Pan-Africanism Must Not Be Reduced to Dogma
I have responded to some of the critiques addressed at me by Horn of Africa Leftists in a prior article. I recently noticed that the same group offered yet another criticism of me. I want to respond here because I think a response would offer an opportunity to explore the issue that I have with reducing Pan-Africanism to dogma.
Dogma can be defined as “a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.” Dogma is most often associated with religion given that religions by their nature are rooted in belief and faith in ideas which cannot be objectively proven. Dogma is not only limited to religion, however. Political ideologies can become dogmatic. One of my critiques of Marxism-Leninism is that some of its adherents have become dogmatic in their views. In my book One Caribbean and Other Essays, I explored how dogmatic approaches to Marxism-Leninism contributed to the fall of Maurice Bishop’s revolutionary government in Grenada. I want to be clear that this is not a dismissal of Marxism-Leninism as an ideology, but only a critique of the dogmatic approach to Marxism-Leninism which renders it as an inflexible ideology which is unable to adapt to changing conditions.
It is clear to me that Horn of Africa Leftists’ own approach to Marxism-Leninism is rooted in a type of dogma which produces very simplistic arguments which offer more style than substance. The screenshots above were a response to a post I made about Arab imperialism in Africa. They also give an example of my point about the simplistic nature of Horn of Africa Leftists’ analysis.
It is curious to me that Horn of Africa Leftists claims that I am exploiting the images of figures like Kwame Ture and Malcolm X given that my analysis on Arab imperialism in Africa is partly rooted in Malcolm’s own support for the revolution against Arab rule in Zanzibar. In Malcolm X Speaks, Malcolm declared:
Many of you have heard of the island called Zanzibar. Zanzibar was famous for its headquarters as a slave-trading post; in fact, many of us probably passed through there on our way to America 400 years ago. And it was on this island some time last year, I think it was, that the government was overturned when the African element on the island got fed up with the situation that existed. Overnight they did what was necessary to bring about a change. So today Zanzibar is free.
I am not sure how it fundamentally contradicts the revolutionary foundations of Pan-Africanism to acknowledge that the Arab oppression of African people is real and it is connected to the historical legacy of Arab imperial conquest throughout Africa. Malcolm certainly was not the only one to recognize this problem. Chancellor Williams wrote about this in Destruction of Black Civilization. Khalid Muhammad explained that he witnessed racism in Mecca during his several trips there. Mahmoud Mohammed Taha was killed for opposing Arabization in Sudan. Jalal Dhiyab Thijeel fought against Arab racism in Iraq and was eventually assassinated. Biram Dah Abedi has spent years combatting Arab racism in Mauritania. Arab racism against African people is a real problem which cannot be brushed aside under the guise of a Leninist analysis.
As for the claim of me promoting sympathy for pro-State Department activists from Togo, one must seriously ask what has Horn of Africa Leftists actually done to assist the fight against neo-colonialism in Togo? We know that the regime in Togo has historically been supported by the US State Department, so it’s not clear to me why Horn of Africa Leftists has had more to say in criticism of me than in criticism of a regime which is actually supported by the US State Department. Is this the type of Pan-Africanism which Kwame Ture would have approved of?
My assumption is Horn of Africa Leftists has done little about the situation in Togo because it’s easier to criticize another Pan-Africanist than it is to actually build a revolutionary, anti-imperialist organization which fights against imperialist backed regimes in Africa. While Horn of Africa Leftists has been busy offering critiques of me, I was involved in the effort to discredit the Pan-African Congress which Togo attempted to host. That Congress has since been postponed in part due to such efforts.
Many of these so-called revolutionary Pan-Africanists were silent about Togo’s attempt to co-opt Pan-Africanism, but they have much to say about me because I’m an easier target. They simply are not committed enough to doing the type of work that actually needs to be done to combat neo-colonialism in Africa.
As for Lenin’s definition of imperialism, I would state that it means little to me. I certainly acknowledge that Lenin and his revolutionary ideas have served as an inspiration for many Pan-Africanists of the past. Though Kwame Ture was not a Leninist himself, he respected Lenin. Thomas Sankara implemented many Leninist theories in Burkina Faso. Even Marcus Garvey spoke highly of Lenin and the Russian Revolution.
Even so, Lenin is not someone I would cite as a primary authority on Africa’s historical struggle. To limit imperialism to “monopoly capitalism” is to ignore the impact of imperial conquests in Africa prior to capitalism. Even Horn of Africa Leftists acknowledges the “regional influence” of Arabs. Where did this regional influence come from? Horn of Africa Leftists does not say and Lenin himself certainly did not say because Africa was not his primary concern. The reality is that this regional influence is due to the legacy of Arab conquests in Africa. An example of this which I have written about is how Egypt today is known as an Arab republic, even though Egyptians were not ethnically or culturally Arab prior to the Arab conquest of Egypt. On this question I look not to Lenin, but to the various Africans who have addressed this problem and even fought against it.
Lenin’s analysis was largely concerned with capitalism in European society. Lenin wrote very little about Africa’s condition. For this reason I would argue that Lenin should not be regarded as a primary point of reference for Africa’s struggles. I am not implying that Lenin’s analysis is of no value for Africa, but simply that I would start my analysis with the work of someone who was seriously concerned with Africa’s conditions. Furthermore, that Arab imperialism does not align with Lenin’s theories is no comfort for Africans who have had to struggle against Arab racism. Being able to quote Lenin’s theory looks nice, but it actually means little to Africans who are struggling against the very issue which Horn of African Leftists seeks to downplay.
It is true that Arab nations have been subjected to Western imperialism. It’s also true that the Arab enslavement of African people predates the European slave trade. James Sweet’s article “The Iberian Roots of American Racist Thought” is one that I reference often to show that anti-Black racism existed in the Arab world before it became dominant in Western society. That Arab nations have also been colonized by Western imperialism does not negate the reality of Arab racism against African people.
This is why I cite Malcolm because Malcolm’s analysis was not rooted in one-dimensional dogma. He could support a revolutionary struggle against Arab rule in Zanzibar, while also seeking to build connections with anti-colonial Arab leaders. He saw no contradiction in this. Likewise, Marcus Garvey saw no contradiction between his ancestors being owned by Irish slave owners in Jamaica and his support for the Irish struggle against British colonialism. Those who only see the world through the lens of simplistic dogma may view this as a contradiction, but it really is not.
Pan-Africanism cannot be reduced the type of dogmatic thinking which Horn of Africa Leftists often displays in their responses to me. More importantly is the fact that Pan-Africanism cannot be reduced to critical analysis which is removed from actual anti-colonial work. Lenin was not simply a revolutionary theorist, but someone who implemented his ideas through an actual revolutionary process. I think Horn of Africa Leftists could make a more valuable contribution if they decided to engage in the process as well. If Horn of Africa Leftists has a better approach to combatting neo-colonialism in Togo, I would be among the first to gladly welcome it. In the meanwhile, my “liberal positions” will continue to have an outsized impact on the anti-colonial struggle in Africa because I, like Malcolm and the others who influenced me, believe that Pan-Africanism is about the work that we do for our people, not about offering empty dogma.
