, PLEASE USE THIS DOCUMENT AS A GUIDE TO ANSWER YOUR ASSIGNMENT
1. Using Menkiti’s argument that personhood is a 'becoming' defined by communal excellence
and Gyekye’s argument that the individual possesses 'innate' dignity independent of the
community, write an essay in which you provide a critical evaluation of the South African
government’s focus on 'Social Cohesion' policies.
Essay 1
Introduction: Contextualizing Social Cohesion in South Africa
The South African National Development Plan (NDP) 2030 emphasizes the importance of social
cohesion and communal values as essential to the country’s socio-economic development. Central to
the NDP is the notion that citizens must be active participants in national development, supported by
a capable state and strong leadership across society (National Planning Commission, 2012: 1).
This approach highlights the need for a transformation that not only addresses South Africa's
historical inequities but also strives for a more unified and harmonious society, where all people,
especially the poor, can achieve a better standard of living. Social cohesion, therefore, is positioned
as a cornerstone in the pursuit of long-term development. This agenda intersects with the country's
historical legacy of division, shaped by apartheid, and the ongoing struggle to achieve equity, justice,
and inclusivity in the post-apartheid era. At the same time, the NDP calls for a balance between
individual constitutional rights and the collective good, which often creates tension. This essay will
explore these tensions by examining radical and moderate communitarianism, focusing on their
ability to address the complex relationship between individual rights and communal responsibilities
in contemporary South Africa.
Theoretical Frameworks: Radical vs. Moderate Communitarianism
In discussing the tension between individual rights and communal duties, it is useful to consider two
distinct frameworks of communitarianism: radical and moderate. Menkiti (1984) argues that
personhood is not an innate quality but is rather a 'becoming' shaped by communal participation and
excellence. According to Menkiti, the self is defined through its relationships and responsibilities to
others, meaning that a person’s identity and value are closely linked to their role in the community.
This view aligns with a radical communitarian perspective, which prioritizes the collective
well-being over individual autonomy. On the other hand, Gyekye (1997) suggests a more moderate
approach, arguing that while the individual’s dignity is inherent and independent of the community,
this dignity can still be expressed and fulfilled within a communal framework. Gyekye's moderate
communitarianism acknowledges the importance of individual rights and freedoms but recognizes
that these rights must be balanced with communal responsibilities in order to foster social harmony.
In the context of South Africa, these two frameworks offer contrasting solutions to the challenge of
achieving social cohesion in a society marked by deep inequalities and a history of division. Radical
communitarianism, as proposed by Menkiti, would emphasize collective societal goals over the
protection of individual rights, advocating for a stronger role of the state and community in guiding
personal choices and responsibilities. This model might appeal to the need for state intervention to
rectify historical injustices and promote communal solidarity. However, it could risk infringing on
individual freedoms, which are enshrined in the South African Constitution.
1. Using Menkiti’s argument that personhood is a 'becoming' defined by communal excellence
and Gyekye’s argument that the individual possesses 'innate' dignity independent of the
community, write an essay in which you provide a critical evaluation of the South African
government’s focus on 'Social Cohesion' policies.
Essay 1
Introduction: Contextualizing Social Cohesion in South Africa
The South African National Development Plan (NDP) 2030 emphasizes the importance of social
cohesion and communal values as essential to the country’s socio-economic development. Central to
the NDP is the notion that citizens must be active participants in national development, supported by
a capable state and strong leadership across society (National Planning Commission, 2012: 1).
This approach highlights the need for a transformation that not only addresses South Africa's
historical inequities but also strives for a more unified and harmonious society, where all people,
especially the poor, can achieve a better standard of living. Social cohesion, therefore, is positioned
as a cornerstone in the pursuit of long-term development. This agenda intersects with the country's
historical legacy of division, shaped by apartheid, and the ongoing struggle to achieve equity, justice,
and inclusivity in the post-apartheid era. At the same time, the NDP calls for a balance between
individual constitutional rights and the collective good, which often creates tension. This essay will
explore these tensions by examining radical and moderate communitarianism, focusing on their
ability to address the complex relationship between individual rights and communal responsibilities
in contemporary South Africa.
Theoretical Frameworks: Radical vs. Moderate Communitarianism
In discussing the tension between individual rights and communal duties, it is useful to consider two
distinct frameworks of communitarianism: radical and moderate. Menkiti (1984) argues that
personhood is not an innate quality but is rather a 'becoming' shaped by communal participation and
excellence. According to Menkiti, the self is defined through its relationships and responsibilities to
others, meaning that a person’s identity and value are closely linked to their role in the community.
This view aligns with a radical communitarian perspective, which prioritizes the collective
well-being over individual autonomy. On the other hand, Gyekye (1997) suggests a more moderate
approach, arguing that while the individual’s dignity is inherent and independent of the community,
this dignity can still be expressed and fulfilled within a communal framework. Gyekye's moderate
communitarianism acknowledges the importance of individual rights and freedoms but recognizes
that these rights must be balanced with communal responsibilities in order to foster social harmony.
In the context of South Africa, these two frameworks offer contrasting solutions to the challenge of
achieving social cohesion in a society marked by deep inequalities and a history of division. Radical
communitarianism, as proposed by Menkiti, would emphasize collective societal goals over the
protection of individual rights, advocating for a stronger role of the state and community in guiding
personal choices and responsibilities. This model might appeal to the need for state intervention to
rectify historical injustices and promote communal solidarity. However, it could risk infringing on
individual freedoms, which are enshrined in the South African Constitution.
