amilcar cabral - identity and dignity in the national liberation struggle

7/16/2019 Amilcar Cabral - Identity and Dignity in the National Liberation Struggle

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/amilcar-cabral-identity-and-dignity-in-the-national-liberation-struggle 1/10

Identity and Dignity in the National Liberation StruggleAuthor(s): Amilcar CabralReviewed work(s):Source: Africa Today, Vol. 19, No. 4, Lesotho, Burundi, Guinea-Bissau (Autumn, 1972), pp. 39-47Published by: Indiana University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4185262 .

Accessed: 03/08/2012 15:05

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Indiana University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Africa Today.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=iupress

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4185262?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4185262?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=iupress



Idenitity and Dignity

in the National Liberation Struggle

Amilcar Cabral

The peoples' struggle for national liberation and independence

from imperialist rule has become a driving force of progress forhumanity. It undoubtedlyconstitutes one of the essential charac-teristics of contemporary history. An objective analysis of im-perialism reveals that, with all its strain of prejudice, of pillage, ofcrimeandofdestructionofhumanandculturalvalues, it wasnotjust anegative reality. The vast accumulation of capital in half a dozencountriesof the northernhemispherewas the result of piracy, of theconfiscation of the propertyof other peoples and of the ruthless ex-ploitationof the workof these peoples, and led to the monopolization f

colonies and to the division of the world under imperialist rule. Butimperialistcapital,constantly seeking to enlarge itself, increasedthecapacityofmanand broughtabouta totaltransformation f themeansofproduction, hankstotherapidprogressofscience andof techniquesoftechnology.Thisaccentuated the pooling of laborand broughtaboutthe concentration of population. In the colonized countries, wherecolonizationandwar blocked the historicalprocesses of developmentorchanged them radicallyin the name ofprogress,imperialist capitalimposednew types of relationshipsupon ndigenoussociety, makingit

more complex. It stirred up, fomented, poisoned, or resolved con-tradictionsand socialconflicts. It introduced, ogetherwith money anddevelopmentof internal and external markets, new elements in theeconomy.It broughtaboutthe birthpangsof newnations from peopleswho were at differentstages of historical development. It is not todefendimperialist domination o recognizethatit gave new nationstotheworld. It revealed newstages of development n human society andin spite of, or because of, the prejudice, discrimination, and crimeswhichit occasioned, t contributed o a deeperknowledgeof humanity

as an entirety,as a unityin the complex diversity of its development.

Amilcar Cabral is the president of the PAIGC (Partido Africano da Independencia da

Guinee e Cabo Verde). This address was delivered at Lincoln University on October 15,1972, when he received the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (honoris causa).

39



Imperialist rule broughtabout progressive, sometimes abrupt,confrontation between different men and different societies. Im-perialistruledemandedand still demandsknowledgeof the society itrules and of the historical reality, economic, social and cultural, inwhich it exists. This knowledgeis necessarily expressed in terms ofcomparisonwith the dominatingsubjects and with its ownhistoricalreality. Such knowledge is a necessity in imperialist rule, whichresults in the confrontation,mostly violent, between two identitiesdissimilar in their historical elements and antagonisticin their func-tions.Thesearch for such knowledgecontributed o a generalenrich-mentofhumanandsocialknowledge nspite ofthefact thatit was one-sided, subjective,andvery oftenunjust. Infact, manhas nevershownas much interestin knowingothermen and other societies as duringthe century of imperialist domination. An unprecedentedmass ofinformation,hypothesesandtheorieshas been builtup, notably n thefields of history,ethnology,ethnography,sociology and culturecon-cerning peoplesunderimperialistdomination.The concepts of race,caste, ethnicity, tribe, nation, culture, identity, dignity and manyothers have commanded ncreasing attentionfrom those who studiedmen and societies describedas primitiveor evolving. Morerecently,with the rise of liberationmovements, the needhas arisen to analyzethesesocieties inthelightof thestruggletheyarewagingand todecide

the factors which launch or hold back this struggle. In this contextculture hadspecialsignificance.Anyattempttoclarify the trueroleofcultureinthedevelopmentofanindependenceor liberationmovementcancontribute othepeoples'struggleagainst imperialistdomination.

Here we considerparticularlythe problemsof identityanddignityin the context of national liberation. The fact that independencemovements are generally marked, even in their early stage, by anupsurgeof culturalactivity has led to the view that such movements

are preceded by a cultural renaissance. Some even suggest thatculture is onemeans of unifyinga group,one weaponin the struggleforindependence.From theexperienceof ourownstruggle andthatofthe whole of Africa, we consider that there is too limited, even amistaken, idea of the vital role of culture in the developmentof theliberationmovement.This arises from a false generalizationfrom arealbutlimited phenomenonoundat a particular evel in theverticalstructure of colonizedsocieties - at the level of the elites of thecolonialdiasporaordiasporas.Thisapproach s unwareof, or ignores,

thevitalelementof theproblem, the indestructibleculturalresistanceof the masses when confronted with foreign domination. Certainlyimperialist dominationinvolves cultural oppressionand attempts,either directly or indirectly, to do away with the most importantelement of the cultureof the subject people. But the peopleare onlyabletocreate anddevelopthe liberationmovementbecausetheykeeptheirculturealive despite the continualorganizedrepression of their

40



Amilcar Cabral

culturallife, continuingto resist culturally, even when theirpoliticaland militaryresistanceis destroyed. It is culturalresistancewhichata given moment can take on new forms - political, economic,

military-

to fight foreign domination.

With certain exceptions the period of colonizationwas not longenough, at least in Africa, for there to be a significant degree ofdamage to the most importantfacets of the culture and traditionsofthe subject people. The colonial experience of Africa, genocide,racial oppression, and apartheidexcepted, shows that the only so-called positive solution which the colonial power put forward torepudiatethe subject peoples' cultural resistance was assimilation.

Butthefailuretoassimilatenative populationss the livingproof of thefalsehoodof this theoryandof the capacity of subjectpeople to resist.The maximum numberof peopleassimilatedin Guineawas .03percentof the total populationand this was after 500 years of civilizing in-fluence and a half a century of "colonialpeace." Wherethe over-whelmingmajorityof the populationare indigenouspeople, the areaoccupiedby the colonialpower and the area of cultural influence isusually restricted to coastal strips and a few limited parts in the in-terior. Outsidethe capital and other urban centers this influence is

almost nil. It onlyleaves its markat the very topof the colonialsocialpyramidwhich created colonialism itself, influencingthe indigenouspetite bourgeoisie,and a very small numberof urbanworkers. Themasses in rural areas and the larger section of the urbanpopulation,over 99 per cent of the indigenouspopulation, are untouched, oralmost untouched,by thecultureof the colonialpower. Thisis partlythe result of the obscurantistcharacter of imperialist domination.While despising and suppressing indigenous culture, it takes nointerest in promotingculture for the masses who are the pool of

manpowerfor forcedlaborand the main object of exploitation. It isalso the result of the effectiveness of the cultural resistance of thepeople, who, subjected to political domination and colonial ex-ploitation,find theirown cultureacts as a bulwark n preservingtheiridentity. Wherethe indigenoussociety has a vertical structure thisdefense of their cultural heritage is further strengthened by thecolonialpowers' nterestin protectingthe influenceof the rulingclass,their allies.

Thisargumentimplies that there is notany marked destructionofcultureor traditioneither for the masses or for the indigenousrulingclasses - traditionalchiefs, noble families, religious authorities.Repressed, persecuted, humiliated, betrayed by certain socialgroups who have compromisedwith the foreign power, culture tookrefugein the villages, in theforests, andin thespirit of the victims ofdomination. Culture survives and through the liberation struggle

41



blossomsforthagain. Thus the questionof culturalrenaissancedoesnotarise andcouldnotarise for the mass of these peoplefor theyarethe repository of the culture and the only social sector who canpreserve and built it up and make history.

Thus, inAfrica, at least, in discussingculturein thedevelopmentof the liberationmovementa distinctionmust be made between themasses whopreservetheircultureandthesocial groups, assimilatedor partiallyso, who are cut off andculturallyalienated.Even thoughthe indigenouselites who emerged during colonization still pass onsome element of the indigenousculture, yet they live materiallyandspiritually according to the foreign colonial culture. They identifythemselves increasinglywith this culture bothin social behaviorand

values. Inthecourse of twoor threegenerations, a social class arisesmade upof civil servants, peopleemployedin varied branches of theeconomy,especiallycommerce, professionalpeople,and a few urbanand agricultural landowners. This indigenous petite bourgeoisie,emerging outof foreign dominationandindispensable o thesystem ofcolonialexploitation,standsmidwaybetweenthemasses and thelocalrepresentatives of the foreign ruling class. Despite links with themasses andthetraditionalchiefs, theyaspiretoa way of life similar ifnot identical to that of the foreign minority. They try to become in-tegratedinto this minority, often at the cost of family or ethnic tiesand always at great personal cost. Yet despite apparentexceptionsthey do not succeed in overcoming the barriers thrownup by thesystem. They are prisonersof the social and culturalcontraditionsoftheir lives. They cannotescape their role as a marginalclass. Themarginalcharacterof this class both in their own countryand in thediasporasin the territoryof the colonialpoweris responsiblefor theirsocio-cultural conflicts played out according to material cir-cumstances and level of

acculturationbut always on the individuallevel, never collectively. It is within the framework of this dailydramaagainst thebackgroundof theusuallyviolentconfrontationbe-tween the mass of the people and the ruling colonial class, that afeelingofbitterness, of frustration, is bredanddevelops. Atthesametime they are becoming more conscious of a need to question theirmarginalstatus andrediscovertheiridentity. Theyturnto the peopleat theotherextreme ofthe social culturalconflict, the native masses.

Theproblemof thereturnto thesourcesseems more pressingthegreatertheisolation, as in the case of Africandiasporas established nthe colonialmetropoles. It comes as no surprisethat Pan-Africanismand Negritude - two pertinentexpressions arising mainly from theassumptionthat all Black Africanshave a cultural identity - wereproposedoutside Black Africa. More recently the Black Americansclaim to an African identity is another proof, possibly a rather

42



Amilcar Cabral

desperateone,of theneedfor a returnto thesources,althoughclearly

it is influencedby a new situation- the fact that a great majorityof

Africanpeople are now independent.

But, the returnto the sourcecannotin itself be an act of struggle

against foreign domination,colonialist or racist. And it no longer

necessarily means a returnto traditions. It is a denial by the petite

bourgeoisieofthepretendedsupremacyof thecultureof thedominantpower over that of the dominatedpeople. The return to sources is

therefore not a voluntary step but the only possible reply to the

demandof concretepressures, historicallydeterminedand enforced

by the inescapablecontradictionsbetween the colonizedsocietyand

thecolonialpower,betweenthe masses of the peopleexploitedandthe

foreignexploitativeclasses - a contradictionnthelightofwhicheach

social structureorindigenousclass must defineits position. When he

returnto the sources goes beyondthe individualand is expressed in

groupsor movements,the contradiction s transformed ntostruggle,

secret or overt,andis a preludeto thepre-independencemovementor

ofthestrugglefor liberation romtheforeignyoke.

Sothe returnto thesourcesis of nohistoricalimportanceunlessitbringsnot onlyreal involvementin the strugglefor independencebut

alsocompleteandabsolute dentificationwiththehopesof the mass of

thepeoplewhocontestnotonlythe foreignculturebutalso theforeign

dominationas a whole.Otherwise, he returnto the sources is nothing

more than an attempt to find short-termbenefits, a kind of political

opportunism.Onemust pointout that the returnto the sources, ap-

parentor real, doesnotdevelopat onetime andin the sameway in the

heartof the indigenouspetite bourgeoisie.It is a slow process,broken

up and uneven, whose development depends on the degree of ac-culturationof each individual,of the material circumstances of his

life, of the formingof his ideas andhis experiencesas a social being.

This unevenness is the basis of the split of the indigenous petit

bourgeoisclass into threegroupswhen confrontedwith the liberationmovement a minoritywhichclings to thedominantcolonialistclass

and openly opposes the movement to protect its social position, amajoritywho are hesitant and indecisive and anotherminoritywho

shareinthe buildingandleadershipoftheliberationmovement.

Butthe lattergroupwhichplaysa decisiverolein thedevelopment

of the pre-independencemovement does not truly identify with the

masses of the people, with their culture and hopes, except through

struggle; the scale of this identificationdependinguponthe kind or

methodsof struggle, on the ideologicalbasis of the movementand on

43



the level of moral and political awareness of each individual. Iden-tification of a section of the indigenouspetite bourgeoisie with themass of the people has an essential prerequisite, that in the face ofdestructiveaction by imperialist dominationthe masses retain theiridentityseparate and distinct from that of the colonial power. It isworthwhile,therefore,to decide in what circumstancesthis retentionis possible, why, when,and at what levels of the dominatedsociety israised the problem of the loss of identity and in consequence itbecomes necessary to assert or to reassert, in the frameworkof thepre-independencemovement, a separate role and distinct identityfrom that of the colonial power.

Theidentityof an individualor of a particulargroupof peopleis abio-sociologicalfactor outside the will of that individual or

group,meaningfulonlywhenexpressed in relation with other individualsorothergroups. Thedialectical characterof identitylies in the fact thatit identifies and distinguishes. Identity is not a constant preciselybecause the biologicaland sociological factors which define it are inconstantchange. Identityis always arbitraryandcircumstantial,fordefining it demands a selecting out more or less strictly of thebiologicaland sociologicalcharacteristics of the being in question.Inthedefinitionof identitythesociologicalfactorsare moredetermining

thanthe biologicalones. Clearlythe identityof which one must takeaccount at a given moment in the growth of a being, individualorcollective, is the actual identity and oneness of that being. If it isreached only on the basis of his original biological identity it is in-complete,partial,andfalse, for it leaves out the decisive influenceofsocial conditionsonthecontent and form of identity.In the formationof individualor collective identitythe social condition s an objectiveagent arisingfromtheeconomic,political,social and culturalaspectswhich are characteristic of the growth and history of the society in

question.If one argues that the economic aspect is fundamental,onecan assert that identityis an expressionof an economicreality. Thisreality, whatever the geographical context andthe past developmentofthesociety, is definedbythelevel ofproductive orces, thatis tosay,the relationship between man and nature, and by the means ofproduction,that is to say, the relationship between man and theclasses within this society.

But, if one accepts that culture is a dynamic synthesis of the

material and spiritual condition of the society and expresses arelationshipbothbetweenman and nature,and betweenthe differentclasses withinsociety, one can assert that identity is at an individualandcollective level andbeyondthe economicconditionthe expressionof a culture. This is why to recognizethe identity of an individualorgroup s above all toplace thatindividualorgroup n theframeworkofa culture.

44



Amilcar Cabral

The main propof culture n any society is the social structure.Onecan thereforeconcludethat the possibilityof a given group keepingorlosing its identity in the face of foreign domination depends on the

extent of the destructionof its social structureand of the stress of thatdomination.Onemust look here at classic colonialism against whichthe pre-independencemovement is contending.Whatever he stage ofhistorical developmentof the dominatedsociety, the social structurecan be subjectedto the followingexperiences. First, total destructionmixed with immediateor gradual liquidationof the indigenouspeopleand the replacementby a foreign people.Second, partial destructionwith thesettlingofa moreor less numerous oreign population. Third,ostensible preservation brought about by the restriction of the in-

digenous people in geographical areas or special reserves and themassive influx of a foreign population.The fundamentallyhorizontalcharacter of the Africansocial structuredueto theprofusionof ethnicgroups means that cultural resistance and the degree of retentionofidentity are not uniform.So, even where ethnic groupshave broadlysucceededin keepingtheir identitywe observe that the most resistantgroups are those whichhave had the most violent battles with colonialpower during the periodof effective occupationor those who becauseof their geographical ocation have had least contact with the foreign

presence.

Onemustpointout that the attitude of the colonialpowertowardsthe ethnic groupscreates an absolute contradiction.On one hand itmustdivideorkeepdivisions n orderto rule and for that reasonfavorsseparation f not conflict between ethnicgroups.On the other hand,totry andkeepthepermanencyof its domination t needs to destroythesocial structure,cultureand, by implication,identityof these groups.

Moreover, t must protectthe rulingclass of thosegroupswhich,likefor exampletheFulainourcountry,havegivendecisive support o theimperialist powerduringcolonialconquest,a policywhich favors thepreservationof the identity of these groups.

There are not usually important changes in respect of cultureinthe upright shape of the indigenous social pyramid or pyramids,groupsor societies in a state. Each level or class keeps its identitylinked with that of the group but separate from that of other social

classes. Conversely, n the centers where the cultural influence of thecolonial power is felt, the problem of identity is more complicated.While he bottomand thetopof the social pyramid,that is, the mass ofthe workingclass andthe foreign dominantclass keep their identities,the middle level of this pyramid, that is to say the indigenous petitebourgeoisie, culturally uprooted, alienated, or more or lessassimilated, engage in a sociological battle in search of its identity.

45



When, at the initiative of a minority of the indigenous petitebourgeoisieallied with the indigenousmasses the pre-independencemovement is launched,the masses have no need to assert or reasserttheir identity whichthey have never confusednor would have knownhow toconfuse withthatof the colonialpower.This needis felt onlyby

theindigenouspetitebourgeoisiewhich findsitself obligedto takeupaposition in the struggle.

However, the reassertion of identity distinct from that of thecolonial power, is not achieved by the whole petite bourgeoisie. It isonly a minority who do this. Anotherminority asserts, often in aviolent manner, the identity of the foreign dominant class while thesilent majority is trapped n indecision.Moreover,even whenthereis

a reassertion of an identitydistinct from that of the colonialpower,thereforethe same as that of the masses, it does not showitself in thesame way everywhere. Onepart of the middleclass minorityengagedin the pre-independencemovement uses the foreign culturalnorms,calling onliteratureand art to express discoveryof its identityratherthan to draw on the theme of the hopes and sufferings of the masses.Andprecisely because they use the language and the speech of thecolonialpower thisminorityonlyoccasionallymanage to influencethemasses, generally illiterate and familiar with other forms of artistic

expression. This does not, however, remove the value of the con-tribution made by this petit bourgeois minority for it can at thesame time influence a sector of the uprootedand an importantsectorof public opinionin the colonial metropolis,notably the class of in-tellectuals. The otherpart of the lower middleclass which from thestart joins in the pre-independencemovement finds its share in theliberation struggle and integration with the masses the bestmeans of expression of identity distinct from that of the colonialpower. Thatis why identificationwith the masses and reassertionof

identity canbe temporaryordefinitive,apparentor real, in the lightofthe daily effort and sacrifice demanded by the struggle itself - astruggle which, while being an organized political expression of acultureis also ofnecessity proofnot onlyof identity but also of dignity.

In the process of colonial dominationthe masses, whatever thecharacteristic of thesocial structureof thegrouptowhichthey belong,do not stop resisting the colonial power. In the first phase, that of

conquestcynicallycalled pacification,they resist gun in handforeignoccupation.In the secondphase, that of the goldenage of triumphantcolonialism, they offer passive resistance, almost silent but repletewith many revolts, usually individualand once in a while collective.Therevolt is particularly n the field of workand taxes, even in socialcontactswiththe representative, foreignor indigenous,of the colonialpower. In the third phase, that of the liberation struggle, it is the

46



Amilcar Cabral

masses who provide the main strength which employs political orarmed resistance to challenge and to destroy foreign domination.Sucha prolongedandvariedresistance is possible onlybecause, while

keepingtheircultureandidentity, the masses keep intact the sense oftheirindividualorcollectivedignity,despite thehorrors,humiliations,and brutalities to which they are often subjected. The assertion orreassertion by the indigenouspetite bourgeoisie of i0ontity distantfrom that of the colonial power does not and could not bi`n aboutrestorationof a sense ofdignityto thatclass alone.

In this context, the sense of dignity of the petit bourgeoisciaszdependsonthe objectivemoral and social feelingof each individualorhis subjectiveattitudetowardsthe twopoles of thecolonial conflict be-tween which he is forced to live out the daily drama of colonization.This drama is the more shattering to the extent to which the petitebourgeoisie in fulfilling its role is made to live alongside both thedominatingclass and the masses. Ononeside thepetitebourgeoisie sthevictim of frequent f notdaily humiliationby the foreignerandonthe other side it is aware of the injustice to which the masses aresubjected because of their resistance and spirit of rebellion. Hencearises theapparentparadoxof struggle and colonial domination.It isfrom within the indigenouspetite bourgeoisie, a social class whichgrows from colonialism itself, that arise the first importantstepstowardmobilizingand organizingthe masses for the struggleagainstthe colonial power. The struggle reflects the grasp of a completeidentity,generalizesand consolidatesthe sense of dignity,strengthensthe developmentof politicalconscience, andderives from the cultureorcultures ofthemasses inrevoltoneof its principalstrengths.

Inconclusion,we would ike onlyto tell you that wpaie very gladto be here withyou and thatwe are very honoredby the degree con-ferred on our people throughmyself by the University. We have agreat task todoyet. We haven't finished the liberation of ourcountry,butwe haveliberatedmore than two-thirdsof thecountry.We are nowcreatinga new life in thecountryand we are stronger than ever in thisfight. But we have to finish totally with the Portuguese colonial

presence in Guinea Bissau and Cape Verde Islands. We have thepleasure to announce that last week we finished the elections in allliberatedregions of our countryfor the creation of our first nationalpopularassembly. Maybe it is a coincidence but a very good coin-cidence that at this very moment you, our brothers and sisters ofLincolnUniversity,decidedto concede to ourpeoplethis great honorwhichwe received here in behalfof ourpeople.Thankyouvery much.

47

amilcar cabral - identity and dignity in the national liberation struggle

Documents