Race, Class and Nationhood: The Afro-Guyanese Experience
by Cheddi Jagan and Moses Nagamootoo
(This paper was written
in 1988 for the 150th Anniversary of the ending of Apprenticeship and
the beginning of Indian Indentureship.)
In the Caribbean,
the mere mention of sugar elicits another word - slavery. The switch
from tobacco to sugar as the main crop in the Caribbean ushered in the
socio-economic system of slavery. And the slave trade in the Caribbean
meant trade in African slaves, 15 million of whom were shipped across
the "Middle Passage" to the so-called "New World" between 1518 and
1807.
This period of
early colonial expansion signalled the dawn of the era of capitalist
production. Karl Marx wrote of it as " the discovery of gold and
silver in America, the extirpation, enslavement and entombment in
mines of the aboriginal population, the beginning of the conquest and
looting of the East Indies, the turning of Africa into a warren for
the commercial hunting of black-skins."1
In the name of
wealth and capital accumulation, unspeakable crimes were committed by
slave-traders. Africans suffered in many ways - as victims forcibly
uprooted from their land of birth, as chattel slaves inhumanly
exploited on the plantation, and as Blacks whose culture, features and
colour were used as rationalizations to justify the despicable trade
in " human cargoes" from the African continent.
The chains of
slavery were galling. In The Black Jacobins, CLR James refers
to the "crack of the whip, the stifled cries and the heavy groans of
slaves...who saw the sun rise only to curse it for its renewal of
their labour and their pains."2 On the plantations, slaves
were worked like animals, cruelly punished and constantly terrorized.
They received the whip with more certainty and regularity than they
received food, according to CLR James.3
Slavery was a life
from which few really expected to escape. The Guyana experience, as
was the case elsewhere in the West Indies, showed a prevailing pattern
of a vicious circle of punishment, resistance, escape, punishment. The
masters acted in the only way they knew: more cruelty and more
punishment; the slaves reacted in the only way open to them:
sullenness, non-cooperation, passive resistance and escape which
alternated with sabotage and revolt.
While not every
slave was a Spartacus (a rebel slave during the Roman Empire) or even
potentially one,4 and the system bred many collaborators
5(as the imperialist capitalist system did in more recent
times), slaves throughout the West Indies rebelled when they could.6
Such resistance, Melville Herskivits asserts in his Myth of the
Negro Past, may be traced as far back as the slave ships.7
Michael Craton insists that there is a continuum of slave resistance
from the moment of capture in Africa to the overtly bloody Afro-Carib
revolts in the West Indies.8
If the first
skirmishes took the form of White-Black confrontation, the pattern
that subsequently unfolded was underlined by class considerations. The
fact of the matter is that there was an "antagonistic and
irreconcilable relationship" between the two main social classes under
slavery - masters and slaves.9 One Jamaican slave described
that relationship as "the life of a dog,"10 while the
Jamaican martyr of the 1831 revolt, Samuel Sharpe, poignantly
demonstrated the irreconcilability of the relationship when he
defiantly said: " I would rather die upon yonder gallows than live in
slavery."11
Throughout the West
Indies, African slaves shared a popular ideology of freedom sometimes
referred to as the politics of slave resistance. The Afro-Guyanese
experience - the 1763 Berbice and 1823 Demerara slave revolts - proved
Herbert Aptheker, US Black history scholar, correct when he submitted
that "resistance, not acquiescence, is the core of history."12
Our experience could also locate struggles within the context of the
inherited tradition of Amerindian resistance.13
In some cases, as
in Berbice and Haiti, the object was the total seizure of power and
the replacement of the European controlled state by a Black state.
Other rebellions, like the Maroons of Jamaica and the "Bush Negro" of
Suriname, had a more limited objective: the establishment of
autonomous village committees within an overall White-controlled
territory.
In the face of
great odds, superior forces and arms, our early revolutionaries proved
they could not easily be intimidated. Leaders such as Cuffy in Berbice,
Quamina in Demerara and Damon in Essequibo laid down their lives in
heroic struggles for freedom.
Slavery and
apprenticeship could not endure the test of time. The deep-seated
class contradictions and the dynamic processes of society were forces
which the various facets of the slave system could not contend with
and resolve. And those who would wish to deny the role of
internationalism and solidarity in the struggle should analyse the
impact of the American, French and Haitian revolutions, the selfless
campaigns of English humanitarians and White missionaries, etc on the
abolition of slavery, the vicious system which did not proceed beyond
the 19th century in the Caribbean.14
The emancipation
which came about by the ending of Apprenticeship was a great
historical event. But it did not mean the complete liberation of the
slave. The "chains" of domination and exploitation changed forms but
were nonetheless exacting.
The ending of
apprenticeship in 1938 in the Anglophone countries did not herald an
end to slavery in general or to the plantation system in particularly.
African slavery as a system had embraced the tropical zone of the
Brazilian northeast, the south of the United States and the Caribbean
Basin. And the plantation system was based on the large-scale
production of a single crop (sugar, cotton, tobacco, etc) for export
to Europe - food for the urban masses and cheap primary products and
raw materials for industrialization and development. This system still
required an abundant supply on cheap labour.
The Anglophone
plantation owners saw themselves at a disadvantage as emancipation did
not come about everywhere at the same time. They had with freed paid
labour to compete with slave labour everywhere in the Americas. In the
United States, the Emancipation Proclamation was signed by President
Abraham Lincoln only in September 1862 and became effective on January
1, 1863. In Brazil, emancipation came later in 1888.
The plantocracy
attained its objectives of unmitigated exploitation and primitive
capital accumulation by various means and stratagems. Above all was
the creation of a racist ideology - white superiority and non-white
inferiority.
Plantation slavery
in the Americas was based on race, caste and class. According to Dr
Norman Girvan: "at the top were the white masters, in the middle the
mulattoes, and at the bottom the black slaves... As in the case on
Indian slavery too, an ideology of racism was generated and
systematically applied to legitimise the outright exploitation of one
race by another."15
Girvan points out
that racist ideology was expressed in cultural as well as physical
terms:
It was certainly
the case that African speech, religion, mannerisms and indeed all
institutional forms were systematically denigrated as constituting
marks of savagery and cultural inferiority, in order to deprive Black
people of a sense of collective worth…16
The very colour of
the African's skin was held to be the first and the lasting badge of
his inferiority; as were the characteristics of his mouth, nose and
hair texture. The desired consequence on extending the ideology of
racism from cultural to physical attributes was to ensure that the
African, whatever his degree of success in assimilating white culture,
was permanently imprisoned in his status as a slave inasmuch as he was
permanently imprisoned in his black skin.17
Cultural whiteness
gave the slave some advantages such as a job as headman or a house
slave. The badge of inferiority due to physical attributes was
something that Cheddi Jagan experienced as a student at the black
Howard University in Washington in 1936-38, long before the Civil
Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s.
That the abolition
of slavery and the ending of apprenticeship was not a revolutionary
transformation, but only a change in the basis of exploiting labour
was manifestly evident. According to Brazilian sociologist, Florestan
Fernandes, in Brazil, "the 'negro' remained almost at the margin of
this revolution. He was negatively selected, having to be content with
what now came to be known as 'nigger work': unstable or difficult
jobs, as miserable as they were underpaid.18
After emancipation
in the United States, the Blacks who migrated to the north found
themselves enmeshed in ghettos where they were confined to dirty,
unskilled, low-paying and unstable occupations. Today, Blacks are
second-class citizens and some of the gains made earlier are being
eroded.
In Guyana, as late
as the 1940s when a virtual "colour bar" existed in the civil service
- Blacks could not rise beyond a certain point in the
administrative/executive ladder, with a few exceptions in the
professions. A Junior Civil Service Association agitated for the
abolition of the colour bar. A similar bar existed in insurance,
banking, mines and plantations.
It was against this
ethno-cultural racism that Marcus Garvey and his Universe Negro
Improvement Association developed in the early part of this century.
Because of its strong appeal against oppression and exploitation, this
Black nationalist movement gained widespread appeal in North and
Central America and the Caribbean. It constituted a Pan-Black struggle
against colonialist exploitation and plunder and a call for
Pan-African regeneration.
The plantocracy not
only used racist ideology for subjugation and exploitation. It also
resorted to methods which were intended to undermine the very basis of
emancipation and to divide and rule.
Immigrants were
brought from Europe and mainly from Asia not only to work for less
than what was demanded by the freed ex-slaves, but also to create a
surplus labour force in and around the sugar estates. It was expressed
that it "...is the East Indian under indenture who fixes the rate of
wages rather than the free labourer."19
The flood of
immigrants, in the context of a lack of alternative employment,
brought pressure for work and thus no incentive for improvements in
the estates. By 1884, the supply of "free" labour was "so abundant
that the market rate fell below the statutory rate for indentured
immigrants."20 And what seemed more obnoxious to them was
generally taxation by custom duties and export levies to finance
immigration costs, as well as medical services on the estates, the
immigration department and the recruiting office in Calcutta.
The People's
Association, which included 7 out of the 14 members of this Combined
Court, reported:
... the race to
whose detriment the coolies were being introduced were made to
contribute to the cost of a scheme of immigration designed either to
supplant the Negro or to coerce him into service with the planters at
a wage inadequate for his proper maintenance.21
The People's
Association rightly felt that the charges for immigration, etc, should
be a direct charge on the sugar plantations.
At the same time,
the Afro-Guyanese were subjected to other restrictions and
difficulties. The planters adopted a deliberate policy of denying land
to the freed ex-slaves. The People's Association noted that the Land
Code of 1839 not only set a high price for land but stipulated that
only a minimum of 100 acres of Crown Lands could be acquired. It was
only on January 14, 1890 that Crown Lands, which had cost $10 per
acre, were reduced to $1. According to Malcolm Cross: "it was only
after the first change in 1890 and the subsequent one of 1898, when
the sugar industry was in decline and the battle to retain labour
became, for a brief period, of lesser consequence that the planters
acquiesced to the possibility of a landed peasantry."22
"Even then the
settlements which could be opened up, and the encouragement given by
the Government, were almost solely for rice growing - an occupation
peculiarly suited to the Indians, but one which was regarded as
anathema by the Blacks."23
In contrast, the
policy in Trinidad was more enlightened. Large tracts of land has been
given out for cocoa and cane farming to both freed ex-slaves and
immigrants leading not only to the development of an independent
peasantry, but also to lessened racial tension as a result of reduced
direct competition in the sugar plantations. Trinidadian land settlers
did not also face the same problems as their counterparts in British
Guiana, whose lands were subject to inundation from the sea and floods
and drought.
Nevertheless, the
"push" from the plantations was so great that freed ex-slaves made
great achievements not only by sacrificing and saving to found their
own villages, but they worked cooperatively and initiated the
establishment of a system of local government. Of the 60,000-odd
Africans and Mulattoes then in the colony, about two/thirds had
migrated to the villages. By 1851, they had erected 11,152 homes, and
the property owned by them was worth nearly 1 million pounds sterling.
The first property
bought in November 1839 by 83 former slaves for 30,000 guilders was
Plantation Northbrook on the East Coast of Demerara; part of its 500
acres was renamed as the village of Victoria.
In April 1940, 128
Blacks bought plantation New Orange Nassau for $50,000 and later
renamed it Buxton. Other plantations bought - Beterverwagting,
Fellowship, Den Amstel, Plaisance, Gibraltar, Rose Hall and Liverpool
- formed the backbone of the village movement.
Initially, an
attempt was made by the ex-slaves to run the abandoned plantations as
genuine cooperatives with the cultivation of provisions for their own
consumption and for sale. "When the planter-dominated colonial
government adopted laws which made cooperative land tenure illegal,
the cooperatives' lands were divided among their members"24
in accordance with the amount of initial investment.
The plantocracy
also resorted to various measures which were conducive to racial
conflict and were essential for the maintenance of law and order. By
conferring political and economic benefits and privileges or imposing
burdens selectively and disproportionately on different subordinated
ethnic groups, it maintained the status quo; a situation which was to
haunt Guyana in the immediate pre- and post-independence period
through the divide-and-rule politics of the ruling class.
According to Dennis
Bartels: " Again, as with Afro-Guyanese farmers, the absence of a
class of wealthy Afro-Guyanese merchants was a direct result of
planter and colonial government policy which favoured the development
of Portuguese and Indo-Guyanese businesses."25... The
businesses started by Afro-Guyanese and coloureds during the
emancipation period were ruined by the planters26... Ruling
class wholesalers and merchants extended credit to many Portuguese
retailers, while withholding credit from creoles and coloureds."27
The African gang
generally had an African as a driver; it was most common for a Chinese
to have a Chinese. But the Indian immigrants had an African driver.
The Africans were
given cane cutting work at 60-85 cents per day, whilst the Indians
were relegated to weeding at 25-45 cents a day. Indian immigrants were
excluded from jobs such as engineering and pan (sugar) boiling.
The technique was
employed by the planters of flooding or overdraining the land, so as
to destroy the crop of the small holder. This was one way to force the
freed slave-turned-peasant back to the plantation.
When land
settlements were created for Indian immigrants, in lieu of return
passage, beginning with Huis t' Dieren in Essequibo in 1880 and laid
out in 2-acre plots, the ex-slaves were excluded. This aggravated
their sense of frustration and bitterness. Their improved position
after emancipation was destroyed by the planters when they "persuaded
the local legislature to deny to the African the right of settling on
the soil as an agriculturist."28
This was justified
on the ground of irresponsibility, inability and incapacity. The
Colonial Office in 1903 agreed with Governor Swettenham's views that
the Blacks in British Guiana were irresponsible and affirmed that the
"underdeveloped estates" could not fall into the "incapable hands" of
the Blacks.
Racial stereotypes
were also created by the ruling class not only to justify further
immigration and exploitation, but also to foster attitudes of
prejudice among the subordinated groups so that conflict instead of
cooperation could continue in the plantations.
As regards racial
stereotypes, Bartels says: At the same time, ruling class racist
ideology allowed for distinctions between different non-White groups.
Many accounts by plantation owners, plantation managers, colonial
officials, and Christian missionaries characterized East Indians as
(1) industrious and hardworking; (2) thrifty to the point of greed;
and (3) lacking in Christian morals... On the other hand Afro-Guyanese
were often characterized as (1) physically strong, but lazy, carefree,
irresponsible, financially improvident, and intellectually dim; (2)
physically repulsive because of their facial features, skin colour,
and hair type; and (3) child-like, trusting, and easily misled by more
intelligent, unscrupulous people.29
The rabidly racist
and deep-seated animosity was also expressed by the famous commentator
on the ethnography of Guyana E.F Im Thurn, who, when addressing the
Royal Colonial Institute in London argued that "...it is all very well
to say that a man is a man whether his skin is white or black; but it
is certain that the vast majority of West Indian blacks - all but the
very few really educated members of the class - are not men but
children, great, strong, generally good tempered children, but almost
always fickle, and essentially, though from mere thoughtlessness,
cruel.30
Ruling class racist
ideology and the racial stereotypes it fostered, especially in the
context of ruling class power dispensing political and economic
benefits and burdens, tended to foster divisions in the various
subordinated ethnic groups - the Afro-Guianese, Indo-Guianese and the
Portuguese. These groups in turn used the ruling class racial
stereotypes to strengthen their own distinct social and economic
positions, thus maintaining and strengthening ethnic divisions and
conflict and preserving the interests of the ruling class.
But operating side
by side with this conflict/tendency was another based on working class
solidarity against the common enemy, the planters. Especially, during
periods of economic crisis, this tendency resulted in unity and
concerted industrial and political action against the ruling class.
As early as 1678,
African slaves and Carib Indians joined in an insurrection against the
Dutch planters in Suriname.
In 1847-48,
recently emancipated slaves were joined by East Indian and Portuguese
indentured plantation workers in strikes for higher wages.
In 1904-05 and
again in 1924, East Indian plantation labourers joined Afro-Guianese
workers in demonstrations and strikes against the employers and the
colonial government. In the 1936-45 period, sugar and bauxite workers
were organized by the Man-Power Citizens Association (MPCA).
The Political
Affairs Committee (PAC) from 1964 to 1949 linked the struggles of the
Indian sugar workers and the Black transport and bauxite workers. And
in the 1950-55 period, Afro-Guianese and Indo-Guianese workers
struggled unitedly against the plantocracy under the class-based and
scientific-socialist banner of the People's Progressive Party (PPP).
In his doctoral
thesis, Dennis Bartels pointed out:
The first general
election under the new constitution was to be held in April, 1953.
Until the formation of the PPP, most non-White politicians had
appealed to voters on the basis of ethnicity, or personal reputation.
Few had presented platforms which appealed to class interest, and none
had carried their election campaigns to rural areas, particularly to
the sugar estates... The PPP changed all this. PPP candidates in the
1953 election came from almost all the ethnic groups in Guyana (with
the possible exception of Amerindians). They appealed to voters on the
basis of a pro-working class, nationalistic platform and not on the
basis of ethnicity. And they built party organizations in rural areas.
In short, the PPP modernized politics in Guyana."
Although the
success of the PPP in forging inter-ethnic unity among workers during
this period is well documented, it has not received attention from
plural theorists."
Working class unity
had been earlier forged in the serious labour disturbance of 1905 as a
result of the sugar crisis and the wage reduction of 20-35% between
1894 and 1897 by a combination of rate-cutting and speed-up. Afro-Guianese
workers at Plantation Ruimveldt went on strike and some Indo-Guianese
workers joined them. On December 2, 1905, police constables opened
fire on a predominantly Afro-Guianese crowd of strikers, wounding some
and killing others.30
On March 31, 1924,
waterfront workers went on strike for improved wages and working
conditions. Support was forthcoming from sugar workers on the East
Bank of Demerara. A mixed crowd of nearly 5,000 plantation workers,
who were marching to Georgetown to join the urban workers on strike,
were stopped at Ruimveldt, police opened fire, killing 12 and
seriously wounding 15, including both Afro-Guianese and Indo-Guianese.
In the interval between the 1905 and 1924 upheavals and shootings,
working class consciousness developed significantly under the
leadership of trade unionist Hubert Nathaniel Critchlow, and the
British Guiana Labour Union (BGLU).
Militant leadership
was not only provided to the urban working class, but steps were taken
also to improve conditions in the sugar estates. Under Critchlow's
leadership, the first tentative steps were made to bring about
organized urban/rural, African/Indian working class unity. Indians
joined the BGLU and Critchlow was deemed the "Black Crosby," named
after the White Immigration Agent General, James Crosby, who protested
against the abuse of the system of Indentureship in British Guiana.
The influence of
the BGLU and its support led to the election of nationalist leaders to
the Combined Court.
The response by the
capitalist ruling class to the emancipation struggle of the working
people under the leadership of the Afro-Guianese working class and
radical intelligentsia through the Critchlow Movement was brutal. The
liberal Constitution inherited from the Dutch was suspended in the
late 1920s and a Crown colony type of constitution imposed with the
Governor having absolute powers of certification and veto. At the same
time, steps were taken to destabilize the Movement by undermining the
working class leadership of Hubert Nathaniel Critchlow.
This process was to
be repeated in the early 1950s when, after the PPP victory of 1953,
the Constitution was suspended and the Party split.
In 1953, when the
working class was united, the Anglo-American imperialists used
ideological anti-communist hysteria to justify the destruction by
armed forces of the PPP government. Soon after, by manoeuvring and
imposing unequal pressures, burdens and penalties, they engineered a
division in the Party ranks in 1955. And later, when racial
incitement, strikes, demonstrations and blockade resulted in racial
strife and bloodshed, they used ethnic divisions as the excuse for
denying independence in 1962-63. The modern-day imperialists had
learnt well the divide-and-rule methods of the plantocracy.
To the advocates of
the pluralist theory, this observation and critique of K.W.J. Post is
pertinent:
If the allegiance
to plural sections is at all times constant and overriding, how then
do we explain the success of the PPP in bringing together Africans and
Indians in 1950-53? The answer is, of course, the common oppression of
the masses of both at the hands of the colonial system, something of
which professor Despres might have made far more had he not rejected
class as part of his theoretical apparatus...
Guyanese political
development since 1953 has not been determined by the plural society,
but by British and US policy. This has been the constant in the
situation, not the plural society. At every crucial point where the
allocation of political power has been involved... it has been
intervention from outside which has decided the matter. It is
remarkable, for example, that professor Despres has nothing to say
about the role in the 1960s of the CIA and private organizations like
the Christian Anti-Communist Crusade, and only an obscure footnote
reference to the American Institute for Free Labour Development (1969:
91)
CARIBBEAN
DEVELOPMENTS
There were grass
root upheavals for the emancipation of the working people in the late
1930s and early 1940s - Kola Rienzi and Uriah Butler in Trinidad,
Bustamante in Jamaica, Boysie Skinner and Philip Payne in Barbados,
Mackintosh and Joshua in St Vincent, and Critchlow and Edun in British
Guiana. These events were reflective of the socio-economic problems
linked to the aftermath of the Great Depression of 1929.
The developments
led to the convening of several West Indian Conferences in British
Guiana under the leadership of Critchlow and the BGLU, the call for
the forging of a nation through a West Indies Federation with a
socialist perspective, and to the formation of the militant
anti-colonialist and anti-imperialist Caribbean Labour Congress (CLC).
In the pre- and
post-independence period, the struggle for emancipation was influenced
by various ideological currents - nationalism, fabianism,
democratic-socialism and Marxism-Leninism. Until the late 1940s, these
currents played a positive anti-colonial and anti-imperialist role.
However, with the advent of the Cold War, negative aspects developed.
The nationalist
People's National Movement (PNM) in Trinidad and Tobago aligned itself
politically on the western side and embraced the reformist planning
strategy, "neither Puerto Rican nor Cuban," which objectively put it
in line with the "partnership" economic model of imperialism.
Right-wing, reformist fabianism and democratic socialism also led
objectively to an alignment with imperialism. And in the left, as a
result of the division in the world communist movement, ideological
differences led to confusion and disunity in the ranks of the working
class.
The end result was
a setback for national liberation, economic emancipation and social
progress. Its manifestation was the disbandment of the Caribbean
Labour Congress, attacks on the PPP government following British
"gunboat diplomacy" in 1953, acceptance of a West Indies Federation on
the basis of "collective colonialism," adoption of the pro-imperialist
Puerto Rican model of development and a course of dependent
capitalism.
These developments
led to the growth of a new ruling elite - a non-white bureaucratic and
non-comprador parasitic bourgeoisie - leading to the continuing
"development of underdevelopment" and worsening conditions for the
dispossessed Black masses. The latter remain as the suppliers of
cheap, unskilled labour.
This situation saw
the development of new forms of struggle for emancipation - the Ras
Tafari movement, the Black Power movement and others.
The Rastafari
grass-roots protest movement in the 1950s and 1960s was to Jamaica and
the rest of the Caribbean what the Garvey movement was to the region
in the early part of this century. A significant difference was that
while the latter posited mainly white domination, the former was an
expression of disillusionment with Black and Mulatto rule and power.
The Black power
movement in the Caribbean also struggled for change. While its
counterpart in the USA was chiefly centred around the struggle against
second-class status for Blacks and for civil rights, dignity and
equality, the Caribbean movement, led by the radical intelligentsia,
was more oriented towards the revolutionary change of society. Dr
Walter Rodney's great contribution to this movement was his
Marxist-Leninist world outlook and class approach.
Because of
differences in outlook and approach, the Pan-African movement, which
wanted a united and socialist Africa, Kwame Nkrumah's dream, also
faced difficulties. Some, who preached " Caribbean exceptionalism" and
advocated a policy of "equidistance from the two super powers," like
George Padmore, one-time political advisor to Ghanian Prime Minister
Nkrumah, saw this development taking place in isolation from the
socialist community. Others, however, like Dr W.E.B. Dubois and Paul
Robeson, pioneers of the US civil rights movement, saw a socialist
Pan-Africa emerging only in close association with the socialist
states.
These differences
were exposed in sharp focus in the mid-1970s in relation to support
for the new revolutionary-democratic MPLA government of Angola. At a
crucial OAU meeting, there was an equal division of votes, with
"African socialist" Senegal and "Arab socialist" Egypt lining up with
20 other African states against Angola on the side of South Africa and
the imperialists.
Similarly, in the
Caribbean in 1983, the democratic-socialist government of the Barbados
Labour Party (BLP) and other nationalist and Christian-democratic
Caribbean governments openly cooperated with the US aggression against
Grenada.
In the late 1968’s,
the ruling Caribbean elites, when confronted with the Black Power
movement had responded: We do not need Black Power; Black people are
already in power. But time has demonstrated that "Black people in
power" has generally meant clientele power - client neo-colonialist
states, which despite revolutionary, even socialist, rhetoric are
fulfilling the broad political, economic, ideological, cultural,
military and strategic aim of imperialism.
Jamaica and Grenada
have shown that capitalist dependency, in the context of an on-going
and deep general, structural and cyclical crisis of world capitalism,
only increases underdevelopment which in turn deepens the dependency.
Barbados, once regarded as a model of development for the Caribbean,
is now faced with grave problems.
That imperialism
has no answer for the problems facing the Caribbean people is
manifested by the new wave of mass upsurge. The puppet NNP government
of Grenada has been split. The US-backed Seaga-led Jamaica Labour
Party government is tottering; it lost all but one of the 13 local
parish elections in 1986 and is faced with electoral defeat at the
forthcoming general elections.
Ruling parties in
Barbados and Trinidad and Tobago were defeated disastrously in recent
elections. In St Lucia, the ruling party saw its majority in
Parliament reduced to one. And despite a popular mandate, the ruling
party in Barbados and the coalition in Trinidad are faced, within a
very short period, with internal dissension due to a reformist
approach and centrist/rightist policies.
As a result of
capitalist dependency, underdevelopment, declining living standards,
alienation and discontent, large numbers of the Caribbean working
people regrettable see salvation in another movement: emigration to
North America.
Hopelessness must
be combated. The class struggle in all aspects, political, economic
and especially ideological, must be intensified. What is needed is a
revolutionary democracy with a socialist-oriented programme.
In the metropolitan
countries, a broad-based anti-monopoly coalition must be forged. In
the Third World, anti-imperialist unity on a regional and national
basis is essential for genuine political independence and economic and
social emancipation. This means unity of all left and democratic
forces. In class terms, it means the forging of a broad multi-class
and strata alliance, with the revolutionary-democrats (the vanguard of
the working class) playing the leading and guiding role.
With growing
contradictions not only within the three centres of world capitalism
but also between the imperialist and imperialist-dominated Third World
states, the prospects for the future are bright.
The objective
situation favours revolution. At the subjective level, however, there
is a lag. In multi-ethnic societies like Guyana, Suriname and Trinidad
and Tobago, it is necessary to fight against racist ideology and
racial stereotypes which were created and fostered by the
capitalist/colonialist ruling class, and later exploited by
self-serving politicians. It must be recognized that whatever our
racial origin, we have a common heritage. Our forefathers, regardless
of ethnic, religious and cultural differences, watered the sugar cane
with their blood, sweat and tears. Little wonder that Dr Eric Williams
in his book Capitalism And Slavery had observed: "strange that
an article like sugar so sweet and necessary for human existence
should have occasioned such crimes and bloodshed."
Fortunately, in
Guyana and other multi-ethnic societies, we see a growing working
class consciousness from a "class-in-itself" to a "class-for-itself"
approach. The grave economic and social crisis and IMF "prescriptions"
are creating the objective conditions for racial and working class
unity, as at specific periods in the colonial era. Though shot,
killed, detained, restricted and imprisoned on countless occasions,
our ancestors continued to unite, struggle and sacrifice for the
common good.
On this 150th
anniversary of the ending of Apprenticeship and the beginning of
Indian indentureship, the greatest tribute we can pay to our ancestors
is to pledge to unite and struggle for complete emancipation, which
can only come from a multi-ethnic, broad-based revolutionary
democracy. It is imperative for the survival and prosperity of this
great nation to forge a modus vivendi, a formula for power-sharing,
reflective of the composition and interest of all sections of the
Guyanese people. We must return to the 1953 era of racial and working
class unity and harmony, and fight for emancipation from modern-day
IMF and CBI neo-slavery. Emancipation cannot be complete without the
freedom of Nelson Mandela and the total eradication of the detestable
apartheid doctrine and all forms of racial discrimination.
REFERENCES
1. Karl Marx,
Capital, Vol. 1, Chap. XXXI, cited in R Palme Dutt, Crisis Of Britain
and the British Empire, Lawrence and Wishart, London, 1957, p. 22.
2. C.L.R. James,
The Black Jacobins, Random House, New York, 1963, pp 9-10.
3. Ibid, p 12
4. Gorden Lewis
quoted by Hilary Beckles, Black Rebellion in Barbados: The Struggle
Against Slavery, 1627-1838, Bridgetown, 1984, p. 2.
5. Michael Craton,
"The Passion To Exist: Slave Rebellion in the BWI. 1650-1832". JCH,
Vol. 13, 1980, p. 11.
6. Hilary Beckles,
Black Rebellion in Barbados, Op cit, p 2.
7. Monica Schuker,
"Day to Day Resistance in the Caribbean During the 18th Century",
African Studies Association WI Bulletin, No. 6, December 1973, p. 58.
8. Craton, op cit.
p. 18.
9. V.G Afanasasyev,
Marxist Philosophy, Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1980, p. 211.
10. W. McGowan
cited in "The 1831 Slave Rebellion in Jamaica", Seminar Paper, Queen's
College, August, 1980.
11. M Craton,
Testing the Chains: Resistance to Slavery in the BWI, Cornel
University press, 1982.
12. Craton, op
cit.,cited at p. 13 speech of H Aptheker at New York Academy of
Science, May 6, 1976.
13. Robert Moore,
"Slave Rebellion in Guiana", 3rd Annual Conference of Caribbean
Historians, UG, April 1971.
14. Cheddi Jagan,
The Caribbean - Whose Backyard? New Guyana Company, Georgetown, 1985,
pp. 16-20.
15. Norman Girvan,
Aspects of the Political Economy of Race in the Caribbean and the
Americas, Mimeographed paper prepared for the CLASCO-UNAM Conference
in Mexico. October 1974, p. 5.
16. E.G. Patterson
(1967) ch. VI, Lindsay (1974) p. 10., cited in Girvan, Op.cit. p.6
17. Girvan, op
cit., p. 28 cites Beckford, "At first, white people had justified
slavery on the grounds that Africans were heathens. But when they had
been converted to Christianity, that justification could no longer
stand. And so the theory of the racial inferiority of black people was
advanced."
18. Cited in Norman
Girvan. op cit., p. 13.
19. Malcolm Cross,
"East Indian-African Relations in Trinidad and Guyana in the late 19th
Century", paper prepared for the Conference on Indo-Caribbean History
and Culture, May 9-11, 1988 at the University of Warwick, England.
20. Alan H.Adamson,
Sugar Without Slaves, the Political Economy of British Guiana,
1838-1904, New Haven, London, Yale University Press, p. 194.
21. Cd 5194 p. 19.
Cited in Malcolm Cross, op cit., p. 26.
22. Malcolm Cross
op cit., p. 24.
23. Ibid. p. 15.
24. Dennis Alan
Bartels, Class Conflict and Racist Ideology in the Formation of Modern
Guyanese Society, University of Alberta, Edmonton, 1978, p. 32.
25. Ibid. p. 34.
26. Ibid. p. 38.
27. Ibid. p. 109.
28. Cd 5194, p. 15
-- cited in Malcolm Cross op cit., p. 24.
29. Dennis
A.Bartels, op cit., p. 44.
30. E.F. Im Thurn,
"Notes on British Guiana", Paper read at the Royal Colonial Institute,
London, December 13, 1892, pp. 7-8.
31. Dennis Bartels,
op cit., p. 155.
32. Cited in Dennis
Bartels, op cit., p. 14.