10 African socialism

Wallace G. Mills Hist. 317 10 African Socialism

African Socialism

- this term came to be used by a great many leaders in independent Africa, but what they meant by the term tended to vary considerably. Certainly, many put a very strong emphasis upon the adjective, ‘African’, in asserting that it was different from other forms of socialism. When told by a white marxist that what they were talking about was not really socialism because it wasn’t ‘scientific’, Africans replied heatedly that they didn’t care what the man thought, it was socialism and it was African! (at Can. African Studies Ass. meeting).

- nor was there necessarily a strong connection with marxism.

- certainly, educated Africans had access to socialist and marxist ideas from a fairly early date. Critiques of imperialism and colonialism from these points of view have always had an appeal; they seemed to provide a simple explanation of why imperialism happened in the scramble period and how colonialism worked to the detriment of Africans. Thus, the theory of capitalist imperialism and similar marxist theories have been frequently accepted and adopted by Africans.

- that does not mean that most were in fact keen or dedicated marxists. This was true of a great many, possibly the majority, of the anti-war protesters in the 1960s and 70s in the US.

- some Africans were attracted though, and some even went to the Soviet Union. Jomo Kenyatta was there for a time (he never gave much information about this period in his life so it’s not clear for how long he was there, nor how far he was affected; he gave few signs in later life that he was dedicated to marxism, and Kenya after independence was one of the few countries that gave not even lip-service to socialism in any form!) Several Africans from South Africa also went.

- in the post-1945 period, Moscow went further in courting Africans and in the 1960s, even established a university for Africans, naming it Patrice Lumumba University after the Congo leader was killed in the civil war breakdown following independence. Many Africans who went to the Soviet Union became disillusioned (they encountered a lot of racism there too) or like Kenyatta returned without becoming real converts. (one US senator suggested facetiously that American money should be used to send African students and scholars to the USSR, not to bring them to the USA! He noted that African students who came to the US tended to become anti-American while those who went to the USSR sometimes became anti-Soviet. )

- we have already noted George Padmore as an example of a marxist and communist who became disillusioned and strongly anti-communist. His role in pan-Africanism and through his book meant that his influence was widespread in Africa. Padmore had had close connections with Nkrumah and been an advisor for a short time during the 1950s until Padmore’s death in 1958.

- Nkrumah himself is difficult to assess, partly because his attitudes and ideology were changing. The excerpt we are using was probably written in 1965, not too long before the coup d’etat which drove him from power in 1966. In this excerpt, he talks about ‘scientific socialism’ which is what Marx claimed for his approach and ideas. He goes on, “Socialism depends on dialectical and historical materialism, upon the view that there is only one nature subject in all its manifestations to natural laws and that human society is, in this sense, part of nature and subject to its own laws of development.” (p. 208)

- thus, he rejects the idea of a distinct ‘African’ socialism: “To suppose that there are tribal, national, or racial socialisms is to abandon objectivity in favour of chauvinism.” This seems pretty clear, but during the early years in power, Nkrumah’s government was not very systematic; in fact, he had usually made a point of claiming that his government, and independent Africa generally, should be pragmatic in taking whatever worked and was useful anywhere they should find it. However, the 1960s were not very good for Ghana. The decline of commodity prices on the world market (some analysts have called it a ‘collapse’) caused Ghana to go from a situation of accumulated surpluses at independence to large and growing deficits. [There was also massive mismanagement by Nkrumah’s government so not all of the problems can be blamed on ‘world markets’.]

- in any case, he definitely seems here to have adopted a marxist position without any qualifications. After his ouster (the coup was engineered when he left the country to make a trip to communist China, which was still treated as a pariah state in the 1960s), Nkrumah found refuge in Guinea whose political leadership had been associated with the French communists in the pre-independence period. Nkrumah had arranged a paper federation with Guinea not too long before the coup. In other words, it seems that as he became more desperate, he did veer towards much harder adoption of a marxist position.

-earlier, his approach was more pragmatic. He had the example of Abdul Nasser in Egypt in using the superpower rivalry to get as much as possible. Thus, he deliberately and fairly openly set out to get the USSR and the US into a bidding war with aid. The Soviet Union was prepared to do this if the recipient governments would support certain positions in the UN or make some noises (however, Nkrumah also worked hard to make himself a leader in the growing non-aligned block).

- in fact, the USSR did ship some aid, but it subsequently turned into a joke. A shipment of tractors was landed at port in Ghana where most of them sat for years—no one knew what to do with them, no one knew how to fix them and there were no spare parts. Finally, they were sold for scrap for practically nothing.

- the development policies of the Nkrumah government do illustrate a number of aspects which became very familiar in post-independent Africa.

the argument was that Africa had too few resources and was too far behind to be able to pursue development under a competitive free market capitalism.
also, such an approach produced unequal distribution of wealth, which was not only undesirable for itself but was also intolerable in societies where creating unity was an urgent priority and necessity.
thus, development should be more carefully planned and controlled so that resources would not be wasted. The waste might come from ‘inefficiencies of competition’ but also, if a small group of society got a disproportionate share of the wealth, they might waste it on consumption of imported luxuries.
it was widely accepted that development should be planned and controlled by the state; also, only government ownership could provide the capital and other resources for large scale enterprises. Nkrumah’s government set up a number of state-owned corporations (airline, cocoa and other marketing agencies, etc.). As other colonies became independent states, many of them tended to do the same.

- this did not necessarily make them marxist, socialist, or communist anymore that government ownership of airlines, railroads, synthetic rubber manufacturing, etc. etc. made Canada socialist or communist, regardless of what right-wing ‘Gen. Bullmoose’ American politicians or businessmen have claimed. Nor of course, does Medicare make Canada ‘socialist’.

- thus, many African governments established state-owned corporations and set out to ‘plan’ development.

- in addition to the economic reasons given, there were social and sociological concerns expressed as well—that they did not want to create ‘classes’ and class antagonisms.

- moreover, it was argued that the glorification of individualistic elements, which were the hallmark of laisser-faire capitalism was not compatible with African traditional values which stressed the interests of the family, the clan and the general community ahead of the individual.

- some even questioned if laisser-faire capitalism was possible in Africa. The value system to support it was not in place and could not be for several generations. Nor was it desirable; African leaders said that they did not want such a change in values to take place.

- it was at this point that ‘African socialism’ began to be put forward as an alternative.

- in our excerpt, Nkrumah uses Senghor as an example. As we noted before, Senghor was a socialist and allied with French socialists; he had deliberately adopted a position of opposition to the communists.

- Senghor was also a major spokesperson for African socialism. He argued that African societies and African culture emphasised communal values and orientation. In independent Africa, Africans should recover and develop this aspect. Thus, he was advocating a socialism that emerged and evolved out of African experience and perceptions.

- in fact, many Africans argued that neither the laisser-faire capitalism of the US and the West nor the state-dominated ‘socialist’ system of the Soviet Union and its satellites in Europe was an appropriate or desirable model to follow.

- African socialism was to be an alternative that might borrow from both systems as it found appropriate, but it would be in essence made in Africa. It was to grow and be developed out of the already existing communal value system and way of doing things.

- the core was to be African, but they would adapt elements from outside; e.g., the state ownership of large enterprises to achieve development. However, it was not marxist and they would not be simply copying the Soviet Union.

Tanzania and Julius Nyerere

- Nyerere became the highest profile and most prolific advocate of this notion. It was in Tanzania that the most intensive and most prolonged attempt was made to bring this African socialism into existence and implement it.

- Nyerere always remained close to his Christian roots and was clearly not a doctrinaire marxist, but the University of Dar es Salaam, which became a major centre defining African socialism in theory and in practice, attracted many marxist scholars.

- see p. 237 for Nyerere’s statement

- in the excerpt, Nyerere gives his ideas of what education should be and do in this socialist society. Tanzania would provide an education for the real status and conditions of the people in Tanzania: as the majority are farmers, then it should help them to be better farmers; it should not detach students passing through it culturally and socially from the masses of the population (i.e., it should not be primarily to train a small elite).

- this equalitarianism has a nice ring to it, but it should be noted that these were the same rationales used by the National Party government in South Africa when it introduced and forced Bantu Education on the African population there. The circumstances were of course rather different in Tanzania.

- something similar was also adopted and pushed through in China without producing very impressive results.

- in the name of African socialism, a great many experiments were made, especially in community based development approaches.

What was accomplished?

- economically, not too much which distinguishes Tanzania from other African countries; its per capita GDP is still very low and no better than most other parts of Africa in development.

- however, other approaches haven’t had great success either. CIDA over the years has funded a number of experiments. One took Canadian farmers to Tanzania as advisors to teach African farmers techniques used in Canada. But the capital-intensive, mechanised approach of agriculture in Canada was not appropriate in Tanzania.

- however, politically and socially, Tanzania may have done better. It has not had severe internal tensions and hostilities that many other countries have had, no military coups, no civil wars; it has been remarkably stable with no massive ethnic hatreds.

.

Return to
Return to

Mills home page
History 317 lecture list