CHAPTER 7: WHOSE IDENTITY, WHOSE CONSTRUCTS AND WHOSE INTEREST? THE SYNTHESIS OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY DATA IN
5.3 The First Republic (1964-1972)
5.3.2 Humanism as National Ideology and Philosophy
140
communists. For Kaunda, it was nationalism that held African bonds and solidarity, rather than communism. It was nationalism that restored African optimism and sense of worth and it is this influence that shaped Zambia’s stance against minority rule, especially in Southern Africa.
The behaviour of the UNIP government seemed to have been more inclined towards a more radical stance against minority rule. This is not an easy conclusion to arrive at. Susan Herlin Broadhead argues that though Kaunda was identified as an idealist58 (driven by principle), he exuded political realism by understanding the complexity of the challenges that faced him at home and externally. The geographical interdependence he shared with the governments of the minority ruled south prior to the establishment of the TAZARA rail line, made “him a moderate in the council of the Pan African organizations based to the North” (Broadhead 1973:698). Thus, the argument of whether Zambia was radical or idealistic in its foreign policy, especially in the first eight years after independence, needs concrete examples to buttress either line of argument.
It is clear, though, that by choosing humanism, Kaunda’s government was effecting a veneer of high principles, non-violence and Christian influence as the main dimensions of national ideology.
141
of non-indigenous Zambians. To compound the problem, at independence the country had a very small number of university graduates. However, leaving the colonial status quo to continue unchanged would have defeated the whole purpose of fighting for self-governance. Thus, humanism promoted state control of the economy and the recruitment of indigenous Zambians in the private and public sectors (Sekwat 2000). One of the consequences of this was the creation of welfare services (Giliomee and Simkins 1999).59
Kaunda’s humanism was also influenced by the thought of Teilhard de Chardin, a French Jesuit Priest and philosopher. The centrality of God and the human person was key to Zambia’s humanism (Kanu 2014).60 Kaunda, as the main proponent of humanism, has been described as
“intensely religious” (Morris 1966:13). It might seem ironic that Zambia under Kaunda was secular but became Christian after he left office. However, it is arguable from reading Kaunda’s works and observing his personal example that he did not declare the country a Christina nation because he was cognizant of the important elements of other religions and, as someone who fought against racial discrimination, did not want to create religious discord by overlooking other religions present in Zambia.61
Education and non-violence were also salient components of humanism, and Zambia’s generally non-violent victory over colonialism provided part of the rationale for humanism. It also testified to Kaunda’s moral “example and to his powers of persuasion” (Morris 1966:12). In the introduction to A Humanist in Africa, Colin Morris (1966:9), who professed to be “an admirer, quite unashamed and not little sentimental,” of Kenneth Kaunda, gave forceful notions on Kaunda’s stance on non-violence. Violence was a popular tactic used to command colonial attention. African nationalists who used violent sabotage were influenced by Marxist ideologies and the victories of guerrilla warfare in countries such as China and Cuba. Some saw violence as the only form of protests that colonisers took seriously. Even movements like South Africa’s African National Congress that had a history of non-violence eventually resorted to violence as a
59 Ironically, the provision of welfare services was to be a major point of conflict between the UNIP government, the people of Zambia and international financial institutions. With the foundering economies of Third World countries, IFIs prescribed a cut-down on state-sponsored services. A further elaboration of how this played out in Zambia will follow in the section dealing with the twilight of UNIP governance.
60 It should be noted that Kaunda was born of Malawian parents. His father, David Kaunda, was a missionary of the Church of Scotland. Kaunda’s unwavering belief in God, the Bible and human goodness has often been attributed to his strong Christian upbringing.
61 See Colin M. Morris (1966:14).
142
means to an end. Other movements whose leaders presented a prima facie commitment to non- violence furtively encouraged their followers to engage in violence or at least did their least to deter them from this course. “Kenneth Kaunda, on the other hand” argues Morris (1966:11), “not only declared his allegiance to the philosophy of non-violence but rigidly enjoined it upon his followers to the point where his leadership teetered in the balance.”62 Kaunda tried to emulate the non-violent nature with which Mahatma Gandhi campaigned for India’s independence (Rotberg 1964; Kaunda 1980).63
Prior to colonial control, Zambians lived a lifestyle that had socialist or communitarian traits in it. However, with the encroachment of Western political, social and economic control, this lifestyle became hard to practise. Formally adopting humanism as the national ideology and philosophy on 27 April 1967 (Sekwat 2000) was an attempt to resurrect the somewhat idyllic manner that Africans lived prior to British colonialism. Thus, while humanism presented Zambia as more of a socialist country, the country’s philosophy was also idealist as shown by its determination to salvage the idyllic lifestyle of pre-colonial Zambia.
Zambia was the first country to adopt humanism as a national ideology and philosophy. For this reason, the country did not have an example from which it could draw inspiration. Nevertheless, the ideology was propagated with great vigour in schools and work places. Kaunda’s personal influence and example ensured that humanism enjoyed attention; his stated sympathies for the poor and the oppressed were in tandem with his version of humanism. Zambia was a poor64 and vulnerable country but Kaunda still supported liberation movements from other countries, even though Zambia suffered violent reprisals from Rhodesia and apartheid South Africa. His stance was driven by tenets of humanism which are decidedly anthropocentric and harbour suspicions for any ideology, including capitalism, that seems to use people for political gain or profit.
62 This was not always successful. The Lumpa uprising of 1964 provoked violence from UNIP in the northern province of Zambia. The uprising was the violent conflict between UNIP and members of Lumpa Church led by Alice Mulenga Lubusha who wanted to separate themselves from party politics in a physical sense and built separate stockade villages for this purpose. The battle for membership and allegiance between Lumpa and UNIP played a part in the violence that ensued (Gordon 2008).
63 Other nationalist politicians who were influenced by Gandhi’s non-violent politics include Hastings Kamuzu Banda of Malawi (Short 1974).
64His reluctance in the 1980s to implement the structural adjustments programmes of the IMF and World Bank (Larmer 2006) was influenced by his view that removing subsidies would deeply hurt the poor.
143
However, internal and external forces, both political and economic (like the slump in copper prices in the 1970s; see Zambia Review 2016) tried Kaunda’s idealism. The resurgence of tribal and ethnic rivals at home was equally a threat to his ideals and grip on power. The resignation of Simon Mwansa Kapwepwe as vice president, and the subsequent formation of the United Progressive Party (UPP headed by the same Kapwepwe) posed a palpable threat to the Kaunda government. Kapwepwe came from the Bemba people and in a country where ethnic cleavages were threatening political dynamics, he enjoyed the support of the biggest ethnic group. These external and internal forces compelled Kaunda to take a firm stance on his domestic and foreign policy. To enjoy a free hand, UNIP had to liquidate opposition and the most obvious manner with which to realise this was to institute a single-party polity, an alternative which he chose in 1973 through “the Choma Declaration” headed by the Vice President at the time – Mainza Chona (Musambachime 1991:291).