Abstract

If we separate needs into basic and non-basic with the former characterized by the sort that relates to the security of people’s physical needs and the latter characterized by demands such as freedoms and self-determination, we could ask which of these two forms deserves more attention than the other. This question is especially pertinent on the African continent, where there seems to be a resurgence of the belief that it takes strongman tactics to fulfil the basic needs of the people. Such an approach does not prioritize what I characterize as non-basic needs. But for the advocates of non-basic needs, prioritizing basic needs to the exclusion of non-basic needs is dangerous, and it undermines values associated with non-basic needs. While it might appear obvious to resolve this conflict by insisting on the equality of these needs, such an approach will not work as the history of Africa has unfolded in a way that has consistently violated both sets of needs in ways that have led to a full-fledged impoverishment of its citizens in both respects. It, therefore, follows as an attempt to rebuild Africa that there has to be a starting point of which needs to attend to first. It is in that recognition and whatever follows that the current dilemma is created. My aim is to weigh these needs as theoretical competitors and to assess what such competition means for African politics and development on the one hand, and the freedoms and welfare of its citizens on the other.