Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T20:59:46.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Comintern, South Africa and the Black Diaspora

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

Sheridan Johns
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In late 1927 the Communist Party of South Africa learned with surprise and shock that the Communist International (Comintern) in Moscow had drafted a radical new policy for its distant affiliate in southernmost Africa, the only communist party south of the Sahara. The new policy, focused upon the slogan, “an independent native South African republic, as a stage towards a workers' and peasants' government with full, equal rights for all races, black, colored, and white” seemed to a majority of the small multiracial membership of the South African party to be directly counter to the old policy which, after a difficult process of internal disagreements and tactical reorientation, was bringing its first significant wave of recruits and support among the black majority of the country. The slogan proposed from Moscow, quenching dreams of socialism, generated widespread opposition within the party, but an unhearing Comintern decreed in October, 1928, that the South Africans must accept the new line. The consequences of the imposition of the new slogan and the subsequent bolshevization of the party shook the Communist Party of South Africa to its roots.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , April 1975 , pp. 200 - 234
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Roux, Edward, “Chernie i Belye Profsoiuszy v Iuzhnoi Afrike,” Krasnii Internatsional Profsoiuzov (Moscow), 92, no. 9 (09, 1928)Google Scholar.

2 International Press Correspondence (Vienna), VIII, no. 78 (11 8, 1928), 1452Google Scholar.

3 For a more detailed analysis of the history of the CPSA and its predecessors during the period from 1914–1928 see Johns, Sheridan W. III “Marxism-Leninism in a Multi-Racial Environment: The Origins and Early History of the Communist Party of South Africa, 1914–1932” (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1965)Google Scholar.

4 The discussion of La Guma's meeting with Bukharin, the receipt of the “Draft Resolution on South Africa” by the CPSA, and the reaction to it within the CPSA are derived from the account in Roux, Edward, S.P. Bunting: A Political Biography (Cape Town, 1944), pp. 88–90Google Scholar. The presentation of Bukharin's arguments therein may be presumed to be reasonably accurate inasmuch as they conform with the analysis given in the subsequently published resolution of the Executive Committee of the Comintern. “The South African Question: (Resolution of the E.C.C.I.),” Communist International (London), VI, no. 2 (15 12 1928), 52–56Google Scholar. Apparently the analysis was changed little from the time that it was first broached to the South Africans.

5 Ibid., 14 October 1921.

6 “Supplementary Report of the Central Executive from 1 April to 30 November 1924,” Document Submitted to the Third Congress of the Communist Party of South Africa, Johannesburg, 20–31 December 1924, typewritten (Private Collection in South Africa), p. 4.

7 International, 30 March 1923.

8 Ibid., 13 April 1923. The full text of Harrison's statement is also published in Harrison, Wilfred H., Memoirs of a Socialist in South Africa, 1903–1947 (Cape Town, 1947), pp. 98–101Google Scholar.

9 The South African Worker, 7 January 1927; 21 January 1927; 4 March 1927.

10 Sachs, Bernard, Multitude of Dreams (Johannesburg, 1949), pp. 150–151Google Scholar.

11 “Supplementary Report of the Central Executive from 1st April to 30th November 1924,” p. 4.

12 For reports of Sachs' visit to the Soviet Union, see Forward (Johannesburg), 11 10 1935Google Scholar; The Garment Worker (Johannesburg) IV, no. 6 (11–12 1943), 8Google Scholar.

13 Such literally appears to have been the case. Bunting reported in mid- 1928 at the Sixth Congress of the Comintern: “Better communication is required. It will perhaps surprise you to know that until six months ago we have not had a letter (except for circulars) from the Communist International for five or six years” (“Address of S.P. Bunting to the Sixth Congress of the Communist International, Moscow, 23 July 1928,” typewritten [Private Collection in South Africa]). The sentences are not included in the account of the speech which appeared in International Press Correspondence, VIII, no. 44 (3 08 1928), 780Google Scholar.

14 Roux, S.P. Bunting, p. 63Google Scholar.

15 In subsequent pages the terms Negro question and Negro are used as they were in discussions at the time. Elsewhere, as appropriate, the term black is employed in line with contemporary usage. Within this rubric reference is also made in the South African context to the separate groups of Africans, coloreds, and Indians.

16 Jones, D. Ivon, Communism in South Africa (Johannesburg, 1921)Google Scholar.

17 The account of Jones' activities and the resolution which he presented are derived from the official French-language newspaper of the Third Congress, Moscou (Moscow), no. 42 (15 07 1921), 3Google Scholar. Jones reported his appearance as follows: “I was asked to speak, not so much for South Africa, but on the negro question in general, the center of which question, however, is South Africa. Most of my ‘co-orientals’ were dark or olive, and a murmur of surprise ran through the tables when they saw that the South African delegate was white! My remarks were directed to emphasising the importance of the whole question to the international movement, and to point out that in South Africa is being evolved a solution for the problem, the most aggravating form of which is found in America” (International, 16 September 1921).

18 For a discussion of the approach of the American communists to the Negro question which resulted in the presence of McKay and Huiswood at the Fourth Congress of the Communist International, see Draper, Theodore, American Communism and Soviet Russia (New York, 1960), pp. 315–328Google Scholar.

19 Steklov, J., “The Awakening of a Race,” International Press Correspondence, II, no. 120 (24 11 1922), 826Google Scholar.

20 For the action of the Fourth Congress with regard to the composition of the Negro Commission, see Bulletin of the IV Congress of the Communist International (Moscow), no. 2 (11, 1922), 1, 2Google Scholar.

21 For the speech of Huiswood, who used the name Billing, see ibid., no. 22 (2 December 1922), 17–21; International Press Correspondence, III, no. 2 (5 01 1923), 14–16Google Scholar.

22 The full text of the “Theses on the Negro Question” is found in Bulletin of the IV Congress of the Communist International, no. 27 (7 12 1922), 8–10Google Scholar. The “Theses on the Negro Question” has also been included in a collection of documents of the Communist International. Degras, Jane, ed., The Communist International 1919–1943, Documents (London, 1956), I, 398–401Google Scholar.

23 International, 19 January 1923. Bunting endorsed the action of the Fourth Congress in his report to the South Africans. He was dubious, however, about the utility of racial conferences, preferring workers of all colors to work together as workers.

24 Information about this is taken from “Circular, To the Sections of the Anglo-American-Colonial Group of the Communist International,” Circular Sent to the Communist Party of South Africa from the Secretariat, ECCI, Moscow, Ausgabe 1140, 3 June 1922 (Private Collection in South Africa).

25 For the relevant speeches of the American delegates, see Piatii Vsemirnii Kongress Kommunisticheskogo Internatsionala — Stenograficheskii Otchet (Moscow, 1925), Part I, pp. 634–637 (‘Jackson’); pp. 665–668 (Pepper); pp. 672–676 (Amter)Google Scholar.

26 Ibid., Part II, p. 9.

27 For an example of the attacks on the CPGB for its lack of “colonial policy,” see ibid., Part I, pp. 599–600.

28 For the relevant section of Lozovsky's speech, subtitled “The National and Race Question in the Trade Union Movement,” see III Kongress Krasnogo Internatsionala Profoiuzov, Otchet (Moscow, 1925), pp. 45–46Google Scholar. Possibly Lozovsky acquired some interest in the problem of blacks when Andrews was working under him in Moscow. The exact nature of Andrews' work under Lozovsky is not known. It is merely reported by Andrews' biographer that “Andrews made friendly contact with Lozovsky, head of the Profintern (Red Trade Union International), and did a considerable amount of work for him” Cope, R. K., Comrade Bill: The Life and Times of W.H. Andrews, Workers' Leader [Cape Town, n.d.], p. 289Google Scholar.

29 For the full text of the relevant section of the resolution, see III Kongress, p. 348.

30 The inattention of the Comintern to the Negro problem can be gathered from the complaint of “Jones” (the pseudonym of the American Negro Communist, Otto Hall) at the Sixth Congress of the Comintern in 1928: “At the Fourth and Fifth Congresses of the Comintern, there was some discussion on the necessity of the creation of a Western Colonial Bureau, dealing with the Negro question. It seems that as far as actual work is concerned, the Bureau has done very little, and nobody knows what became of this Bureau afterwards. We also find in the archives much dusty material on this question that has never been read by anybody” International Press Correspondence, VIII, no. 76 [30 10 1928], 1392Google Scholar. It would seem that “Jones” was referring to the Negro Commission established at the Fifth Congress of the Comintern.

31 Draper, , American Communism, p. 331Google Scholar.

32 Fort-Whitmann, Lovett, “American Negro Labor Congress,” International Press Correspondence, V, no. 67 (27 08 1925), 983Google Scholar.

33 Many years later Kadalie wrote: “While stationed in Johannesburg, about February, 1925, I received an invitation from America to attend the first Negro Labour Congress, which was held in May of that year in New York” Kadalie, Clements, My Life and the ICU: The Autobiography of a Black Trade Unionist in South Africa [London, 1970], p. 79Google Scholar. Kadalie did not cite the exact date or place of the American Negro Labor Congress, but it would seem reasonable to assume that he was referring to it.

34 For an optimistic account of the meeting of the American Negro Labor Congress, see Minor, Robert, “The First Negro Workers' Congress,” Workers' Monthly (Chicago), V (12 1925), 68–73Google Scholar. The meeting was also reported in the Daily Worker (Chicago), 26–3110 1925Google Scholar.

35 Daily Worker (Chicago), 31 10 1925Google Scholar.

36 The Workers' Weekly (London), 26 02 1926Google Scholar.

37 For full texts of the resolutions see Das Flammenzeichen vom Palais Egmont: Offizielles Protokoll des Kongresses gegen Koloniale Unterdrückung und Imperialismus, Brüssel, 10–15 Februar 1927 (Berlin, 1927), pp. 95–96Google Scholar (South Africa); pp. 128–130 (Negro Question).

38 The above account of the role of Stalin in the formulation of the new Negro program of the CPUSA was derived from Draper, , American Communism, pp. 342–345Google Scholar.

39 This information is derived from a letter from Haywood to the author, 27 July 1961. Haywood asserts that the Negro subcommission was established in 1927 within the Colonial Secretariat of the Comintern. Draper, however, suggests that the Negro subcommission was established within the Anglo American Secretariat in 1928; see Draper, , American Communism, p. 345Google Scholar. La Guma's participation was confirmed in 1928 by Bennet, A., the head of the Anglo-American Secretariat (International Press Correspondence, VIII, no. 53 [23 08 1928]) 943Google Scholar.

40 For the full text of Heller's speech see IV Kongress Profinterna, Stenograficheskii Otchet (Moscow, 1926), pp. 437–461Google Scholar. Heller's observations on South Africa were incorporated unchanged into a resolution approved by the Fourth Congress, ibid., pp. 614–615.

41 For the full text of Ford's remarks see ibid., pp. 483–485, 543. The Fourth Congress subsequently endorsed Ford's call for a conference of Negro workers, ibid., p. 693.

42 Protokotl des 5. Weltkongresses der KJI (Berlin, 1929), p. 352Google Scholar.

43 Ibid., p. 415.

44 In an early report of the Colonial Department of the CPGB more concern was shown about the problems of the Indians in South Africa than about the problems of the Africans. Great Britain, Parliamentary Papers, vol. XXIIIGoogle Scholar(Accounts and Papers, vol. VIII), Cd. 2682, 1926, “Communist Papers,” p. 98Google Scholar.

45 In 1925 the Colonial Department of the CPGB considered the sending of a representative to South Africa (ibid., p. 101). There is no evidence that any representative was ever sent. It may be, however, that one of the members of the CPGB, James Shields, who had gone to South Africa for his health in 1924, did become an informal representative of the CPGB within the ranks of the CPSA. Upon arrival in South Africa, Shields contacted the CPSA and joined it. In the difficult days of 1925 he became secretary of the CPSA in the wake of the resignations of the key white officers. From his position he contributed to communist publications in Britain and to International Press Correspondence. In 1928 he returned to Britain where he remained active in the affairs of the CPGB until his death in 1949. For a biographical sketch, see Daily Worker (London), 14 04 1949Google Scholar.

46 Roux, Edward, Time Longer Than Rope (Madison, 1966), p. ixGoogle Scholar.

47 Roux to Bunting, 29 December 1927, Private Collection in South Africa.

48 National Minority Movement (signed by Harry Pollitt) to Secretary, South African Trade Union Congress (Andrews), 6 January 1927, Private Collection in South Africa.

49 Roux to Central Executive, CPSA, 5 April 1928, Private Collection in South Africa.

50 Roux, , S.P. Bunting, p. 90Google Scholar. For Roux's extensive account of the Sixth Congress from which much of the above is derived, see especially pp. 90–100.

51 Bunting to Roux, 5 December 1928, Private Collection in South Africa. The relevant section of the letter is quoted in Roux, , S.P. Bunting, p. 101Google Scholar.

52 Roux, , S.P. Bunting, p. 91Google Scholar.

53 “Address of S.P. Bunting to the Sixth Congress of the Communist International, Moscow, 23 July 1928.” The sentences are also not included in the account of the speech which appeared in International Press Correspondence, VIII, no. 44 (3 08 1928), 780Google Scholar.

54 Roux, , S.P. Bunting, pp. 91–92Google Scholar.

55 For the published English-language texts of the speeches, see International Press Correspondence, VIII, no. 48 (11 08 1928), p. 839 (Mrs, Bunting); pp. 854–855 (Roux)Google Scholar.

56 “Address of S.P. Bunting to the Sixth Congress of the Communist International, Moscow, July 23, 1928.” The above discussion is derived from this source. A slightly abbreviated version of the speech is to be found in International Press Correspondence, VIII, no. 44 (3 08 1928), p. 780Google Scholar. See also, footnotes 13 and 53.

57 International Press Correspondence VIII, no. 44 (3 08 1928), 782 (Dunne)Google Scholar; ibid., VIII, no. 49 (13 August 1928), 872 (Bukharin); ibid., VIII, no. 53 (23 August 1928), 943 (Bennet).

58 For the published English-language text of the speech, see ibid., VIII, no. 64 (19 September 1928), 1156.

59 “Address of S.P. Bunting to the Sixth Congress of the Communist International, Moscow, August 20, 1928,” typewritten (Private Collection in South Africa). The above discussion is derived from this source. A slightly abbreviated version appears in International Press Correspondence, VIII, no. 78 (8 11 1928), 1451–1453Google Scholar.

60 For a list of the membership of the Negro subcommission, see ibid., VIII, no. 64 (19 September 1928), 1156. Roux refers to the Anglo-American Committee in which the discussions on the South African question took place (Roux, , S.P. Bunting, p. 98Google Scholar). It seems clear, however, from the other reports of the Sixth Congress that the discussion took place in the Negro subcommission. Its findings may have been ratified later by the Anglo-American Secretariat.

61 Roux, , S.P. Bunting, pp. 98–99Google Scholar; Roux to Wolton, 5 September 1928; Bunting to Roux, 11 September 1928, Private Collection in South Africa.

62 Roux to Wolton, 5 September 1928, Private Collection in South Africa. The above discussion is derived from this source.

63 Bunting to Roux, 11 September 1928, Private Collection in South Africa.

64 Pravda, 30 October 1928.

65 “The South African Question,” Communist International, VI, no. 2, 55.

66 The above analysis was derived from the full text of the resolution as published in ibid. A summary of the resolution was also published in International Press Correspondence, VIII, no. 79 (9 12 1928), 1490–1491Google Scholar. A Russian-language version of the summary appeared in Pravda, 30 October 1928.

67 International Press Correspondence, VIII, no. 81 (21 11 1928), 1528Google Scholar.

68 For a detailed analysis of the disintegration of the CPSA see Johns, , “Marxism-Leninism,” pp. 465–578Google Scholar.

69 Lerumo, A. (pseud.), Fifty Fighting Years (London, 1971), p. 65Google Scholar.

70 Africanus, Terence (pseud.), “The First International — 100 Years After,” African Communist (London), no. 18 (07–09, 1964), 88Google Scholar.

71 Ibid.

72 Ibid., p. 89. The analysis of Terence Africanus lays the bulk of the blame upon “the development of the Stalin cult in the Soviet Union,” but the evaluation of A. Lerumo makes no mention of Stalin in an analysis which specifically eschews apportionment of blame while rejecting the idea that the Comintern alone was at fault (Lerumo, , Fifty Fighting Years, pp. 72–73)Google Scholar.