery seems to mismatch statistical records.
And thus, the The elucidation of the Namibian condition resulted in popular mobilization and protest. With the land question calling for the creation of organisations such as Affirmative Repositioning and The Landless People's Movement. The amalgamation of disproportionate economic access, lack of job creation and the slowly kept promise of service delivery popularizing parties like The Popular Democratic Movement. And because the personal has always been the political, movements such as the Slut Shame Walk and #ShutItAllDown spark in response to the question of violence and gender anomie.
The monopoly on the power to shape public discourse and action has collapsed and trickled down to grassroots movements – the ‘bottom-up’ approach that has had Namibian Twitter buzzing. The poststructuralist concept which places discourse, as constitutive of knowledge, at the centre of power highlights the fact that language transports knowledge and ideas.
As Mark Haugaard, notes, "truth is used to pacify others by privileging certain ways of interpreting the world, particular discourses and disqualifying others. Power is a form of pacification which works by codifying and taming war through the imposition of particular knowledge as truth.” The place from which discourse stems is particularly important because discourses are systems of social knowledge – and because of this, knowledge formations assume the special function of augmenting power (as put perfectly by Axel Honneth). Discourses, particularly those with a bottom-up approach, are important because they largely shape what is on the political agenda and how the agenda can, must and will transmutate into action.
Participatory and pluralistic forms of democracy have proved effective in putting an ear against the ground and amplifying civilian discourse. Opposition, civil society and the media are now more than ever critical for the progression towards democratic competition and pluralism in Southern Africa. And this is what makes the study of the shifting political climate in Namibia in recent years so worthwhile – because we get to question whether the new shift has the ability to lay the foundations for true pluralism (or at least a breakdown in monopoly) in the political landscape? But ultimately, only time will be able to tell, but for now, we theorize and participate.