[— 371 —]
APPENDICES
[— 372 —]
[Blank page]
[— 373 —]
A P P E N D I X I
A. Black Man's Burden
THE BLACK MAN'S BURDEN*
"The rich will do anything for the poor except get off their backs"
How much does imperialism make out of overseas exploitation?
The official figures say Britain receives £940 million a year in profits, interests and dividends from abroad. So when allowance is made for overseas Government expenditure, mainly military expenditure and "aid to underdeveloped countries" of £503 million and private investment abroad of £454 million, it appears that British imperialism is losing money abroad!
And yet, the British ruling class live in conditions of unparalleled opulence.
Britain abounds with idlers who have never done a strike of work in their lives and yet live well.
The working class is affected, too.
In South-East England two-thirds of the workers produce nothing. But very few of them get under £10 a week.
Even the unemployed get social security benefits of £6.10 – a week for a single man, if one includes the average rent allowance.
Meanwhile the people of Africa, the Middle East, India etc. are lucky to get £2 a week. They are often meant to be thankful for the miserable and demeaning imperialist charity distributed by OXFAM and the United Nations.
How is the British miracle worked?
We began by studying a small British neo-colony – The Gambia. The Gambia's main export to Britain is groundnuts; her main import from Britain is cigarettes.
It takes an adult male farmer ten months to grow a ton of groundnuts. For this ton of groundnuts Britain pays the Gambia £72. So the price of a year's work by a Gambian is £87. The Gambian¬
* First published by Finsbury Communist Association.
— 374 —
farmer does not get £87 per annum, of course. He receives £28 a ton or £34 per annum.
The Imperial Tobacco Company of Great Britain & Ireland is Britain's biggest cigarette and tobacco firm.
This company has a gross trading profit for 1967 of £40,059,000. Its 38,960 British employees received £34,220,000 in wages in 1967.
When allowance is made for stock appreciation of £5,753,000, depreciation of £7,090,000 and various minor expenses it becomes apparent that The Imperial Tobacco Company made £76,034,000 from converting raw materials into finished goods – mainly cigarettes. The Imperial Tobacco Company has 38,960 employees in Britain.
So the value of the labour of each of these employees for one year averaged £1950. The average wage of an Imperial Tobacco Company worker was £880.
At the end of this pamphlet we give further examples of comparative prices and values of a year's labour and also the basis of calculation and the sources employed – see APPENDIX 1.
From these figures the basis of imperialist trade is clear. The neo-colony has to pay for the manufacturing skills of the British worker at the full rate of £1950 for the product of a year's labour. But the neo-colony is compelled to sell the product of a year's labour by a Gambian farmer for £87.
There is no law which says that one year producing cigarettes from tobacco is of any greater value than one year producing groundnuts. So The Gambia is, in effect, forced into seeling groundnuts for far less than they are worth.
The difference provides huge profits for British importing and processing firms; the profits keep some of Britain's idlers, Britain's capitalists and Britain's non-productive workers. Even after they have taken their share, cheap groundnuts from The Gambia means that everyone in Britain benefits from cheap margarine, cooking oil, and peanuts. The same applies to other neo-colonial products like tea, sugar, cocoa, rubber, cotton, coffee, etc.
What is the basis of the price paid by Britain? Could The Gambia get more money by producing more groundnuts?
The example of Ghana under Kwame Nkrumah disproves this. Ghana produced three times as many cocoa beans. Her reward was to see the world price cut to a third so that she got no more than before.
The price paid by an imperialist country for its raw material imports is just enough to maintain the neo-colonies as neo-colonies,¬
— 375 —
and no more. That is, sufficient to maintain the ruling class in luxury, to equip an army and a policy force for keeping the people down, to provide a few amenities and transport facilities and to pay the minimum in wages that the local people can be induced to accept.
In other words, a neo-colony is kept at the bare subsistence level, no matter what it produces.
Exploitation – capitalist and "socialist"
Like Britain, all the capitalist industrial countries share in the exploitation of the neo-colonies. And, at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development the Soviet Union has demanded that the "developing" countries offer the same terms of trade to the socialist countries as to the "developed" capitalist countries.
In other words, the Soviet Union wants to extort as much from India and Africa as Britain and America do.
"Developing" is a hypocritical word. What chance has a country to develop if it is kept at bare subsistence level? If it has to work twenty years – or even five years – to buy what the "developed" country has produced in one year.
Imperialism will be overthrown
Imperialism dominates the peoples of the neo-colonies in three ways, by armed force as in South Africa, by trade and investment as we have shown above, and by ideological means.
Most of Britain's imports from the neo-colonies are far too cheap.
So everyone in Britain benefits enormously from imperial exploitation. No one wants to lose it. At the same time Britain abounds with socialists, communists, humanitarians, friends of the Arabs, anti-imperialists, militants, revolutionaries, progressives etc. Millionaire publishers willingly put up money to print and circulate "left-wing" and "anti-imperialist" publications. They will even published detailed guides to revolution.
Fortunately it is now being increasingly recognised that those who benefit from exploitation are bad guides to those who wish to shake off exploitation. The best use that the peoples of Asia, Africa, the Middle East, the Caribbean etc. can make of the writings of British and other Western intellectuals (including those of Afro-Asians who have become Westernised) is to light the fire with them.
The Afro-Asian peoples are realising that there is only one road to liberation. The road followed by the People's Republic of China, itself once a neo-colony but now a mighty force for the¬
— 376 —
defeat of imperialism. The road of people's war.
The writings of Mao Tse-tung and Lin Piao are showing hundreds of millions of people how to throw the West off their backs.
app 1
Britain's Balance of Payments (H.M.S.O. 10/-), the I.L.O. report, the various yearbooks and company accounts were used to obtain this material. The cost of employed was the free-on-board value for neo-colonial produce, and wages and salaries plus trading profit plus depreciation and directors' fees minus stock appreciation, where appropriate, for British companies.
N E O - C O L O N I A L P R O D U C T
Commodity Price of a year's Average
labour Wages
£ £
Groundnuts 87 34
(Gambia)
Tea 139 45
(India)
Sugar 491 212
(Mauritius) (males)
92
(females)
B R I T I S H P R O D U C T
Commodity Value of a year's Average
labour Wages
£ £
Cigarettes 1950 880
(I.T.C.)
Woven Fabrics 1385 840
(Courtaulds)
Vehicles 1904 1328
(Fords)
app 2
Where silence denotes complicity
The follow organizations claim to be Marxist-Leninist and anti-imperialist.
— 377 —
But they absolutely refuse to show how Britain is benefiting from cheap food and raw materials from abroad. They dare not tell the British workers that the Afro-Asian-Caribbean countries will bring this exploitation to an end.
1) Birch's party 2) Marxist-Leninist Organization of Britain 3) The Marxist 4) Communist Workers' Organisation (Irish Communist Organisation) 5) The Internationalists 6) Marxist Forum 7) Committee to Defeat Revisionism for Communist Unity 8) Joint Committee of Communists
B. "T" and "U"
TEA*
According to the history books tea was £5.6.8. a pound when it first came to London in the 17th century. At that time, of course, the pound sterling was worth much more than it is today.
Today tea costs anything from 5/- to 15/- a pound. There are many reasons for the difference in price between now and the 17th century.
Shipping today is much less risky, for example.
The major factor, however, is the change in the relationship between Britain and India and Ceylon since then.
In the 17th Century India was made up of independent states. Tea was not widely cultivated as it is today. British influence was limited to a few trading posts.
In these circumstances the rulers of India were in a position to demand a fair price for their tea. If it took two Indian workers a year to grow and process a certain quantity of tea, and two English workers, a shepherd and a weaver, say, a year to grow and weave a certain quantity of cloth; then the Indian ruler wor[i]ld expect to receive something like that quantity of cloth for the equivalent quantity of tea.
With the conquest of India and Ceylon by Britain in the 18th and 19th centuries all this changed.
Thousands of square miles of forests in India and Ceylon were devastated to make way for tea plantations. Millions of peasants were dragooned into these plantations to work for a few pence a day.
As a result, productivity went up. But, as tea growing and¬
* First published in "Finsbury Communist", No. 45, October 1968.
— 378 —
plucking has to be done by hand, the rise in productivity was not great. In Britain, on the other hand, thanks to the Industrial Revolution, productivity went up by leaps and bounds.
Today, a British worker, for example a car worker, makes something like £1900 for his employer in the course of a year. Of this £1900 he gets an average of about £1300 in wages.
An Indian worker on a tea plantation, however, can work for a year growing tea. The product of his year's work is sold out of India for about £140 of which he receives about £45 in average wages. Ceylon tea fetches slightly more.
The relative positions of India, Ceylon and Britain have evidently changed somewhat since the 17th century, to the disadvantage of India and Ceylon.
Some Indian historians claim that famine was never known in India until the British took over.
Some Indian rivers are filthy with mud. Ceylon is subject to floods.
Western travel films occasionally imply that this is due to the ignorance of the peasantry. They say the peasants do not know how to cultivate the land. When the rains come, therefore, their gardens are washed into the rivers.
This is adding insult to injury.
Tea is a very peculiar crop. It needs a lot of water. But this water must not be allowed to stagnate around the roots. So tea is best grown on a hillside.
When the British took over India there were large forests growing on the hillsides of India and Ceylon. These forests, with their huge roots, prevented the rain from rushing down the hillsides and devast[at]ing the valleys. The forests also held the soil in place.
The British tea planters were responsible for chopping down many of these forests to plant tea.
The root of the tea plant does not hold back the rainwater. Hence the floods and the silting-up of the rivers.
India and Ceylon are at present ruled by governments which are subservient to Britain, the United States and the Soviet Union. Provided the ruling circles can live well, they do not care a damn about their country or the people who live in it.
This will not always be the case. When the workers and peasants take over India and Ceylon they will want a price for their tea equivalent to what Britain charges for its products. This will be in the best interests of 99% of the Indian people.
— 379 —
The launching of people's war in various parts of India, such as Naxalbari, in the past year or so shows that the overthrow of the Indian government is only a matter of time.
The Communist Party of Ceylon is very concerned about soil erosion and floods, as well as about what Ceylon gets for its tea. This party maintains that many of the hillsides, now covered with tea plants, should be re-forested.
So we can see which way a free Ceylon is going to go.
Many of our comrades say we should not print these facts. They say we should stick to telling the Barts Buildings tenants that we are in favour of pulling down Barts Buildings as we are; the council tenants that we are against higher rents; workers in general that we want wage increases.
Occasionally, a vague reference to Socialism could be made; or we could quote with approval from Chinese, Albanian, Vietnamese and Cuban publications. But never must difficult subjects be mentioned.
Our view is that, unless these difficult subjects are dealt with British communists will never be more than tenants association chairmen, militant trade union officials or parrots.
C. Coal and Oil –
Where Proletarian Internationalism Begins
Expensive luxury*
After the long period of softening-up in the press and on radio and television the Budget came as a bit of an anti-climax. It appeared that purchase tax had been increased on a few luxuries and selective employment tax had been increased. £900 million had been almost painlessly extracted. But what are the facts?
The majority of non-perishable goods have gone up in price, including even stationery and baby powder. So the pound has again been devalued in terms of what it will buy.
Such devaluation is now a constant feature – and not only at Budget times. Rents, fares, gas and postage are all due to be increased. If the pound is devalued in terms of what it will buy it is only a matter of time before it is devalued in terms of gold and other currencies, as it was last year.
* First published in "Finsbury Communist", No. 39, April 1968.
— 380 —
We shall then be told that prices must go up because of devaluation when in fact devaluation has taken place because prices have already gone up.
A number of left-wingers, including self-styled communists, repeat this old capitalist press line on devaluation.
The only difference between a "left-wing" defender of capitalism and a right-winger is that the "left-winger" urges resistance to Government attacks on living standards.
Such calls for resistance, struggle, etc. are becoming almost as sick a joke as the Government itself. For they all assume that there is an alternative policy. The truth is that Britain's economy is on the downward slope. At present capitalism is an expensive luxury. Before long it will be a liability.
Where to begin*
Britain abounds in organizations for friendship with foreign countries, solidarity with liberation movements, not to mention fighting for socialism in Britain.
The overwhelming majority of Britons are not greatly concerned about friendship, solidarity and socialism. Yet these organizations seem to have plenty of money, plenty of publicity, and plenty of leaders who do not need to earn a living, unless perhaps as authors, broadcasters or M.P.'s.
How is this?
Take as an example, the British Council for Peace in Vietnam. This body organises demonstrations and gets out leaflets. The slogans are a bit weak, perhaps, but they rally two or three thousand people against U.S. aggression. What's the harm in that?
Watch more closely. On the prestige arising from the demonstrations a few people get themselves invited out to Hanoi to meet North Vietnamese leaders. What do they say to the North Vietnamese leaders? Usually this is a very closely-guarded secret but occasionally the cat is let out of the bag. For example, when Lord Brockway asked Ho Chi Minh not to try the American pilots. If Ho took Brockway's advice, he would be obliged to fight those North Vietnamese who want to try the American pilots. This could lead to a split in the North Vietnamese leadership.
Brockway does not count for much, be added to Shelepin from¬
* First published in "Finsbury Communist", No. 39, April 1968.
— 381 —
Moscow, Aptheker from U.S.A., and dozens of other characters from all over the world, he counts for a lot. They all visit Vietnam. We always hear what Ho told them but rarely what they told Ho.
Our guess is that they are trying to get the North Vietnamese to negotiate without insisting that the Yanks quit Vietnam entirely.
More subtle are the Vietnam Solidarity Campaign, run by a trotskyist group. Their slogans are never weak. Their demonstrations are always lively. But the key question remains – who goes out to Vietnam and what does he say when he goes?
These people are well-known supporters of the Castro-Debray school of guerilla warfare which says that the guerilla band should be a kind of suicide squad of heroes, isolated from the people, like Che Guevara was in Bolivia before his death.
Are they using their support for Vietnam to push this line?
A curious feature of all this phoney "friendship and solidarity" organizations is that it is generally one of a very small clique of leaders who goes on delegations abroad; or who sees all the correspondence.
These bodies represent the fifth column of U.S. or British imperialism for whom they do a useful job at a minimum of expense. Their aim is to roll back the socialist countries and liberation movements. Certain anti-revisionists, including the Finsbury Communist Association, regard it as one of their primary tasks to expose phoney organisations.
But is there nothing else that can be done?
Faced with the mounting number of Government attacks on the working-class and middle-class, many quite good communists have become punch-drunk.
What should be tackled first? Rents, fares, wages, redundancies?
Where should we begin?
The problem also remains of how to link the struggle in Britain with the world-wide fight against imperialism, exemplified by Vietnam, Rhodesia, Congo, Palestine, Dominica, Indonesia, and the great cultural revolution in China.
For a British struggle that cannot be linked up with the international struggle is about as useful as splitting against the wind. It has no roots and is doomed to the usual routine of demonstration, lobby, and sell-out.
What British struggles are directly linked with the national liberation movement?
To answer this question we must ask another question. How does Britain exploit the oppressed nations?
— 382 —
The answer is by selling manufactured goods dear and buying raw materials cheap.
This means that British workers producing raw materials similar to those produced by the oppressed nations are forced to compete with low prices and starvations wages.
Which British workers fall into this category? The miners. Middle East oil is cheaper than coal; perhaps more important, the oil monopolies have more "pull" with the Government. So the pits are being closed and the miners are being uprooted.
Just as in the past, cotton workers were sacked due to competition from low-wage Far East textiles.
What solution does Britain's left-wing have?
The Communist Party says there must be alternative industries.
Trotskyists say give surplus coal to old age pensioners.
Some anti-revisionists say re-equip the mines to compete with oil i.e. exploit the miners as ruthlessly as the Middle East oil workers.
These solutions stand no chance of success. They are, however, worse than useless because they accept the Government case for pit closures, that coal is so dear it is piling up and cannot be sold.
The problem will only be solved when the Middle East nations raise the price of their oil to a comparable level with coal and smash the oil companies (62% of Britain's oil comes from the Middle East).
The only people who can do this are the people of the Middle East. So for the British miners to support the Middle East liberation movements is sound common sense.
This won't stop pit closures straightaway, of course, But in time all the sacked miners will be able to come back to the industry to train the many new miners who will be required.
When coal becomes more "economic" than oil the possibility will emerge of re-opening the railways and re-employing the 150,000 sacked railwaymen. Existing miners and railway men will have better chances of promotion in revitalized industries.
Anti-revisionist communists cannot be satisfied with their present lack of progress.
Going to the miners with a correct internationalist policy will lay a basis, not simply for victory in the Middle East or for the re-opening of the mines and railways, but also for many other worthwhile activities which are at present perishing due to lack of mass working class support for Marxism-Leninism.
— 383 —
A P P E N D I X I I
Japanese and West German Penetration of Africa
(1964 - 1968, inclusive)
The following tables are based on information reported in AFRICA RESEARCH BULLETINS, 1964 through 1968 (issued monthly since 1964 by Africa Research, Ltd., London and derived from African as well as metropolitan newspapers plus BBC-monitored world radio). It must be understood as a rock-bottom minimal list of information: for example, many items were reported only once and never followed up; after 1967, formal openings of enterprises in Africa were often reported without reference to the foreign countries, if any, which had helped finance them. So, none of the information in this Appendix is to be regarded as definitive: it is intended merely to set up a weathervane in the wind of events on ALL subjugated areas. It was put together to support claims in the text that West German and Japanese capital are being given outlets for their surplus capital despite their defeat in World War II in order not to repeat the great Versailles error which, between World Wars I and II, led in Western countries to German Nazism, Italian fascism, etc.
All tables below show only ventures started during the years covered. Because of the lack of information, almost no account is taken of activities up to 1964. In the few cases where such data was provided, it has been included. It is statistically insignificant.
I. ECONOMIC, FINANCIAL AND TECHNICAL
Table 33
NEW INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES IN AFRICA
(1964-1968, inclusive)
JAPAN WEST GERMANY BOTH
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. No. No. No. No. No.
TYPE OF ENTERPRISE Plants Countries Plants Countries Plants Countriesb
------------------------ ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Textile 10 7 17 14 27 16
Clothing 3 3 2 1 5 4
Plastics 1 1 3 2 4 2
Timber Products* 2 2 10 6 12 8
Pulp and Paper 1 1 5 5 6 6
Glass - - 3 2 3 2
Radio and TV 2 2 - - 2 3
Electrical 1 1 2 2 3 3
Cement 1 1 7 6 8 7
Processing: Iron 3 3 4 2 7 3
Processing: Other metal 1 1 - - 1 1
— 384 —
continued
JAPAN WEST GERMANY BOTH
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. No. No. No. No. No.
TYPE OF ENTERPRISE Plants Countries Plants Countries Plants Countriesb
------------------------ ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Oil Refineries - - 2 2 2 2
MV Assembly 8 7 4 4 12 9
Car Partso 1 1 3 3 4 3
Boat Building 1 1 1 1 2 2
Chemicals, Drugs 1 1 1 1 2 2
Fertilisers 4 3 8 6 12 9
Crop Semi-Processing 4 3 10 7 14 9
Food Processing 4 4 8 7 12 11
Breweries - - 3 3 3 3
Tanneries - - 2 2 2 2
Agriculturalx 1 1 3 3 4 4
Material, Equipment+ 2 2 3 3 5 5
Repaira 2 1 1 1 3 2
Miscellaneous - - 2 2 2 2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
T O T A L S 53 21b 104 29b 157 33b
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Plywood, veneers, matches, etc. oPistons, engines, etc. +Supply
xMachinery, water pipes, etc. aMachines, equipment
b"Countries" totals are not simple summations due to overlapping: Japanese of
West Germans may have more than one enterprise in a given African country.
Often, both have enterprises in a single African country.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 34
NEW MINING OR MINERAL ACTIVITIES
(1964-1968, inclusive)
JAPAN WEST GERMANY BOTH
-------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
Number of: Number of: Number of:
ITEM Deals+Countries Deals+Countries Deals+Countries
-------------- ----- --------- ----- --------- ----- ---------
Iron ore, etc. 7 5 6 6 13 10
Copper 5 5 1 1 6 6
Zinc - - 1 1 1 1
Chrome, nickel 1 1 - - 1 1
Manganese 2 2 - - 2 2
Coal, graphite 1 1 1 1 2 1
Rare metalsx 1 1 - - 1 1
Uranium* - - - 1 - 1
Phosphates 1 1 - - 1 1
Kyanite 1 1 - - 1 1
Marble 1 1 - - 1 1
Oil - 1o 4 4 4 4
------------------------------------------------------------------
T O T A L S 20 15 13 13 33 23
------------------------------------------------------------------
+Includes large or contractual purchases
*Discovered (Niger). No further report by 1968.
oAsked for prospecting rights (Somali). Awarded to West Germany.
xBeryllium, tantalum and columbium (Uganda)
------------------------------------------------------------------
— 385 —
Table 35
NEW ACTIVITIES IN INFRASTRUCTURE
(1964-1968, inclusive)
(Money in millions of pounds sterling)
JAPAN WEST GERMANY BOTH
------------ -------------------- -------------------- --------------------
#/ Am't #/Coun- #/ Am't #/Coun- #/ Am't #/Coun-
ITEM Deals Moneyo tries Deals Moneyo tries Deals Moneyo tries
------------ ----- ------ ------- ----- ------ ------- ----- ------ -------
Telecom'n 2 - 2 1 - 1 3 - 3
Electrical 1 - 1 7 10.47 6 8 10.47 6
Roads - - - 21 32.03 12 21 32.03 13*
Railway 10 17.86 8 4 7.14 4 14 25.00 12
Air Travel 2 - 2 5 .82 4 7 .82 4
Shipping 2 - 2 4 - 2 6 - 4
Ports - - - 6 6.42 5 6 6.42 5
Transportx 8 9.90 7 7 14.40 6 15 24.30 12
Bridges - - - 7 10.20 4 7 10.20 4
Dams - - - 5 71.89 4 5 71.89 4
Water Supply - - - 9 20.59 7 9 20.59 7
Housing - – - 9 42.15 4 9 42.15 4
Tourism - - - 8 - 5 8 - 5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
T O T A L S 24 27.76 12 92 216.11 28 118 243.87 31
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
oAbsence of money under the various headings means merely that none was report-
ed in the source used.
*In Togo, a big dispute arose, whereby West Germany, which had built the rail-
ways there and now wanted contracts to modernize them, successfully prevented
allocation of EEC funds to Togo to convert all travel to roads. Togo officials
said the railways had been so badly neglected for so long that the only thing
to do was to close down the lot, section by section. Their plan was to finish
this by 1972.
xEquipment # = No.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 36
NEW VENTURES IN AGRICULTURE
(1964-1968, inclusive)
JAPAN WEST GERMANY BOTH
------------ --------------- --------------- ---------------
Number of: Number of: Number of:
ITEM Deals Countries Deals Countries Deals Countries
------------ ----- --------- ----- --------- ----- ---------
Pilot farmsx 2* 1 9 7 9** 7
Livestocka - - 5 5 5 5
Fishing 7 6 4 3 11 8
Forestry - - 1 1 1 1
Irrigationx 1 1 7 6 8 7
Distributionb 1 1 3 1 4 2
Modernizing+ 1 1 14 11 15 12
Studies 3 3 2 2 5 5
Training - - 2o 2 2 2
----------------------------------------------------------------
T O T A L S 15** 8 45 19 60** 23
----------------------------------------------------------------
*Offers only. No further reports as of 1968.
xThese offers involved more than six million acres in Kenya.
aIncludes dairies
bIncludes cold stores
+Includes equipping o60 students; 80 resettled families
**Includes the two offers
— 386 —
----------------------------------------------------------------
Total money, in millions of pounds sterlingc, reported either in
connection with these or with other agricultural deals, was:
Japan 14.54
West Germany 334.03
Both 348.57
----------------------------------------------------------------
cEquivalents to £1 sterling used in all conversions in these
tables were: $2.80, 684 CFA francs; and 7 Deutsches marks. As
can be seen, these are all pre-devaluation; but so were most of
the reported sums involved in these tables. Also, since money
shown is only that reported, no attempt was made to go into fine
points in conversion. Everything is indicative, not definitive.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Table 37
NEW VENTURES IN AID TO AFRICA
(1964-1968, inclusive)
(Money in millions of pounds sterling
JAPAN WEST GERMANY BOTH
------------ ------------------- ------------------- -------------------
Am't #/Coun- Am't #/Coun- Am't #/Coun-
ITEM Money Other tries Money Other tries Money Other tries
------------ ----- ----- ------- ----- ----- ------- ----- ----- -------
Capitalo - - - 18.34 25 9 18.34 25 9
Technical+ - A 1 4.83 2A 6 4.83 3A 7
Financialx - - - 15.07 - 9 15.07 - 9
Development* 22.37 - 3 19.67 1 7 42.04 1 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
T O T A L S 22.37 1 4 57.91 5 31 80.28 6 35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
oFor specific investment projects +Training, research, studies, prospect-
xFor budgetary expenses, government ing, etc.
expenses of recipients; unallocat- *Largely, financing Development Plans
ed funds A = Agreements; S = Studies
I = Increased Aid (i.e., in addition to unnamed sums given previously)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 38
NEW LOANS TO AFRICAN COUNTRIESo
(1964-1968, inclusive)
(Money in millions of pounds sterling)
JAPAN WEST GERMANY BOTH
-------------------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
Am't No. Am't No. Am't No.
ITEM Money Countries Money Countries Money Countries
-------------------- ----- --------- ----- --------- ----- ---------
Agriculture - - 7.29 2 7.29 2
Infrastructure - - 3.57 1 3.57 1
Small Local Ventures 1.00 1 10.81 6 11.81 7
Otherx 73.57 4 57.55 8 131.12 12
------------------------------------------------------------------------
T O T A L S 74.57 5 79.22 13 153.79 17
------------------------------------------------------------------------
oThis chart represents only new aid to African countries during the five
years covered, and only that reported in figures in the source used.
The money shown may or may not cover actual projects and/or money listed
in Tables 33 through 37, above. The results are indicative, as stated;
not definitive.
xIncludes credits; deals specifying purchase of lending country's materi-
als and/or equipment; financing not included in other categories, etc.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
— 387 —
Table 39
NEW TECHNICAL DEALS IN AFRICA
(1964-1968, inclusive)
JAPAN WEST GERMANY BOTH
----------- ----------------- ----------------- -----------------
No. No. No.
ITEMS Numbera Countries Numbera Countries Numbera Countries
----------- ------- --------- ------- --------- ------- ---------
Institutes
or Colleges 3 3 10 8 13 10
Training A. 1 1 17 14 18 14
" S. 218o 5 976+ 11 1,194 9
Research - - 3 3 3 3
Equipmentb 1 1 3 3 4 4
Experts, A. 2 2 20 12 22 14
" S. 42* n.a. 386x 8 428 8
---------------------------------------------------------------------
T O T A L S 6 6 50 22 56 23
---------------------------------------------------------------------
aRepresents: deals, students, experts, or whatever is appropriate to
the category covered.
oBy December 1964, Japan had 158 trainees on her soil from Ghana, Nig-
eria, Ethiopia and UAR. 60 more were reported from Kenya.
+In February 1964, 67 of all Common-Market-sponsored African students
in Western Europe were in West Germany. They came from Congo (K);
Ivory Coast; and Cameroon. No specific new deals for technical co-
operation were reported, 1964-1968 inclusive, for the latter two
countries. Therefore, they have been added to "No. Countries" under
all the columns.
*By end September 1964, Japan reportedly had 42 experts, advisers, etc.,
in Africa; no countries specified.
xIncludes 275 in UAR: When the latter broke diplomatic relations with
Bonn over the issues of Israel and GDR recognition, 200-300 West German
technicians were reported "stranded" in UAR for need of exit visas.
The mean figure, 275, has been used for them.
A. = Agreements S. = Students, staff
bIncludes agreements, gifts, etc. n.a. = not available
---------------------------------------------------------------------
— 388 —
Table 40
REPORTED TRADE IMBALANCES IN AFRICAa
(In millions of pounds, sterling)
(1964-1968, inclusive)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. No. No.
COUNTRY Negative Countries Positive Countries Balance Countries
------------- -------- --------- -------- --------- ------- ---------
Japanx - 73.3 13+ + 97.0 3 + 23.7 15
West Germanyo - 55.8 4 +108.1 4 + 52.3 7
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B O T H -129.1 15+ +205.1 7 + 76.0 18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
aFigures shown here must be regarded with caution: in no case did reports cov-
er all the included years; figures from either Japan or West Germany often did
not cover the same years; certain sums were later shown to be part of some
other deal (in which case, if possible, corrections were made); and sometimes
deficits were reported without specific amounts. Again we stress the indic-
active, rather than definitive, nature of this Appendix.
xIn 1967, African countries reportedly took more than 7.75% of Japanese exports
amounting to about £363.2 million; but Japan took only 4.64% of African exports
- and of this, South Africa furnished the bulk, at about £183 million: by
August 1968, South African exports reportedly constituted 40% of all African
exports to Japan.
In 1968, three African countries (Ghana, Kenya and Nigeria) covered only 65%
of their imports from Japan by exports thereto; Sierra Leone covered only 5%;
and Libya, less than 2%. In 1963, Chad and Malagasy had exported nothing to
Japan, which had sold them, respectively, goods worth £200,000 and £3.57 million.
African countries profiting from trade with Japan included South Africa, UAR,
Tanzania and Zambia. But overall, in 1964 and 1965, African trade deficits in
Japan's favor were reportedly £18.1 million and £50 million respectively.
With the exception of Rhodesia, for which the reported imbalance was very
small (less than £200,000) and transient, all the countires which thus contrib-
uted in Japan's favor were in "Black" Africa. This fact shows that the fiction
of African sovereignty obscures meaning: most of the favorable balances at-
tributed to African countries were in face in favor of foreign corporations
operating in those countries: e.g., British & American Tobacco Corporation
deals with G.F.R. were reported as "Zambian."
oCountries showing substantial imbalances at West German expense were: Ivory
Coast, Liberia, Nigeria and Zambia. Those losing on trade with West Germany
were: Dahomey, Senegal and Togo. Trade was not as heavy a factor in overall
relations with Africa for West Germany as it was for Japan.
*Two countries were added for which deficits favoring Japan were reported, but
for which no amounts were specified.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Japan opened new trading offices and/or new trade agreements with 12 African
countries during the years under consideration.
Japan was among the first-ranking five customers in six African countries; as
a supplier, in six (being among the top eight in one more). In either capac-
ity, Japan reached top-five rank in a total of 10 African countries.
West Germany was among the top five customers of seven African countries; and
as supplier, in six; the total was nine African countries, overall.
There were, in all, 12 African countries where either Japan and/or West Germ-
any was among the top five customers and/or suppliers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
— 389 —
To assess the meaning of the above facts, it must be remembered that;
a. without variation, African exports were all raw materials (mainly agricultural or "cash crop" in nature) and/or semi-processed or assembled goods. The valuable exports, money-wise, were, of course, minerals and/or metal ores (as shown by the favorable trade balances).
b. trade is only one factor in economic relations between countries.
In this context, it can be seen that in Africa, Japan made up from about ten, mostly Black, African countries what might otherwise have been a very serious trade imbalance for her. Indeed, so serious to the African countries concerned were the resulting imbalances in Japan's favor that a considerable amount of huffing and puffing went on diplomatically about them in Nigeria, at least, not to mention Tanzania, Kenya and Uganda. We say "huffing and puffing" for good reason: for instance, in Nigeria, all Japanese goods were banned in 1965 – except textiles; but textiles were precisely the major merchandise sales to Nigeria. Again, in Tanzania, by 1967, a favorable trade balance of £3.6 million had been achieved with Japan – through greatly increased Japanese investments in Tanzania as the price for Japan's taking greatly increased amounts of Tanzanian coffee, tobacco, cotton, sisal, hides, skins and maize. In a word, the "achievement" consisted of increasing Japanese opportunities for super-profits at the expense of the Tanzanian working class while settling Tanzania more firmly as a supplier of primary products.
By and large, the big America-controlled corporations, especially but not solely in Southern Africa, make theirs off Japan and off West Germany in the course of trade; in turn, they can afford to turn a benevolent eye via their governments on various Japanese and West German recuperative activities at the expense mainly of Black African peoples.
LABOR RELATIONS
It is interesting to note that during the years under scrutiny West German agreements were reported with Algeria, UAR and Tunisia to, or about, employment of African labor inside the German Federal Republic.
— 390 —
At the same time, one agreement was reported with the Zambian government for the latter to employ West German "development workers" in Zambia.
MILITARY ARRANGEMENTS
As between West Germany and Japan, all reported military deals appeared to be only with the former.
1. In the Central African Republic, West Germany was to build a naval dockyard.
2. Formal military agreements, including the sale of military supplies and the furnishing of instructors, were signed with four African countries: Malagasy, Rwanda, Sudan and Tanzania. The latter demanded withdrawal of all West German government assistance when the West Germans unilaterally abrogated the agreement as pressure on Tanzania in 1965 to prevent her from recognizing the East German government. It did not succeed. It is noteworthy that President Nyerere made it specific that his demand for withdrawal of assistance did NOT include private investment, missionaries or other Church or private activities in his country. Furthermore, the whole flurry lasted only a few months before all was restored to "normal."
3. West Germany gave some military aid to Ethiopia, because Somalia was reported as deploring it officially, while accepting some for herself: her defences were to be "strengthened" by West Germany, which also provided at least £1 million to "strengthen" the Somali policy force.
4. Armed coastal patrol boasts were sold, or in a couple of cases, given to Malagasy and Tanzania.
5. Training was given to nationals of Algeria (60; plus 8 West German instructors to Algeria); Nigeria (1,000); and an unstated number from Tanzania either as air force pilots, naval boat operators, etc.
6. A total of 56 aircraft were reported as sold to Nigeria.
7. Some £9,083,250 was reported as given to Tanzania and Nigeria for military purposes (Nigeria received an alleged £9 million).
II. POLITICAL, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL
— 391 —
Table 41
NEW POLITICAL DEALINGS IN AFRICA
(1964-1968, inclusive)
JAPAN WEST GERMANY BOTH
------------------------- ---------------- ---------------- ----------------
No. No. No.
ITEM Number Countries Number Countries Number Countries
------------------------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Conferences - - 2 2 2 2
------------------------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Special Events 1x 1 4* 2 5 3
------------------------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Special Actionsa 2** 2 1xx 1 3 2
------------------------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Gifts vs. hunger, etc. - - 1 1 1 1
------------------------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Easing Tariffs, Customs 1 1o 1 1b 2 2
------------------------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Property Compensationc - - 1 1 1 1
------------------------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
State visist[ts] 2 2 13 11 15 13
GFR officials to Africa 2 6 2 6
Top Africans to Europe 2 2 7 7 9 9
------------------------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Protect Investmentsd - - - 10 - 10
M.F.N.e - - 2 2 2 2
N.E.W.C.f - - 3 3 3 3
F.T.R.P.C.A.g - - 1 1 1 1
------------------------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Diplomatic Relations - 7 - 8 - 15
Started - 7 - 1 - 8
Threatened - - - 4 - 4
Broken - - - 3 - 3
Resumed - - - 2+ - 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
T O T A L S - 12 - 27 - 28
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
xJapanese-registered ships, defying U.N. sanctions, transport Rhodesian petroleum.
*In Ghana: (a) German journalist convicted under Nkrumah of misprision of treason
for illegally entering country carrying Ghana money; after February 1966, milit-
ary government released him. (b) A Nazi doctor in Ghana was wanted for war
crimes by the West German government; Nkrumah refused to extradite. Military junta
did. Rhodesia: (a) "Rhodesian" (i.e., British & American Tobacco Corp.) cigar-
ettes were being transported in West German ships, despite U.N. sanctions; (b)
Rhodesian banknotes printed in Britain and about to be flown to Rhodesia in South
African planes were seized by British officials; a British judge released them.
aOr agreements.
**Ban on imports, plus conditions for their removal, in Nigeria. Zambia asks help
from Japan to set up a taxation convention.
xxAbolition of visa control between Nigeria and West Germany, travel only (i.e.,
not for prolonged stays in Germany and/or employment there).
oIn addition, Nigeria banned all Japanese imports, August 1965. Later lifted.
bIn addition, UAR banned all West German imports, June 1967, because of West
German intention to sell arms to Israel.
cFor sequestrated pre-war German-owned property (Ethiopia).
oTreaties or agreements "mutually" to protect or promote investments in each oth-
er's economies.
aMost Favored Nation clauses
fNo Expropriation Without Compensation
gFreedom to Transfer Profits and/or Capital Assets
+In two other African countries (Sudan, Libya), consulates were maintained in
the German Federal Republic despite break-off at ambassadorial levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
— 392 —
Table 42
NEW SOCIAL ACTIVITIES IN AFRICA
(1964-1968, inclusive)
------------ ---------------- ---------------- ----------------
No. No. No.
ITEM Number Countries Number Countries Number Countries
------------ ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Peace Corps 40-50 1 141 3 186 1
------------ ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
YWCA's - - 1 1 1 1
YMCA's - - 1 1 1 1
------------ ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Medical - 1 - 15 - 15
Equipment* - - £4.3m 7 £4.3m 7
Hospitalsx - - 59 5 59 5
Personnelxx 7 1 4+ 4 5++ 5
Educationo - - 6 4 6 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------
T O T A L S - 1 - 17 - 17
----------------------------------------------------------------------
*Includes drugs
xIncludes nurses' hostels, leprosariums and leprosy villages
+Agreements for
oHealth and/or medical
xxIncludes doctors, nurses, therapists, radiologists, midwives
++Total number of agreements: Japanese personnel were under a
single agreement
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 43
NEW CULTURAL ACTIVITIES IN AFRICA
(1964-1968, inclusive)
JAPAN WEST GERMANY BOTH
---------------- ---------------- ---------------- ----------------
No. No. No.
ITEM Number Countries Number Countries Number Countries
---------------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Info. Media 3 3 18 6 21 8
Cinema - - 3 2 3 2
TV 1* 1 6 5 7 5
Radio 2 2 8 5 10 6
Training - - 1 1 1 1
---------------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
General Culture - - 3 3 3 3
Agreements - - 1 1 1 1
Centers - - 1 1 1 1
Other - - 1x 1 1 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
T O T A L S 3 3 21 8 24 8
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
*Color
xWest Germany helped UAR save one Nubian temple from anticipated flood
waters of the Aswam Dam.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
— 393 —
In sum, West Germany was more active than Japan in most of Africa, but both have had – as the text to which this Appendix refers claims – ample opportunity to find "lebensraum" there so that immediately-explosive issues are not, as after Versailles, likely to arise inside them. By implication, this applies to all subjugated areas. However, this approach by rivals to expansion inevitably deepens systemic contradictions and will lead to even more explosive tensions between erstwhile "victors" and "vanquished": even Africa will become crowded. This was already suggested by a May 1964 item from Rhodesia: Rootes (British) motor vehicle assembly plants there began screaming about competition from imports of fully-assembled Japanese trucks.
[— 394 —]
A P P E N D I X I I I
Western Marxist Ideological Poverty
Imperialist Parasitism
and the Western Working Class
(Alternative Approaches)
Marxists elsewhere have reached similar conclusions, though expressed in a slightly different way and otherwise derived. Following is one example, quoted at length:
"While Mao Tse-tung was in the thick of his revolutionary practice in China, in short and clear sentences he gave the essence of the tasks of the Communist Parties of the capitalist-imperialist countries. In his concluding speech at the sixth plenary session of the sixth central committee of the CPC, he said:
'The seizure of power by armed force, the settlement of the issue by war, is the central task and the highest form of revolution. This Marxist-Leninist principle of revolution holds good universally for China and for all other countries.
'But while the principle remains the same, its application on the part of the proletariat finds expression in various ways according to varying conditions. Internally, capitalist countries practise bourgeois democracy (not feudalism) when they are not fascist nor at war; in their external relations, they are not oppressed by, but themselves oppress other nations. Because of these characteristics ... In these countries, the question is one of long legal struggle ... and the form of struggle bloodless (non-military) ... the Communist Parties in the capitalist countries oppose the imperialist wars waged by their own countries; if such wars occur, the policy of these countries is to bring about the defeat of the reactionary governments of their own countries. The one war they want to fight is the civil war for which they are preparing. But this ... should not be launched until the bourgeoisie becomes really helpless, until the majority of the proletariat are determined to rise in arms and fight, and until the rural masses are giving willing help to the proletariat. And when the time comes to launch such an insurrection and war, the first step will be to seize the cities, and then advance into the countryside, and not the other way about.'
— 395 —
"these words, which denote an unbreakable adherence to and further development of Lenin's line, were spoken in 1938 – at a time when for several years already the European communist parties had been following quite another political line, a line diametrically opposed to that of Lenin and Mao Tse-tung...
"... Instead of Mao's clear words about educating the workers and preparing for the final overthrow of capitalism through insurrection and war, in Europe we got blabbering of Communist International from the 'famous' VII Congress in 1935 about the reaction of a 'government of the united front', which was not supposed to have taken power away from the bourgeoisie, but which – nevertheless – was supposed to dissolve the policy of the bourgeoisie and replace it with an armed workers' militia. Instead of Mao Tse-tung's long work, building up strength and educating the workers, we got the destructive proposal of Communist International concerning UNITY BETWEEN PARTIES, i.e., unity between the 'communist' and the social-democratic parties, which excludes any Marxist-Leninist education of the workers, any effective struggle against opportunism.
"Instead of Mao Tse-tung's unbreakable principle, which was put forward by him on November 5, 1938:
'In short, we must not split the united front, but neither should we allow ourselves to be bound hand and foot, and hence the slogan of "everything through the United front' should not be put forward,'
"In Europe we [got] precisely this slogan of 'everything through the people's front.' In his speech at the National Conference of the Communist Party of France, July 10 and 11, 1936, Maurice Thorez spoke in detail of the economic demands of the people's front – of million-large loans to sports activities, of workers' tourism at the Riviera, etc, and with great pathos he declared:
'We have summed up our policy in the formula, which is binding for us: "Everything for the people's front, everything through the people's front".' ('Communist International,' No. 9, 1936, Page 381. Re-translated from the German edition.)
"In clear and unequivocal terms Mao Tse-tung carries forward Lenin's principles for the attitude of communists to imperialist wars. Instead of these clear words, we in Europe got, for instance ... in one of the resolutions from the VII Comintern Congress ... the following passage:
'In the present historic stage, when on one sixth of the globe the Soviet Union is defending socialism and peace¬
— 396 —
for the whole of mankind, the most urgent interests of the workers and working people of all countries demand that the policy of the working class, the struggle for peace, the struggle against the imperialist war, before and after the outbreak of war, be conducted from the point of view of defending the Soviet Union." ('VII Congress of Communist International, abridged shorthand protocol, German edition, Moscow 1939, Page 569. Re-translated from the German.')
"It was this policy which ... made Maurice Thorez advocate 'the policy of indivisible peace based on respect for the League of Nations Pact,' and speak of the wish of the French 'communist' party for a 'peace in honor and dignity for our people.'
"It was this policy which made the U.S. 'communists' support Roosevelt, which – in spite of internment – made the British 'communists' support Churchill, and the French support de Gaulle. It was this policy, which stood in the sharpest contrast to Lenin's and Mao Tse-tung's political line, which made the 'communist' parties of Europe report as loyal defenders of bourgeois democracy.
"It was this policy which after the surrender of Hitler-Germany made the communist party of Italy hand over its armed forces to the bourgeoisie.
"This policy found its completely grotesque expression when, some years after the war, the 'communist' party of Denmark – in the so-called case of General Hjalf – asked the verdict of the bourgeois Danish Supreme Court that any talk about communists as much as dreaming of using their weapons their armed forces during the German occupation in the service of socialism – that any such talk was vicious slander.
"The new brilliant victory of the proletarian cultural revolution in china, this new and brilliant victory for Mao Tse-tung's Thought, will inevitably – on the part of ever more revolutionary communists in the capitalist-imperialist and in the revisionist countries – lead to he realization that Mao Tse-tung's proletarian revolutionary line is correct, not only in relation to the Soviet and other revisionists today, but has been correct the whole time – and that the line followed by the Communist International and, at any rate, by its European parties since 1935 was wrong!
"...This reassessment will inevitably lead to a better understanding of the world – both the capitalist and the revisionist countries included – and of the objective road of development ahead ... it will increase (the communists') knowledge of reality and thus increase their ability to change this reality."1
— 397 —
Another approach to the same problem from still a different angle is this:
"When we ask ourselves about who is the main enemy, we are really going back to the beginning, asking what the whole thing is all about. Who are the exploiters, the exploited? Who suffers, who causes the suffering and derives profit from it?
"Mao's selected works start off from this point. Who are our enemies, who are our friends? To discover this, he made an analysis of the classes in Chinese society, and suggested where each class stood in relation to the struggle in China. Mao was thinking in terms of the struggle within China – which is what, as a Marxist, he had to do. But, also as a Marxist, he didn't limit the study to what was happening in China. In 1926 he described the enemy as ALL THOSE IN LEAGUE WITH IMPERIALISM. In other words, while considering the struggle within China, he still saw Imperialism as the main enemy, and discussed all classes in terms of their relationship to imperialism. As we know, this turned out to be the right approach, and we in Britain today might do well to adopt a similar attitude.
"Mao in those days saw Imperialism as represented by the League of Nations. The League ... was a kind of thieves' kitchen, or commonwealth, of exploiters with no particular group within it clearly dominant. Today, the U.N. carries on the torch, but it's no longer a gathering of equals. Everybody knows who's boss, and if we're in any doubt, we only have to keep the score of U.N.'s interventions in world affairs. British imperialism is pretty faithfully subservient to the boss, but giving a little squeak every now and again when its own particular interests seem to be threatened.
"Looking at the world struggle in this way, we can hardly avoid identifying the main enemy as the united forces of imperialism, clearly dominated by the stars and stripes.
"But we must look, as Mao looked, at the struggle in our own country, asking ourselves how relevant to it is the fact that the main enemy, on a world scale, is imperialism, headed by U.S. imperialism.
"Admitting as we do the dominance of the U.S., we can see our homegrown brand of imperialists as not entirely independent. Britain isn't, like Saigon, in the front line, but for U.S. imperialism she is, in fact, an even more vital bastion. Wilson, like Ky, is a willing puppet. But America has the power to keep Ky a puppet. With Wilson it's like a love match, with the U.S. as the dominant partner. Wilson and Johnson need each other.
— 398 —
"Of course, there are internal contradictions; there's always trouble among thieves, and capitalism and imperialism, by the laws which govern their very nature, continually give rise to competition and conflict. But, for British imperialism, self-interest demands that it subordinate all smaller interests to U.S. imperialism which is bearing the brunt of the main struggle.
"So if, like Mao, we identify our enemy as ALL THOSE IN LEAGUE WITH IMPERIALISM (seeing imperialism as a more or less united force, headed by the U.S.), we can put our native capitalists at the top of the list. But do we stop there? In other words, how far down the social scale do we go on looking?
"Right away, we can add in those classes who traditionally BACK BRITAIN, i.e., see Britain as a unity, and accordingly range themselves behind the capitalist interests that dominate and run the entire country. And here we can lu[m]p together practically the entire bourgeoisie and petty bourgeoisie. True, three are leftists among the intellectuals and academics who, in theory, reject such a line up. But if they were to reject it in practice, this would mean that they were ready to sacrifice the relatively high standard of living they enjoy thanks to successful operation of the system of exploitation.
"And if in fact it is only to the most class-conscious sections of the proletariat that we can look for positive opposition to those in league with imperialism. But here, too, there are complications: however class-conscious a worker may be, we can hardly expect him to oppose imperialism while he believes himself to be reaping some kind of benefit from it.
"We haven't a revolutionary working class today. Not even a working class that is prepared to close its ranks against freeze and squeeze, a nakedly anti-workingclass policy. How is this to be explained? only by admitting that BACKING BRITAIN has, at the deepest level, the support, if only tacit and passive, of a great mass of the class conscious, organized workers. Consider the nature of their objections to the BACK BRITAIN movement: 'Inefficient management.' If management would pull its socks up, we could all pull together.
"By taking this attitude, they give the lie to us, who try to tell them that they have no common interests with the exploiters. Wouldn't it be rather arrogant of us if we were to deny the possibility that they may be, in some sense, correct?
"When we consider the massive extent of the exploitation of the colonies and neo-colonies, the fantastic advantage in the living standards of the very poorest classes in the country, as compared¬
— 399 —
with the mass of the populations of Asia, Africa and Latin America, it would seem at least feasible that our working class in general is drawing some temporary benefit from colonial and neo-colonial exploitation. If, say, in a socialits country like China, the population in the towns eat better than those in the countryside, is it absurd to draw an analogy here with the exploitation of the world's 'countryside', to use Lin Piao's metaphor, by the world's cities."2
These are clear, straightforward statements of what happened or what exists. But, as we have said, it is easier to see that now, with the weight of nearly thirty-five years' events to emphasize it, and of Mao Tse-tung's brilliant record to illumine the past.
[— 400 —]
A P P E N D I X I V
Why Was Patrice Lumumba Assassinated?
(The Belgian Background)
"Between 1950 and 1961 Belgium was torn by several domestic crises – the dynastic issue, the problem of aid to education, and the austerity program of the Christian Social Party following the independence of the Congo."1
A number of events led to the climax over the austerity program, which events included the formation of "social and cultural" associations in the Congo by "working and lower middle classes" there (the establishment of political organizations having been forbidden from 1958).
The agitation for independence began. It succeeded: In January 1960, Belgium "granted" independence to the Congo, but under conditions of a previous colonial policy which resulted in a total lack of Congolese personnel to run the existing administrative and governmental machinery.
By June 1960, the Congo had no functioning central government; a state of "chaos" prevailed. Congolese troops "rioted" against their Belgian officers; some Belgian settlers were killed; still others fled. Belgian control existed only in Katanga.
Against this background:
"Recent events. The loss of governmental revenues from mining in the Congo combined with the need for large programs of industrial redevelopment in Belgium itself led the government to propose a series of austerity measures aimed at strengthening the (Belgian) economy. The Socialist Party and the Socialist trade unions objected, claiming that the measures were unfair to the working classes, who were being forced to shoulder the burden of the program while the very wealthy remained relatively unaffected.
"In December 1960, the Socialists called a general strike. Violent riots swept through the streets of the larger cities. Police and strikers clashed and serious injuries were inflicted on both sides; the entire country was paralyzed. Although the strike had been organized by the Socialists and was mostly strongly supported by the French-speaking workers, it did gain support in the north¬
— 401 —
where the Christian Social Party and the Roman Catholic Church were strongest. The premier, Gaston Eyskens, warned that the strikers were a threat to the very institutions of the state; the Socialists countered by reminding the Christian Socialist government that Belgium was a union of provinces whose interests were not necessarily alike.
"The Socialist leaders proposed a change in the structure of the (existing) state, with a loose Confederation of three provinces – Flanders, the area around Brussels, and the French-speaking area – replacing the unitary state.
"Violence and destruction continued throughout most of January 1961. Finally, late in the month, the strike was suspended. General elections were held in March, and the Christian Social Party lost control of the lower house, though remaining the largest single party. The Socialists did not gain enough stren[g]th to form a government, and the King asked Theodore Lefevre, leader of the Christian Social Party, to form a coalition government."2
The date of Patrice Lumumba's murder was January 17, 1961.
Who were the Belgian parties concerned in the crisis over "Austerity"?
1. Christian Social Party: founded 1945 as a successor to old Catholic Party. Still basically a Catholic Party; strongest in the country. Based on: the nobility, large industrialists, peasants, and Catholic trade unions. The original basis was the peasants, but membership in the Catholic trade unions tended to change the balance: in 1921, there were 150,000 Catholic trade unionists; by 1956, 650,000. This Party's strength was in Flemish-speaking areas.
2. Belgian Socialist Party: Supported by the Socialist trade unions (with a Party membership of 750,000) and generally by the industrial working class. Its strength was in the big cities: Brussels, Antwerp, and Liege, and also in the French-speaking areas. Its program stressed "social welfare rather than nationalization of industry."3 Leaders of this Party (Paul-Henri Spaak and Archille van Acker) "are strongly anti-communist."4
3. Liberal Party: Supported by the middle classes in large cities. It is the smallest of the three large parties. It favors private enterprise; it is against government control of the economy; it is for social reform and social welfare measures. It has cooperated with the Socialists, but "leans more toward the Christian Social Party."5
— 402 —
4. Communist Party: small in Belgium. It "follows Moscow."6 Its greatest influence existed immediately following World War II, but since then, it has lost ground steadily.
The three large parties are agreed on Belgium's attitude toward NATO and the EEC (so-called Common Market): they're for them.7
[— 403 —]
A P P E N D I X V
The U.S. Working Class
Categories included in Table 8, Page 120, include the following:
A. THE PROLETARIAT, OR VALUE-PRODUCERS:
1. Craftsmen, Foremen, and Kindred workers: including bakers, blacksmiths; forgemen and hammermen; boilermakers; cabinetmakers and patternmakers; carpenters; foremen, not otherwise classified, in the manufacture of durable and non-durable goods, as well as in non-manufacturing industry; linemen and service men for telephone, telegraph and power; locomotive engineers; locomotive firemen; machinists and jobsetters; masons, tilesetters and stonecutters; mechanics and repairmen for airplanes, automobiles, radio and TV; other mechanics and repairmen, including loom fixers; millwrights; metal molders; painters (construction), paperhangers, and glaziers; plasterers and cement finishers; plumbers and pipe-fitters; printing craftsmen except compositors and typesetters; shoemakers and repairers, except factory; stationary engineers; structural metal workers; tinsmiths, coppersmiths and sheetmetal workers; tool and die makers and setters; other craftsmen and kindred workers.
2. Operatives and kindred workers: apprentices; assemblers; railroad brakemen and switchmen; manufacturing checkers, examiners and inspectors; metal filers, grinders and polishers; furnacement, smeltermen and pourers; laundry and dry-cleaning operatives; slaughter- and packing-house meat cutters, etc.; mine operatives and laborers not otherwise classified; painters, except construction and maintenance; power station operators; truck drivers, tractor drivers, and deliverymen; molders and flamecutters; dress-makers and seamstresses, except factory; other specific operatives and kindred workers, including those not otherwise classified in: saw and planing mills and miscellaneous wood product enterprises: furniture and fixtures; stone, clay and glass products; primary metal industries; fabricated metal industries; machinery, except electrical; electrical machinery, equipment and supplies; motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment; other transportation equipment; other durable goods; food and kindred products; yarn, thread and fabric mills; knitting and other textile mill products; apparel and other fabricated textile products; other non-durable goods; manufacturing¬
— 404 —
industries not otherwise specified; transportation, communication and other public utilities; other industries not reported.
3. Service workers: cooks.
4. Farm labourers and foremen.
5. Labourers except farm and mine: fishermen and oystermen; longshoremen and stevedores; lumbermen, raftsmen and woodchoppers; other specified labourers; labourers not otherwise classified in manufacturing durable goods, non-durable goods and unspecified manufacturing industries; non-manufacturing industries; construction, railroads, and railway express service; transportation except railroad; other industries including those not reported.
B. LABOUR-POWER SELLERS PRODUCING NO VALUES:
1. Professional, technical, and kindred workers: accountants and auditors; architects; artists and art teachers; authors, editors, and reporters; chemists; college presidents, professors, and instructors not otherwise classified; dentists working for Federal Government; designers and draftsmen; aeronautical, civil, electrical and mechanical engineers; other technical engineers; musicians and music teachers; natural scientists not otherwise classified; pharmacists; physicians and surgeons except those in private practice; social scientists; social, welfare and recreational workers; teachers of elementary and secondary schools and those not otherwise classified; medical and dental, and electrical and electronic technicians; other professional, technical and kindred workers.
2. Officials and inspectors of state and local administrations.
3. Clerical and kindred workers: bookkeepers; cashiers; mail carriers; office machine operators; other clerical and kindred workers; secretaries; stenographers; typists.
4. Sales workers: salesmen and sales clerks, not otherwise classified, in manufacturing, wholesale and retail trade in other industries including those not reported; other specified sales workers.
5. Private household workers, living in or out.
6. Service workers, except private household: auto service and parking attendants; barbers*; but drivers; charwomen; communications, utilities and sanitary services; elevator operators; firemen and fire protection workers; guards and watchmen; janitors and porters; policemen, sheriffs and marshals; taxicab drivers and chauffeurs; waiters, bartenders and counterworkers; other service workers.
* Includes hair-dresses and cosmotologists.
— 405 —
The following categories have been omitted, although cited in U.S. statistics: clergymen; self-employed dentists; physicians and surgeons in private practice; lawyers and judges; farm owners and managers; all managers, officials and proprietors except officials in state and local governments; insurance agents, brokers and underwriters; real estate agents and brokers.
All these were considered definitely non-working class.
There may be differences about certain categories included in the working class. For example, take architects or music teachers: as with physicians, many are in private practice or employ others and by rights are middle class. But in the U.S. statistical source there is no way to separate these out. In any case, their total numbers are not statistically significant; whereas the orders of magnitude for the gross classifications are accurate enough for the purposes of this analysis.
Sources: 1966 U.S. Statistical Abstract, Pages 232 - 236; Page 65; Page 218; and Page 261.
[— 406 —]
A P P E N D I X V I
FRANCE – ACCIDENT OR INEVITABILITY?
According to Workers Broadsheet Vol. 4 No. 4 Page 1:
"One year ago how many in England, or in France, though the French people, 10 million or more, would occupy their factories, railways, postal and telegraph offices, radio and television, schools and universities, for several weeks, defeat the riot police in street battle, and fail to establish workers' power – to develop a socialist classless society – only because they lacked a revolutionary party that had earned the trust of the workers and was ready and able to face up to the seizure of state power?".
Ecstatic though Workers Broadsheet may sound, it offers one among many "If only's" which have been coming out ever since the French situation died down.
"If only the French Communist Party had not been so revisionist!"
"If only existing Marxist-Leninist Parties had been bigger" or "united"!
Yes: "If only the main had not had cancer" he'd have been SO healthy!
WHY was the mass French "Communist" Party NON-revolutionary? WHY were existing self-styled M-L Parties disunited, small or inactive? WHY in France was there last May no "revolutionary party that had earned the trust of the workers and was able to face up to the seizure of state power?"
Were all these unfortunate conditions pure coincidence?
In 1916 Lenin said:
"The export of capital, one of the most essential economic bases of imperialism ... sets the seal of parasitism on the whole country that lives by exploiting the labour of several overseas countries and colonies." ("Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism." Moscow edition: Chapter VIII, "The Parasitism and Decay of Capitalism", Pages 171-172. Emphasis added.).
"The whole country", Lenin said, NOT "except for the workers"!
In the same book, Lenin named parasitism as the chief¬
* First published in "Camden Newsletter", No. 3, December 1968.
— 407 —
feature of imperialism; and said it was embodied in the export of capital. Such export aimed at super-exploiting the cheap labour-power "of several overseas countries and colonies." With the resulting influx of super-profits, the imperialists did two things: god bloody rich themselves; and began bribing a section of their "own" ("Home") working class (which Lenin dubbed "the labour aristocracy") to be good, quiet boys subsisting off "their share" of the "fruits of empire".
The trick worked. Today it enables Western workers to overlook the fact that they are exploited – even though this exploitation does not compare in intensity with that of colonial workers.
The super-exploiting process, carried out by the imperialist (or developed) countries, has taken many forms since Lenin's day. As previously illustrated, the chief form today is "unequal exchange": the entire metropolis paying far below real value for all colonially produced merchandise.
In 1916, the bribed workers in what Lenin called "usurer" nations were a minority. But imperialism was expanding. So must all its features, including parasitism.
If we tie this fact to (a) the economic demands presented by the workers of the occupied French factories; and (b) to the "composition" of the main participants, among whom industrial workers were a minority (see NEW STATESMAN, July 19, article by Mervyn Jones), it doesn't take an Einstein to figure out that the demands of the French workers last May were of a kind that could be satisfied without a proletarian revolution.
Are we "slandering" the French "proletariat"? Or did Lenin say that NO working class would make revolution as long as it could squeeze gains out of the status quo?
As long as no major people's war goes on, especially in imperialism's "hinterlands" – current focus of any REAL revolution – so long will cheap colonial raw materials offer a way to super-exploit labour power through "unequal exchange" or otherwise; and just that long will the ruling class "at home" be able to coin the wherewithal to augment "its" labour aristocracy, – i.e. its "life insurance."
In a word, under present conditions in metropoles "Marxist" parties real or self-styled, can BE only small, disunited or inactive; mass "Communist" Parties GET that way by BEING deadly revisionist. This will be so as long as imperialist parasitism is unchallenged by sufficiently broad peoples' war.
— 408 —
The facts of the French situation were FAR from any "coincidence." They constitute "the nature of the beast", and the central problem of our day!