Seewe as a Production Space and Mechanism for Youth Sociability in Communities Under Pressure from Violent Extremism in Mozambique

Dário Maunze"

Why does a group of young people gather around Seewe to play, talk, and laugh even when the main activity seems to be just a game? This question allows us to look at Seewe beyond its recreational dimension and understand the importance of the social relationships that develop around this practice, particularly in communities living under the pressure of violent extremism in Mozambique.

Seewe is the same traditional game that receives different names in other regions of the country. In southern and central Mozambique it is known as N'Txuva, while in some communities in the north (Nampula) it is called M'pale. The difference lies essentially in the name used in each regional and cultural context. In this reflection, the term Seewe is adopted, as it corresponds to the expression used in the communities that serve as a reference for the analysis.

Seewe is practiced primarily among men of different ages, with a significant presence of young people. At different times of the day, they gather around a board they call... Seewe (In some regions, small holes are dug in the ground, while in other cases, cement is used), not only for playing, but also for talking, telling stories, and engaging in relaxing activities. On some occasions, the gathering is accompanied by the sharing of food, such as cassava with peanuts, or oyele salad (which other regions call Namakotto, referring to broad beans better known as monkey beans), depending on availability and the time of year. Thus, the encounter transcends the limits of mere play.

This reality can be understood through the concept of sociability. From Georg Simmel's perspective, sociability represents a form of interaction in which the very act of being together, conversing, and establishing relationships constitutes an end in itself. The interest is not necessarily in material gain, but in the experience of coexistence among individuals.

A similar explanation can be found in Anthony Giddens's work, through the example of people meeting for coffee. Although coffee is the apparent reason for the meeting, its importance may lie primarily in the opportunity to talk and be in the company of others. Applying this perspective to Seewe, it becomes clear that the game also functions as an occasion for meeting. Young people gather to play, but during this time, they establish contacts, share experiences, have fun, and develop relationships.

It is precisely in this aspect that the sociological importance of Seewe lies. The familiarity built through frequent encounters can foster the development of friendships and feelings of belonging. Sharing food, conversations, and games are manifestations of this conviviality. Although it is not possible to affirm that these relationships necessarily translate into mutual help outside of playtime, it is legitimate to consider that they can create conditions for other forms of closeness and interaction in daily community life.

This dimension gains particular relevance when situated within the context of communities under pressure from violent extremism. In environments marked by insecurity and instability, spaces for social interaction become important in maintaining social relationships. Seewe is not a direct response to terrorism, nor can it be said that its practice prevents young people from becoming involved in extremist groups. However, it allows us to recognize the value of collective activities that bring people closer together, foster familiarity, and contribute to the continuity of relationships within communities.

Seewe also evokes different perceptions within the community. While some recognize the game as a form of social interaction, others consider that young people are wasting their time, especially when they are not involved in economically productive activities such as fishing or agriculture. This difference in understanding raises an important question: should the value of an activity be assessed solely by its ability to generate income? Or should its contribution to building social relationships also be considered?

Another aspect that deserves attention is the predominantly male participation observed in these gatherings. Women do not play Seewe, which raises questions about the spaces for interaction, cultural norms, and the forms of participation of men and women in community recreational activities. However, this is a dimension that deserves its own investigation, and it is not possible to establish definitive explanations based solely on the observations made.

In short, Seewe allows us to understand that youth sociability is not built exclusively in formal spaces or through economically productive activities. It also develops in simple everyday practices, in which individuals find opportunities to be together, talk, and establish relationships. In communities under pressure from violent extremism, looking at these practices means recognizing that, beyond the events associated with insecurity, there are forms of coexistence that continue to organize social life and bring its members closer together.

2025/12/3