This article attempts a preliminary discussion of the three clusters of Archie Mafeje’s work. While Mafeje called for ‘non-disciplinarity’, as against ‘interdisciplinarity’ or ‘disciplinarity’, this article makes a case for why he should be read as a revolutionary sociologist. In so doing, the article pieces together some of the key elements of his oeuvre. The article consists of four main parts. The first part provides some background and contextualises this article. The second part deals with Mafeje’s programmatic critique of the discipline of anthropology and other social sciences. The third part discusses his work on land and agrarian issues in sub-Saharan Africa. The last section focuses on his work on revolutionary theory and politics, with specific reference to his assessment of the responsibility of the African intellectual.
resources. Higher education experiences the same lack of direction with high levels of mismanagement, funding issues and institutional ineptitude. Similarly, the land question is one that remains painful and heated. Today, many South Africans remain shackled
Retrieving the Africanist (Liberatory) Conception of Non-racialism
could only expect to be henceforth deprived of it. … The country had thus fallen to our lot, being justly won in defensive war and … it was our intention to retain it’ ( Ramose 2003: 581 ). This dispute underlines the primacy of ‘the land question’ as
Some Senses of Pan-Africanism from the South
hegemony. She claims that his views on early childhood education and state subsidisation are likewise relevant for current problems with our education policy. On land reform, Sobukwe’s split with the ANC on the land question points to an enduring problem
Kenneth Bo Nielsen
everyday politics . Ithaca : Cornell University Press . Kohli , Atul . 2012 . Poverty amid plenty in the new India . Cambridge : Cambridge University Press . Levien , Michael . 2012 . The land question: Special economic zones and the political