This investigation examines how capitalist society created a system of oppression that fostered the growth of black communism. Second, this investigation aims to consider how communism impacts certain issues such as the “nationalization of culture” and the “Negro question” which are critical for understanding the oppression that created the system of black Marxism.
Through a careful consideration of what scholars have noted on these two subjects, it will be possible to elucidate how black communism has evolved as a black political movement. Further, by examining black Marxism as a political movement a more comprehensive understanding the writings produced by political activists such as W.E.B. DuBois, Amiri Baraka and Marcus Garvey will be possible. When taken collectively, black Marxism speaks volumes about the injustice and hypocrisy of a system created under the veil of democracy.
In order to begin this investigation, it is first helpful to consider a general overview of black Marxism and how it has been conceptualized and defined by scholars. Researchers examining the broad context of political movements in the US have noted that the evolution of Marxism as a response to the Leftist rule and oppression has long been a part of American political movements. According to one author, “In Western societies for the better part of the past two centuries, the active and intellectual opposition to the Left to class rule has been vitalized by the vision of a socialist order: an arrangement of human relations grounded on the shared responsibility and authority over the social means of production and reproduction” (Kelley and Robinson, 1). This author goes on to argue that the socialist order envisioned by Leftist opposition has followed the teachings of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and V.I Lenin. Although both Engels and Lenin supported a slightly different view of the socialist tradition, each grounded his works in the ideologies espoused by Karl Marx (1).
While Marxism was clearly alive and well in the US for a number of decades, scholars examining the development of black Marxism have noted that this political and social system evolved because of the problems that resulted with the institution and subsequent abolition of slavery (Dawson, 173). Specifically, Dawson reports the following: “Black Marxism has its roots in the history and culture which developed out of African Americans’ resistance first to slavery and then the decades of economic political and social subordination that followed the defeat of what DuBois called Black Reconstruction” (173). Dawson goes on to note that while the context of black Marxism has changed-in direct response to the specific social, political and economic conditions that exist at a given time period-the driving force behind black Marxism appears to be the same. According to Dawson, “…Marxism seemed to offer a vehicle for understanding the apparent inability of capitalism to incorporate economically the most disadvantaged sectors of the black community […] From this perspective, both democracy and economic advancement for working-class and middle-class whites were built on black exclusion and economic superexploitation” (174).
When the specific context of the development of black Marxism is examined in this perspective, it appears as if Marxism has provided the framework for black political and social activists to understand why the system of capitalism has not been able to provide for all groups and classes in society. However, as Dawson notes, some historians have argued that Black Marxism was started by whites and has no apparent indigenous roots in the black community (175). Clearly, this is not the case. Dawson contends that when on traces the development of black Marxism as a political movement in the US, it becomes evident that issues of race and oppression that have been inherent in the social, political and economic systems of African Americans have been fused with the ideologies of Marxism. This has created a unique political juxtaposition which has subsequently become identified as black Marxism.
The Creation of Black Marxism
When the basic origins of black Marxism are examined in this context, it becomes evident that the larger social, political and economic systems that shaped the development of African Americans in the United States clearly had an impact on the development of this political movement. With this in mind, it is now possible to consider the specific context of how capitalist society created a system of oppression that fostered the growth of black communism. By examining the specific underlying issues that promulgated the black community to adopt Marxist ideologies, it will be possible to provide a more integral understanding of how black political thought fused with the communist ideologies of a white European scholar. Understanding this process is key to understanding the larger problems faced by African Americans in modern society.
Critically reviewing what has been written about the development of black Marxism in the US, it becomes quite evident that African Americans have consistently faced a broad history of oppression that has subsequently prompted gross social, political and economic inequities for this population. In an effort to systematically review this history and understand the application of Marxist ideologies, one author makes the following observations:
In the 1800s that analysis meant that wage labor could not be free until slave labor was destroyed. In the 1930s that analysis meant that labor, Black and white, had to be organized as one in industrial unions though segregation was the law of the land. In the 1950s it meant Black-white unity in the fight to defeat segregation and the denial of the rights of citizens, civil rights, to the African-American people (Myles, “Black history…”).
This author goes on to argue that, “Class consciousness, but even more so socialist consciousness, reveals that any section of labor can be reduced to the misery and poverty routinely experienced by Black and Brown labor” (Myles, “Black history…”).
When placed in this context, it seems reasonable to argue that what has made the black Marxist movement possible has been the recognition that the fundamental position of African Americans in society has not changed since the time of slavery. Despite the application of a social, political and economic system that was developed to ensure the prosperity of all citizens, African Americans remain notably marginalized in this system. Marxism provides a clear basis for understanding why this oppression continues, even when changes are made to improve the status quo. For African Americans the social and economic inequalities that are encountered are a fundamental part of the larger system of capitalism. As such, these inequalities are difficult if not impossible for African Americans to overcome. They remain a pervasive part of social discourse and a principle reason for the failure of society to effectively improve the social and economic status of the African American community as a whole.
Even though the development of black Marxism can be traced back to the historical racial oppression that has existed in the US since the time of slavery, it is evident that the formal social institutionalization of black Marxism did not take shape until the early twentieth century. As noted by one author, the oppression that had been placed upon African Americans in the US culminated in the early 1920s, with a movement toward radicalism. Many scholars viewed this move as “…the only possible road for black liberation in a country where blacks were brutally oppressed, where the guarantees of a liberal constitution were nearly meaningless and where blacks were badly outnumbered, thus rendering any nationalistic political solution problematic” (Dawson, 177). What this effectively suggests is that the desire to improve the social, political and economic standing of the African American was not borne simply out of the scholarly development of Marxism to the black condition. Rather, radical ideologies, such as Marxism, were embraced as a direct result of the problems encountered by African Americans in their attempts to acquire the basic freedoms that had been afforded to their fellow man.
In addition to illustrating why radical political ideologies were embraced by the black community, Dawson also illustrates why nationalist movements were not possible during this time period. Even though most blacks shared a common history of development in the United States, as a group many scholars felt as if African Americans did not have the sheer size and strength to create a solid nationalist movement that could effectively improve the black condition overall. Thus, radicalism-primarily in the form of socialism-became a central vehicle for the advancement of black Americans in the early twentieth century.
Arguably, when examined in this context, it becomes clear that the application of Marxism to the larger problems faced by African Americans in the United States was not just and ideological movement. Rather, the application of Marxism was undertaken in an effort to advance the political rights of the black community. In the early twentieth century, this movement came together as a loosely knit group of radical organizations which embodied both black Marxism and black nationalism (Dawson, 181). The black Marxist ideologies which were developed in the early years of the twentieth century were expanded in the 1960s and 70s as African Americans took an active role in the Civil Rights Movement (181). What this further suggests about the development of black Marxism is that it did not become fully developed unit the 1960s and 70s. Dawson argues that in the early 1920s, the focus of political movements in the black community was toward integration with whites. This is especially true in the context of integrating white and black labor (184). It was not until the 1960s and 70s that the black Marxist movement began focusing on the issue of autonomy as it related to the larger black community.
The Communist Position on Issues such as “Nationalization of Culture”
With a rudimentary understanding of the development of the black Marxist movement elucidated, it is now possible to consider how communism attempted to address key issues facing the black community. In particular, the issues of the “Negro National Question” and the “nationalization of culture” are addressed. By examining how the communist position addressed these issues, it will be possible to further understand the development of literature and discourse when it comes to the advancement and development of the black Marxist movement in the United States.
Looking first at the issue of the Negro National Question, Dawson considers how the COMINTERN-an international communist organization-viewed this issue. Specifically, Dawson notes that the COMINTERN produced a 1928 resolution which called for self-determination on the part of African Americans (184). However, as Dawson notes, “…nowhere were African Americans characterized as an oppressed nation” (184). This juxtaposition served as the impetus to create a policy of “governmental autonomy” in the South and “equal rights” in the North. As such, in the early years of the twentieth century, the Communist Party did not recognize the need for overall autonomy for African Americans. Instead, the goal of Marxist movements was to link the greater good of the advancement of blacks as workers to the greater good to advancing all workers including whites (184).
Although the COMINTERN provided a clear line for the black community to follow when it came to social and economic development, many scholars rejected the message of the Communist Party, arguing that the definition provided by the COMINTERN served as the basis for establishing the African American tradition as one that is notably different from that experienced by whites. “…African Americans have their own identifiable, autonomous traditions of radicalism” (185). Placing this into the context of practice for those that supported this ideology. Dawson goes on to note that this paradigm “…provided an ideological space for communists to seek black liberation with allies while providing a platform for combating reformist elements in the black community” (186). Thus, in answering the Negro National Question, the Communist Party created a clear line of demarcation for the development of black Marxism.
Tracing the development of black Marxism with respect to the Negro National Question, Dawson goes on to note that as the fight for equality evolved in both the North and the South, the oppression generated by the upper class became more evident. As the face of black Marxism began to evolve under the framework established by the COMINTERN on the Negro National Question, the movement toward equality became one that was focused on “class struggle as opposed to black liberation” (191). For this reason, the specific context of the issue of the Negro National Question elucidates a movement that is reflective of both the struggles of class as well as the struggles of the black community.
Dawahare in his examination of the Negro question as examined by the Communist Party makes the observation that the specific response given to the Negro question in the 1920s had an impact on the development of black national identity until the 1960s (Dawahare, 20). As noted by this author, “Nonetheless, the black Socialists’ insistence in the early 1920s on viewing the ‘Negro question’ as a question of class shielded them from framing the oppression of blacks as a radical or national question, the latter a theoretical error that fostered a host of nationalistic myths about black identity and liberation that dominate Left thinking until the 1960s” (20). What this demonstrates is that the specific context in which communism answered the “Negro question” clearly had an impact on the development of black identity and political activism until the Civil Rights Movement.
In addition to examining the communist position on the Negro National Question, it is also pertinent to consider the communist position on the nationalization of culture. Dawahare in his examination of the literature produced by black scholars during the early twentieth century notes that the communist conception of the nationalization of culture could be seen in the writings of early twentieth century black scholars. In particular this author observes provides an overview of the Communist Party’s conceptualization of nationalism as reflected in the writings of Wright. In particular, “…blacks had a common national culture originating in a ‘plantation-feudal economy’ and subsisting in the Jim Crow political system of the South” (113). This author goes on to argue that as espoused by the Communist Party, blacks did not ask for their cultural nationalism; rather the cultural nationalism exerted on African Americans was the direct result of years of social, political and economic oppression (113). Thus, for the African American, the challenge became one of overcoming the constraints of black nationalism that confine the ability of the African American to make social gains (114).
Scholarly Works Produced In the Era of Black Marxism
Given the frameworks provided above it is now possible to consider a clearer picture of black leftist political thought illustrated by prominent black scholars. Looking first at the work produced by W.E.B. DuBois one scholar notes that Dubois’ work is characterized by a clear belief that African Americans were to blame for their social, economic and political position (McCartney, 69). According to McCartney, DuBois “tended to blame Negroes largely for their condition” placing emphasis on “more emphasis on self-help and duties than on rights” (69-70). Because DuBois so firmly believed in the issue of self-reliance as a central means for moving African Americans forward, it is not surprising to find that by the early 1900s, DuBois favored Socialist ideologies:
…By 1904 he had come to believe that economic discrimination was in a large part the cause of the race problem, and to feel sympathetic toward the Socialist Movement. Later, Du Bois viewed both African-Americans and Africans as exploited by capital, ‘and he predicted that the exploited of all races would unite and overthrow capital, their common oppressor’ (72).
Other authors examining the contributions made by DuBois to the black Marxist movement note the stand that DuBois took in the stand that DuBois took in the 1950s against the anti-communist policies that were being undertaken by the US (Bush, 46). DuBois believed that the foreign policies being pursued by the US were indicative of larger movements toward the oppression of other nations that had been well developed with respect to the African American community. As noted by Bush, DuBois, “stood up for the indivisibility of the anticolonial struggles in the Third World and the Black struggle for freedom, justice, and equality in the U.S.” (46). DuBois clearly saw both as inextricably linked to one another.
DuBois was not the only scholar to see the foreign policy of the US as directly linked to the oppression of developing nations. Considering the work of LeRoi Jones, later known as Amiri Baraka, one author notes that the works produced by this scholar brought to light the world problems associated with American imperialism and classicism that were shaping the outcomes of American foreign policy (Peniel, 4). In particular, Baraka was able to successfully ignite the minds of apolitical black bohemians toward understanding how the larger context of capitalism in the US was impacting individuals from foreign countries (4). Through this scholar’s work the true nature of American oppression, as disguised in both capitalism and democracy, were revealed. Interestingly, however, it was not until the Civil Rights Movement, that black Marxism came to focus more on the development of autonomy in the African American community than an effort of cohesion among all working class citizens.
Finally, when looking at the works of Marcus Garvey, a clear pathway for self-reliance in the black community can also be seen. As noted by one scholar, “Garvey argues that black people are responsible for their own fates in the physical world and should not ‘blame the white man for physical conditions for which we ourselves are responsible'” (McCartney, 81). While Garvey heavily believed in the need for self-reliance in the black community he further argued that many of the institutions that had been developed in an effort to improve conditions for blacks did not work toward this end. “The difference between the UNIA and the movements of this country, and probably the world, is that the UNIA seeks independence of government, while the other organizations seek to make the Negro a secondary part of existing governments” (82). Thus, it is in these ideologies that one can see the importance of creating autonomy in the larger context of the black community. Black Marxism was therefore to shift its focus in the 1960s and 70s to a means for African Americans to support their cause independently of the process of white/black cohesion.
Discussion
When examining the overall black Marxist revolution, it becomes evident that there were a host of challenges facing blacks experiencing social disenfranchisement and those that had been able to achieve some degree of social integration. As noted by one author, “Workers and Intellectuals have different life experiences, which lead them to view the world differently, while all Black people share racial and class oppression on a dual level. Therefore, Black workers as well as Black prisoners are more than likely to have different conceptual and theoretical schemes than Intellectuals” (Ahmad, “The League…”). What this effectively suggests is that the evolution of black Marxism was not just shaped by the development of social discourse in the US. It was also shaped by the larger context of black experiences overall. Unfortunately, for many blacks living in poverty, the works produced by black scholars-i.e. DuBois for example-were more reflective of an upper class mentality. This reality appears to have served as the impetus for retarding the development of the black Marxism movement from one of outright political change for African Americans to one that sought more social, economic and political integration.
Arguably, when examined in this context, it becomes evident that there were a host of issues that served as the impetus for the development of black Marxism in the early and mid-twentieth century. The system of capitalism as it existed in the US had, and continues to have, an impact on the development of racism. As noted by one author, “The racism some see as ‘endemic’ to some or all segments of white labor developed and persists because labor, to date, has been unable to create an alternative economic system and must, at best, still perceive its strategies within the parameters of capitalism” (Wilhelm, 104). While this indeed represents a real reality for both whites and blacks, the development of black Marxism was influenced by scholars examining the overall problems associated with a class and race system the encompassed the whole of African American existence in the United States. As such, the conceptualization of capitalism as a defining position for racism and racial inequality was not easily delineated.
Overall, the goal of the black community is to acquire some degree of social cohesion and political and economic stability. However, as Cornell West points out in his work the development of the African American into an intellect-with theoretically the same rights and privileges as that of white intellectuals-is an issue that remains problematic for the black community as a whole. As noted by this author:
In addition to the general anti-intellectual tenor of American society, there is a deep distrust and suspicion of black intellectuals within the black community. This distrust and suspicion stem not simply from the usual arrogant and haughty disposition of intellectuals toward ordinary folk, but, more importantly, from the widespread refusal of black intellectuals to remain, in some visible way, organically linked with African American cultural life (West, 60-1).
Thus, while black scholars are the ones that provide the rhetorical foundation for the development of ideological and political movements, the experiences and expressions of these individuals are often not taken as a clear indication of what social discourse is life for African American citizens. When placed in this context, it is easy to understand why black Marxism did not evolve as a movement for the autonomous development of the black community until the Civil Rights Movement
.
Conclusion
When the development of black Marxism is reviewed overall, it becomes evident that this process is one that was impacted by a host of internal and external issues that developed in the black community. While African Americans clearly understood the problems of racial oppression that served as the impetus for gross social inequalities, the ideologies supported by the Communist Party coupled with what black scholars noted on the development of black identity, retracted the growth of black Marxism in the early twentieth century. When it first began, the black Marxism movement is best conceptualized as a movement toward the integration of black and white labor in an effort to improve social and economic conditions for all workers.
Unfortunately, it was not until the Civil Rights Movement began to take hold in the United States that black scholars and black organizations began to conceptualize the experience of the African American as one that is indeed separate from the experiences of working class whites. This realization appears to have brought to life a movement toward the development of an autonomous and independent movement to improve the lives of African Americans. Thus, in this context, the system of racial oppression that had been established by the indoctrination of capitalism did indeed serve as the basis for the prolonged oppression of the African American community.
Bibliography
Ahmad, Muhammad. “The League of Revolutionary Black Workers.” 17 Mar 2006
http://www.historyisaweapon.org/defcon1/rbwstudy.html.
Bush, Rod. “The Civil Rights Movement and the Continuing Struggle for the Redemption of America.” Social Justice, 30,1 (2003): 42-61.
Dawahare, Anthony. Nationalism, Marxism, and African American Literature Between the Wars: A New Pandora’s Box. University Press of Mississippi, 2002.
Dawson, Michael. Black Visions: The Roots of Contemporary African-American Political Ideologies. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2001.
Kelley, Robin and Robinson, Cedric. Black Marxism: The Making of the Black Radical Tradition. University of North Carolina Press, 2000.
Myles, Dee. “Black History and Marxist Education.” 23 Feb 2002 People’s Weekly World. 17 Mar 2006
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45a/596.html.
McCartney, John T. Black Power Ideologies: An Essay in African-American Political Thought. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1992.
Peniel, Joseph E. Dashikis and Democracy: Black Studies, Student Activism, and the Black Power Movement.” The Journal of African American History. (2003): 1-17.
West, Cornel. “The Dilemma of the Black Intellectual.” Cultural Critique. 1 (1985, August): 109-124.
Willhelm, Sidney. “Can Marxism Explain America’s Racism?” Social Problems. 28.2 (1980, December): 98-112
