‘The pitfalls of national consciousness’ – so diagnosed Frantz Omar Fanon in his famous book, ‘The Wretched of the Earth’ wherein he critically analysed mistakes committed by Africans after independence. He problematised neoliberal universalism which manifested itself as national consciousness in new nation-states after decolonisation.
National consciousness, Fanon argues, therefore ended up as an “empty shell, a crude and fragile travesty of what it is supposed to be; an all embracing crystallisation of the innermost hopes of the people as a whole”. Although Fanon never lived to observe the national question in Namibia, a country whose land measures more than 800 000 square kilometres, his prophetic intellectual lyrics are witnessed and proclaimed as novel truth in Namibia. Twenty-five years after independence, the settler owns/controls more than 90 percent of the economy; more than 400 000 natives reside in informal settlements, 800 000 natives live in debt (majority being housing bonds) while the housing backlog exceeds 100 000. Of 4 462 cities in the world, Windhoek is ranked 21st as most expensive. We have an award as one of the world’s most unequal societies.
In Namibia, as Fanon theorised, national consciousness is an empty shell, a crude and fragile travesty of an all-embracing crystallisation of the innermost hopes of the masses. Our national consciousness is filled with the liberation struggle mantra, parochial view of peace and stability and the traditionalisation of politics.
The dominant liberation mantra subordinates all narratives in society. When citizens demand justice and fairness they are reminded that Namibia is peaceful and stable. “Don’t disturb peace and stability,” they are attacked by politicians. Seeking accountability is seen as questioning leaders (elders) and is dismissed as disrespectful. Corrupt older leaders/officials are to suppress transparency and escape accountability through traditionalisation of politics.
In our first text, ‘Affirmative Repositioning – The Rationale’ we traced the history of land dispossession in the 106 years of colonialism before problematising the post-independence land policy irresolute and zigzagging. We did so to generate understanding of how we got here. Our second text ‘Affirmative Repositioning – The Two Options’ discussed two eventualities; the cooperative way and the antagonistic one. We provided clarity that either land is given to us or we treat, comfort and help ourselves onto the land. At the time, we had already enabled more than 50 000 landless people to submit land applications. Our third text, ‘Affirmative Repositioning – Where Are We and How Far’ recalled our journey, its challenges, and reaffirmed our commitments to occupy the land. We commenced with dissident land occupation exercises (miscalls) to provide a glimpse of the then coming future, 31 July. It was after these callisthenics that the elites took us seriously, having learnt that we won’t retreat, relent or surrender.
Under pressure from banks and property developers, they ran to the police, intelligence, marine, air force, army and all security apparatus to suppress our struggle. Even with police helicopters flying over several towns we remained undeterred. Life or death we would occupy land, we vowed, as we found solace in the Oshiwambo idiom of keso nako okegumbo (death is also home).
Be that as it may we remained open and willing to dialogue with whosoever was interested. Despite our ‘expulsion’ we resolved to meet with President Hage Geingob to jointly give practical direction and solutions to the crisis guided by our key document – the AR Housing Charter 31. We promised ourselves to negotiate in the best interest of our youth, the landless and the country. The result of the negotiation was a radical policy departure with long-term and short-term policy interventions. The short-term culminated in the Massive Urban Land Servicing Program (MULSP) to make 200 000 plots available countrywide starting with Oshakati, Walvis Bay and Windhoek with a joint implementation committee established. At an appropriate time, we will substantially reflect on this event.
AR exists and will continue existing as an independent movement. It remains a radical leftist movement restoring the dignity of our people as it relates to land. Our participating in the MULSP is a partnership not a co-option. We are not an extension of government bureaucracy.
We suspended our land occupation program given the consensus reached with our government and joint efforts to resolve the land crisis. We believe the pact concluded is the best for our youth, the landless and the country. We remain committed to the pact until and unless the centre can no longer hold. We have observed several views particularly from lazy armchair commentators and manufacturers of conspiracy theories. Our eyes remain on the ball for we know the highest tree always catches most wind.
If government reneges on the commitments, it will be clear that none other than ourselves can answer our thirst for land that is visible and available. There will be no negotiations in round two. If the MULSP fails, the masses of our people will lose faith in government and place the credibility of government into question. We will ensure that we do our best to see this program through.
Dimbulukeni Nauyoma, George Kambala and Job Shipululo Amupanda