Partisanism and ethnic chauvinism have seen the willingness to trade-off democratic principles for potentially conflicting considerations such as political ideology and policy preferences in Africa. It is confirmed that ethnic chauvinism has thwarted the progress of democracy in the continent. As ethnic groups are caught in a reciprocal struggle for power to secure the interests of their group which in certain parts of the continent has witnessed an unprecedented rise of authoritarian leaders who defy democracy. In response, scholars and organizations are pursuing innovations to strengthen democracy in Africa. This study explores the causes of democratic backsliding in Africa and identify solutions to build more resilient democracy in the continent. However, the imperatives of partisanism and ethnic chauvinism are far more demanding than the claims of democracy. In the context of the precedent, this study seeks to answer the following research questions; What is the origin of partisanism and ethnic chauvinism in Africa? How has partisan politics and ethnic chauvinism reshaped patterns of political behaviour in Africa? What are the solutions to build more resilient democracy in Africa? Answers to these questions would be obtained through extensive literature review of secondary data that comprise of journal articles, government publications, websites, books and other relevant sources.

How have the dominant development theories negatively shaped Africa’s development trajectory? Are there more appropriate approaches to thinking about Africa’s development? Are Africa’s development challenges due to ideological and cultural backwardness, sustained impacts of imperialism, disparaging global perception shaped by dominant representations or the continent’s elite’s uncritical adoption of Western ideologies and narratives? This paper explores some post-colonial African perspectives on development theories, policies and practices and their political and socio-economic implications for Africa. It argues that post-colonial Africa is a product of transculturation. Suggesting that we cannot understand Africa’s development circumstances and trajectory through only the pre-colonial or Western modernity lens but through local knowledge, everyday people’s experiences, and empirical data on current trends.

Creating appropriate and effective development theories for Africa depends on balancing dominant development thinking that usually focuses on growth and modernity with antagonists’ views, such as postcolonialism and post-development schools that advocate local alternatives. This essay focuses on three factors (culture, identity politics, and representations) that impact African development thinking and practices. It draws attention to the importance and validity of African indigenous knowledge and development approaches.

This article presents what we miss when we caricature Africa either through a Western modernity lens or through the scope of postcolonialism. It offered some explanations by African scholars for the current growth stage of Africa outside of the dominant narratives and theories. A review of old and recent scholarly publications shows that African development is characterized by building a strong sense of solidarity and harmony. Development is driven by a strong sense of ownership and interconnectedness at interpersonal, societal, national, regional, and continental levels. African development literature shows that Africa's development is motivated by resistance to internal and external exploiters and building credible institutions rather than foreign aid as a priority for development in Africa.

When South Africa transitioned from Apartheid rule to democratic governance in 1994. It became a new nation. The first democratically elected President-Nelson Mandela described South Africa as the ‘rainbow nation.’ It represents a fundamental shift across the country’s sociopolitical and geographical landscapes. As unity replaced segregation, equality replaced legislated racism and democracy replaced apartheid. There was a recognition that collective well-being and togetherness have direct relationship to individual well-being. Hence, the term ‘ubuntu’ - “I am because you are” was coined to strengthen togetherness. However, despite the coinage of ubuntu, discrimination and violence against African migrants increasingly continue in the new South Africa. New discriminatory practices have emerged against African migrants that is threatening togetherness in South Africa. In the context of the precedent point of view, the aim of this paper is to provide answer to the following questions; (a) What are the discriminatory practices against African migrants that threatens togetherness in South Africa? (b) How effective is ubuntu in fostering togetherness in South Africa? (c) Why are African migrant victims of togetherness in the new South Africa? Answers to these questions is obtained through extensive literature review of secondary data that comprise of journal articles, government publications, websites, books and other relevant sources. The findings reveal physical and verbal discriminatory practices against African migrants that threatens togetherness in South Africa. It discovers that ubuntu is less effective in fostering togetherness in the face of rising poverty, inequality and unemployment in South Africa. And that African migrants are victims of togetherness in the new South Africa as a result of disillusionment among locals.

Africans and Europeans have been in contact for centuries under different contexts, including trade, Atlantic slavery, and colonization. However, colonization is the most epochal of African contacts because of how it changed African political, economic and social structures, instituting a framework of life that conflicted with African precolonial values. This conflict manifests in debates about what constitutes development in Africa, as shown in Ngugi wa Thiong'o's Decolonizing the Mind (1986). According to Ngugi, while some scholars feel that African cultural values are the core of African development, others argue that European modernity is the foundation of African development. However, the two perspectives are flawed because they rely on binary relationships that place categories on hierarchical levels of importance. Chinua Achebe questions such hierarchies in his writings, particularly his "The Dead Men's Path" which presents a complex/interconnected model of development in Africa. I, therefore, argue that development in Africa cannot be simplified into a choice between African tradition and European modernity because development models rooted in hierarchical frameworks cannot address Africa's complex/evolving reality. I advocate, instead, for a pluriversal framework of African development as represented in Achebe's "Dead Men's Path" which acknowledges the diverse influences/preconditions of development in Africa. Drawing upon Erik Olin Wright's Real Utopias, my analysis envisions a self-determined African future which complicates any desire to return to the romanticized African past or an idealized Westernized future. My paper will be guided by the following set of critical questions: is African tradition an impediment or resource to African development? What enablers of development are suggested in Achebe's "Dead Men's Path"? The paper concludes with Wright's perspective that since African development problems are rooted in African structures/institutions, African thinkers can also re-imagine developments from alternative models. Achebe's "Dead Men's Path" offers a lens to imagine alternative and potential transformative possibilities.