His work in anthropology was closely tied to his political activism, and he used his scholarship as a tool to critique the social and economic structures that underpinned the apartheid system in South Africa.

A prominent member of the African left, he was critical of Western academic traditions and argued for developing an African-centered approach to social theory and anthropology.

Archibald Boyce Monwabisi Mafeje was born on 30 March 1936 in Gubenxa, a remote village in the Ngcobo (Thembuland), Cape Province, Union of South Africa.

[3][2]: 27 Mafeje then matriculated in 1954 to Healdtown Comprehensive School in Fort Beaufort, a Methodist missionary with a list of alumni that includes Nelson Mandela and Robert Sobukwe.

[4] There, Mafeje was deeply influenced by Livingstone Mqotsi, a history teacher,[4][6] and started participating actively in groups connected to the Non-European Unity Movement.

[2]: 28  Mafeje joined the Fort Hare Native College, a black university in Eastern Cape, in mid-1955 to study zoology, but he left after one year.

[2]: 35  Nonetheless, Mafeje's friends recalled that certain SOYA members found his intellectualism and preference for theoretical argument irritating because they believed he spent too much time "hobnobbing with whites".

[26] The sit-in gained international coverage and was considered part of the global protests of 1968 that received support from students mounting barricades in Paris and London.

[27] Mafeje assumed a senior lecturer position in 1969, before becoming a full professor and the head of the sociology department, at the University of Dar Es Salaam in Tanzania.

They campaigned for complete democratic rights for all oppressed peoples based on its Ten-Point Plan, which positioned the land issue squarely at the heart of South Africa's liberation movement.

Mafeje also emphasised the need for agrarian reform to be linked to broader social and economic transformation, including women's empowerment and promotion of sustainable agricultural practices.

[47] Mafeje was critical of neoclassical economic theories that, according to him, underpinned many of Africa's land and agricultural policies, which he argued were often based on flawed assumptions and failed to account for the complexities of African societies.

He argued that poverty was not simply a matter of individuals lacking sufficient income, but a result of unequal distribution of wealth and power embedded in colonial and postcolonial social structures.

[50] In exile, Mafeje shared animosity with white South African Communist Party (SACP) members, including Joe Slovo, Dan O'Meara and Duncan Innes.

[60] Mafeje scholarly work significantly contributed to the decolonisation of African identity and its historical past,[61][62] criticising anthropology's typically Eurocentric techniques[63] and beliefs.

[64][65] He demanded that imperialist[66] and Western ideals[67] be eliminated from Black African anthropology,[50] which led to an examination of the discipline's founding principles and the methods by which academics approached the study of the attributed other.

He argued that ethnography, as a tool of Western social science, tended to create a distorted and exoticised image of African societies and was often used to justify colonial domination and exploitation.

He argued for a more self-reflexive and critical approach to ethnography, one that acknowledges the researcher's limitations and biases and is attentive to the political and economic structures that shape social relations.

Mafeje was critical of liberal functionalism, a theoretical framework that posits that societies work best when organised around the efficient performance of specialised tasks by individuals and institutions.

Mafeje was particularly critical of the idea that the key to development in Africa was the creation of strong, centralised states and the imposition of a Western-style legal and economic system.

Instead, he advocated for a more bottom-up approach to development that prioritised the needs and aspirations of local communities and recognised the importance of traditional knowledge and social institutions.

[73] Mafeje engaged in a series of debates and polemics with scholars such as Ruth First,[74] Harold Wolpe,[75] Ali Mazrui,[76] Achille Mbembe,[77] and Sally Falk Moore,[78] who was an anthropologist and Chair at Harvard University.

In his article, Mqotsi criticises Mafeje's focus on the "spontaneous" nature of the Soweto uprising, arguing that it resulted from long-standing grievances and organised resistance.

He also critiques Mafeje's analysis of the role of the black middle class and argues that the protesters did not constitute a homogeneous group, but rather included both progressive and reactionary elements.

Mqotsi argued for a more nuanced understanding of the complex social and political dynamics that led to the Soweto uprising and the broader struggle against apartheid in South Africa.

[85] In his works, Mafeje emphasises the need for African intellectuals to be actively engaged in the struggle for social and political transformation, rather than being mere academic observers.

Mafeje, in turn, disagreed with Mbembe's characterisation of the concept, arguing that the pessimism he observed was not inherent in African culture, but a product of the historical and political context in which Africa had developed.

[90] According to Mafeje, colonialist (or white) anthropology is inherently problematic since it is founded on the pursuit of otherness, which breeds racism and apartheid, as demonstrated by the history of South Africa.

[68] However, Sally Falk Moore dismissed Mafeje's claims and accused him of launching unfounded personal attacks while "trying to kill a dead horse", i.e., colonial anthropology.

[92][93][94] His work posthumously gained wide attention[95][96] and has attracted growing interest from other African scholars,[97][98][14][99][68][100] such as Francis B. Nyamnjoh,[101][102] Dani Wadada Nabudere,[4] Helmi Sharawy,[103] Lungisile Ntsebeza[84] and Bongani Nyoka.