Posted December 9, 2013
​
     In the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen of 1789, the French Revolution proclaimed the freedom and equality of all.  The bourgeoisie interpreted the declaration in a limited form that established a franchise limited by property and residence and that focused on economic liberty.  In contrast, the petty bourgeois Jacobins interpreted the democratic revolution as requiring a universal franchise, the protection of social and economic rights, and the subordination of property rights to the needs of society.  From 1792 to 1794, the Jacobins took control of the revolutionary process; but from 1789 to 1792 and after 1794, the revolutionary process was constrained by bourgeois interests (see “Bourgeois revolution in France, 1787-1799” 11/25/2013; “Class and the French Revolution” 11/27/2013).

      Meanwhile, on a foundation of African slave labor, the French West Indian colony of San Domingo exported sugar, cotton, indigo, and hides.  The trade generated by San Domingo was more than twice that of all of the British colonies combined, and it was the basis for the wealth of the French maritime bourgeoisie, which had led the bourgeois revolution against the Old Regime (James 1989:45, 47, 51, 57-58).  In this way, colonization and slavery provided the material foundation for the emergence of classes that would proclaim democratic values and forge a democratic revolution, establishing a situation in which the political and ideological centers of the world-system would proclaim values in contradiction with the fundamental political-economic structures that are the foundation for its development.

     This contradiction would have consequences in the colonies, and its first manifestation was immediately seen in San Domingo, where white planters, white small farmers, and mulattoes saw new possibilities established by the French Revolution.  Each acted in accordance with its interests, in conflict with each other and with the French bourgeoisie.  But the actors that would emerge as the central force were the black slaves. 

    In The Black Jacobins, a classic work written in 1938, the Trinidadian C.L.R. James describes the influence of the French Revolution on the black slaves.  He writes:  “And meanwhile, what of the black slaves?  They had heard of the revolution and had construed it in their own image: the white slaves in France had risen, and killed their masters, and were now enjoying the fruits of the earth.  It was gravely inaccurate in fact, but they had caught the spirit of the thing.  Liberty, Equality, Fraternity” (James 1989:81). 

     By the end of 1789, there were meetings in forests at night and uprisings on isolated plantations, which were bloodily repressed.  Learning that isolated actions could not succeed, they began to organize for larger actions, traveling great distances to communicate with one another.  In July 1791, a group of 12,000 slaves under the leadership of Boukman, a Voodoo High Priest, put into action a plan to burn the plantations and massacre the whites, which did not succeed in its entirety.  They divided into two large gangs, one under the leadership of Biassou, and the other under Jean Francois.  Both leaders were able to impose order and discipline, and they demonstrated a capacity to govern (James 1989:81-82, 86-89, 93-94). 

     We can thus see the interconnectedness of things.  Colonization and slavery in San Domingo functioned to promote the economic development of France and the emergence of the French bourgeoisie, which had an interest in overthrowing the nobility and the remnants of feudal society, and the resulting bourgeois democratic revolution would in turn stimulate slave rebellion in the colony.

     But the slave leaders did not have a clearly-defined political direction, and this lack was overcome by the arrival in Biassou’s band of Toussaint L’Ouverture, a charismatic leader whom we will discuss in the next post. 


References

James, C.L.R.  1989.  The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution, Second Edition, Revised.  New York: Vintage Books, Random House.


Key words: Third World, revolution, colonialism, neocolonialism, imperialism, democracy, national liberation, sovereignty, self-determination, socialism, Marxism, Leninism, Cuba, Latin America, world-system, world-economy, development, underdevelopment, colonial, neocolonial, blog Third World perspective, French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, slave rebellion, Toussaint L’Ouverture

Posted December 10, 2013

     The slave rebellions in San Domingo colony in the aftermath of the French Revolution would have exhausted themselves without concrete gains if it were not for the presence of a charismatic leader.  The German sociologist Max Weber defined a charismatic person as one who is set apart from others by virtue of exceptional powers or qualities (1947:358-59).  Such charismatic leaders have been present in all revolutionary processes that have been able to take power and to govern in accordance with the interests of the popular classes.

     At the time of the outbreak of the slave rebellion, Toussaint L’Ouverture was a 45-year-old slave with administrative experience and authority provided by his position as steward of livestock on the plantation of Bayou de Libertas.  More educated than the great mass of slaves, he had an understanding of local and international political affairs as a result of reading and conversations in the town of Le Cap, two miles from the plantation.  When the rebellion broke out, he waited to see how it would develop.  As a result of the respect with which he was held by fellow slaves, he was able to prevent the rebellious slaves from attacking the Bayou de Libertas plantation.  But after a month, determining that the rebellion was of lasting significance, he made his way toward their camps (James 1989:90-93).

      Toussaint quickly emerged as one of the leaders of the rebellious gangs, but the rebellion had reached a dead-end after four months.  He participated with the slave leaders in negotiations for the return to the plantations of the majority of the rebellious slaves in exchange for the liberty of 400 of them.  When the proposal was rejected by the colonial authorities, Toussaint arrived at the conviction of “complete liberty for all, to be attained and held by their own strength” (James 1989:107).  To this end, he began in July 1792 to train an army capable of fighting European troops.  During 1793, his revolutionary army grew in size and quality, such that by January 1794 he was in command of 4000 men, and his army controlled a cordon that ran from east to west across the colony.  In May 1794, the Jacobin French government abolished slavery in the colonies and appointed Toussaint Brigadier-General, enlisting his support in the war against Spain and England, which were seeking to take control of the colony.  In May 1796, he was named Assistant to the Governor, and early in 1797, he was appointed Commander-in-Chief and Governor.  By 1797, he was in undisputed command of the colony, and by 1798, he had the confidence of whites, blacks, and mulattoes (James 1989).

     Toussaint took seriously the idea of equality for all proclaimed by the French Revolution.  He believed that the best hope for the blacks of San Domingo was to seek protection of fundamental rights as citizens of the French Republic.  Toussaint envisioned a revolutionary government in France that, guided by Jacobin values, would provide San Domingo with the capital and administrators necessary for the economic development of the country and the education of the people.  For this reason, he did not want to sever ties with France, even after the Jacobins had lost control of the French government, and the government was secretly pursuing a plan for the restoration of slavery in the colony.  In a world in which Britain, Spain, and the United States openly sought to subdue the colony for their own imperial interests, he could see no hope for the future other than the Jacobin values of the French Revolution.  He rightly saw that a people that had become impoverished and uneducated by colonialism and slavery, and further devastated by twelve years of civil and foreign wars, could not proceed alone.  The colony needed the support of international actors committed to fundamental human values, and there were none with any hope of political power in that historic moment other than the Jacobins of the French petit bourgeoisie (James 1989).

     In addition to his military genius and exceptional political insight, he possessed exceptional personal qualities.  “It was his prodigious activity which so astonished men. . . .  The inspection of agriculture, commerce, fortifications, Municipalities, schools, even the distribution of prizes to exceptional scholars—he was tireless in performing these duties all over the country, and none knew when and where the Governor would appear. . . .  And after these lightning dashes across the country he was able to dictate hundreds of letters until far into the early morning.  He dictated to five secretaries at once. . . .  He slept but two hours every night, and for days would be satisfied with two bananas and a glass of water. . . .  From the beginning of his career to the end he charged at the head of his men whenever a supreme effort was required. . . .  In ten years he was wounded 17 times. . . .  He could make soldiers accomplish the seemingly impossible. . . No wonder he came in the end to believe in himself as the black Spartacus . . . , as predestined to achieve the emancipation of the blacks.  The labourers in their turn worshipped him as a direct servant of God. . . .  Simple in his private life, he wore splendid uniforms on state occasions. . . .  He was absolutely at home with the masses of the people and yet, at the same time . . . , the local whites were astonished at the singular courtesy and charm of his manners. . . .  He remained a man of simple and kindly feelings. . . .  He was incapable of meanness, pettiness or vindictiveness of any kind. . . .  He had his advisors, but his proclamations, laws and addresses have his own personal quality and all accounts of him and tradition agree that he left nothing to anybody, working at everything himself, consulting fiends and well-wishers, but evolving his schemes in his own secretive manner and then checking every small detail himself. . . .  For himself he expected the usual end of revolutionaries. . . . ‘I know I shall perish a victim of calumny.’  In this Roman stoicism he was, despite his Catholicism, a typical representative of the French Revolution” (James 1989:249-56)

    But he confronted dilemmas that were beyond the capacity of his powerful personality to resolve, as we will explore in subsequent posts.

 
References

James, C.L.R.  1989.  The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution, Second Edition, Revised.  New York: Vintage Books, Random House.

Weber, Max.  1947.  The Theory of Social and Economic Organization.  Translated by A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons.  Edited with an Introduction by Talcott Parsons.  New York: The Free Press, Macmillan Publishing Co.


Key words: Third World, revolution, colonialism, neocolonialism, imperialism, democracy, national liberation, sovereignty, self-determination, socialism, Marxism, Leninism, Cuba, Latin America, world-system, world-economy, development, underdevelopment, colonial, neocolonial, blog Third World perspective, French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, Toussaint L’Ouverture, charismatic leader

Posted December 11, 2013

​     Toussaint L’Ouverture was a charismatic leader lifted up by the slave revolution in the French colony of San Domingo. He formed a black revolutionary army, took power, and proceeded to govern in accordance with universal human values and the interests of his people.

     Toussaint developed a plan for economic and cultural development based on capitalist agricultural production for export, using the emancipated slaves as wage laborers.  He understood that the system of slavery had created a situation in which the slaves did not possess the capacity to administer the plantations, whereas the white plantation owners did.  He therefore permitted the white proprietors to keep their plantations, if they paid wages to the workers, rather than forcing them to work.  He confiscated the property of those proprietors who refused to comply.  He took a similar approach in relation to government bureaucracy: he appointed whites to government posts, recognizing that they possessed the education to fulfill necessary governmental functions (James 1989:155-58).

     He understood that the parceling of the plantations into small plots would limit the land to subsistence production and thus would retard the development of education, transportation, and commerce.  He therefore insisted that the plantations be maintained, and that the laborers be converted into wage-workers, receiving one-quarter of the value of what they produced, thus providing incentive for work in the salary structure.  Formerly the slaves had worked from dawn to dusk, but now the workday was from 5:00 to 5:00.  Employers were not permitted to whip workers, as had been the custom under slavery (James 1989:242). 

     Toussaint understood the need to overcome the limited cultural formation of the people, a legacy of their enslavement.  The Trinidadian C.L.R. James has written of Toussaint: “Personal industry, social morality, public education, religious toleration, free trade, civic pride, racial equality, this ex-slave strove according to his lights to lay their foundations in the new State.  In all his proclamations, laws and decrees he insisted on moral principles, the necessity for work, respect for law and order, pride in San Domingo, veneration for France.  He sought to lift the people to some understanding of the duties and responsibilities of freedom and citizenship” (James 1989:247).

      Toussaint’s development plan confronted the problem of dependency.  Among the ex-slaves, there were not sufficient numbers of persons with the education and experience necessary for the management of the plantations, for political administration, and for the education and cultural formation of the people.  These functions would have to be carried out by educated whites and white proprietors. 

     Toussaint dealt with this problem through a conciliatory policy toward whites, seeking to reassure them that the ex-slaves did not seek vengeance and that there was a place for them in the new society.  But at the same time he insisted that whites accept that a new society was indeed being forged, one which protected the rights of all, regardless of color or previous condition of servitude.

     For a brief historical moment it worked.  Under his governance, cultivation prospered.  In a year and one-half, cultivation was restored to what it had been in the flourishing days of the old colony (James 1989:247, 249). 

     Building on this beginning, Toussaint sought the institutionalization and formalization of what had been emerging in fact.  He proposed a new Constitution, which we will discuss in the next post.

 
References

James, C.L.R.  1989.  The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution, Second Edition, Revised.  New York: Vintage Books, Random House.


Key words: Third World, revolution, colonialism, neocolonialism, imperialism, democracy, national liberation, sovereignty, self-determination, socialism, Marxism, Leninism, Cuba, Latin America, world-system, world-economy, development, underdevelopment, colonial, neocolonial, blog Third World perspective, French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, Toussaint L’Ouverture, charismatic leader

Posted December 12, 2013
​
     By 1801, Toussaint L’Ouverture was officially recognized by France as governor of its San Domingo colony and had de facto control of the colony, having led successful military campaigns to expel English troops and to subdue a counterrevolutionary force that sought to establish an independent nation under exclusive mulatto control.   Toussaint had restored agricultural production to its pre-1789 level, using a strategy of capitalist agricultural production for export, with French proprietors of plantations and with emancipated slaves working as wage laborers (see “Toussaint L’Ouverture” 12/10/2013; “The problem of dependency” 12/11/2013).
 
     Toussaint sought to legitimate the revolution with legal authority through a new Constitution.  The German sociologist Max Weber distinguished three types of authority: legal, traditional, and charismatic.  Legal authority is exemplified by a President, whereas traditional authority is possessed by a King or chief.  Toussaint had charismatic authority, which is held by those with unusual or exceptional characteristics (see “Toussaint L’Ouverture” 12/10/2013).  Thus Toussaint was seeking the institutionalization of charismatic authority, a process that Weber called the routinization of charisma (Weber 1947:328-73).

      The proposed Constitution was prepared by a committee of six, composed of rich whites and mulattoes whom were appointed by Toussaint.  It fully reflects the Toussaint’s thinking.  The new Constitution abolishes slavery, and it established full equality for all, regardless of color.  It protects the property rights of the plantation owners, including those who were absent from the colony, except for those who had been engaged in activities against France.  The Constitution appoints Toussaint Governor for life, and it gives him the authority to appoint a successor.  It concentrates power in the hands of the governor, giving him the authority to appoint municipal administrators, who have the authority to nominate members of the legislative assembly.  It does not decree the independence of the colony; rather, it decrees that blacks in San Domingo are citizens of France.  It gives France no real authority over the colony; French officials are to advise the governor, but they cannot overrule his decisions.  Thus the new Constitution establishes the de facto independence of the colony.  But France has the obligation to provide capital and administrators for the economic development of the country.  Toussaint thus was proposing that the colony have dominion status, and that France set aside colonial intentions and work in cooperation with Toussaint for the economic development of the colony and the cultural formation of the people (James 1989:263-66).

     Many from the North interpret Toussaint’s proposed constitution as a bid for personal power and as a confirmation of the adage that “power corrupts” and of the belief that revolutionary processes generally lead to a new form of authoritarianism.  But such interpretations are examples of Northern narrow mindedness and cultural blindness.  The Constitution sought to give legitimacy to what was de facto emerging and to strengthen tendencies that were prerequisites for the economic and cultural development of the colony.  Toussaint faced powerful forces from above: Great Britain, the United States and Spain sought to control the colony and restore slavery.  France under Jacobin rule had signaled the kind of cooperation that Toussaint understood to be necessary, but in 1801 France was ruled by Napoleon Bonaparte, who intended to restore slavery.  At the same time, he faced opposition from below, from those who wanted: to declare independence and sever ties with France, erroneously trusting the promises of cooperation of the United States and Great Britain; to set aside the policy of conciliation toward whites and to engage in vengeful violence; and/or to break up the plantations into subsistence plots.  Toussaint was seeking legitimation in order strengthen his capacity to respond effectively to the maneuverings of the forces from above and to manage the confusions emerging from below. 

     The Constitution would have given unchecked legal authority to a person who represented the best hopes of the majority for the long term and who intended to use his authority to promote the economic and cultural development of the colony.  During the twentieth century, revolutionary processes would develop structures of popular democracy and popular participation.  But let us not judge Toussaint by the standards of today.  In the context in which Toussaint was operating, with powerful forces of opposition, with limited democratic structures everywhere in the world, and with the limited political formation and experience of the people, it was necessary to concentrate power in his hands. 

      What Toussaint proposed in 1801 was almost workable.  The crucial missing element was the failure of the Jacobin Revolution to consolidate power in France.  Toussaint correctly placed his hopes on the re-emergence of Jacobin values in France, for there was no other possibility for the development of the colony.  It did not come to be.  But let us imagine the impact on the world if it had: a developed nation of the North, whose development was made possible by colonialism and slavery, cooperating with a charismatic leader lifted up by the colonized and the enslaved, with the intention of promoting the economic and cultural development of the colony.  With a concrete example of this kind, it may have been possible for humanity to begin to construct an alternative to the neocolonial and undemocratic world-system, thus preventing the structural crisis of the world-system that today threatens the survival of humanity.  .

      Toussaint’s proposal for North-South cooperation is today more urgent than ever.  As in Toussaint’s time, the cooperation of the political centers of the world-system may well be necessary for the revolutionary transformation emerging in Latin America and the Third World to be sustained.  Perhaps in our day the global constellation of forces necessary for the definitive transformation of the world-system can be mobilized. 

 
References

James, C.L.R.  1989.  The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution, Second Edition, Revised.  New York: Vintage Books, Random House.

Weber, Max.  1947.  The Theory of Social and Economic Organization.  Translated by A.M. Henderson and Talcott Parsons.  Edited with an Introduction by Talcott Parsons.  New York: The Free Press, Macmillan Publishing Co.


Key words: Third World, revolution, colonialism, neocolonialism, imperialism, democracy, national liberation, sovereignty, self-determination, socialism, Marxism, Leninism, Cuba, Latin America, world-system, world-economy, development, underdevelopment, colonial, neocolonial, blog Third World perspective, French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, Toussaint L’Ouverture, charismatic leader, North-South cooperation

Posted December 13, 2013
​
    Toussaint sought common ground between blacks and whites and cooperation between the global North and South.  He understood that mutual cooperation could only be based on a foundation in which blacks possessed military strength, and to this end he had formed a black revolutionary army and led it in successful campaigns against French and English troops.  But having attained a position of strength, the question becomes: What should be done with the power obtained through force of arms?  Here is where Toussaint sought cooperation, and he favored a policy of conciliation rather than vengeance. 

      Toussaint’s policy of conciliation toward whites was expressed in a number of different contexts: he opposed vengeful violence, and he adopted concrete measures to protect whites; he promised full rights as French citizens to whites and mulattoes who were faithful to the Republic; after the British were expelled, he granted amnesty to white proprietors who had cooperated with the British, as long as they had not fought with the British ranks; and he invited white émigrés back to the colony, on the condition that they take an oath of fidelity (James 1989:201, 204, 215)

     For Toussaint, the conciliatory policy toward whites was strategic.  Whites were necessary as a counterweight to the mulattoes, who sought independence under their exclusive control. And they were necessary for their education and administrative skills, taking into account the limited education and political formation of the people, a legacy of slavery (James 1989:215).  C.L.R. James writes: “He knew that these owners of property . . . [were] . . . utterly without principles except in so far as these helped to preserve their plantations.  But they had the knowledge, education and experience which the colony needed if it was to be restored to prosperity. . . .  They had culture, which only a section of the Mulattoes had and none of the slaves.  Toussaint therefore treated them with the utmost forbearance, being helped by an unwarped character which abhorred the spirit of revenge and useless bloodshed of any kind.  ‘No reprisals, no reprisals’ was his constant adjuration to his officers after every campaign.  It was their plantations these whites wanted and he gave them their plantations, always ready to forget their treachery if they would work the land” (1938:156).  James further observes that Toussaint “guarded his power and the rights of the labourers by an army overwhelmingly black.  But within that wall he encouraged all to come back, Mulattoes and whites.  The policy was both wise and workable” (1938:261).

     Most blacks were not in agreement with the policy of conciliation.  James believes that the policy was correct, but that Toussaint took for granted support from the masses of blacks, and he therefore did not make a sufficient effort to explain why the policy was necessary in the long run.  Toussaint was much more oriented to convincing whites to participate in the new society and to convincing Bonaparte that he would protect the property of the plantation owners.  Toussaint’s policy of racial conciliation, combined with the maintenance of capitalist export-oriented agriculture, led to insurrection from below.  In the eyes of some, Toussaint was too moderate; they wanted to see more radical change (James 1989:262, 283-88).  This division in the black revolution damaged its prospects for success.

     But Toussaint was right.  Nationalization of the plantations would have led to white emigration and the aggressive hostility of the global powers, leaving the nation in a position of trying to develop agriculture without sufficient trained staff and without the international commerce necessary for technical support and for markets.  On the other hand, the parceling of the plantations into small subsistence plots would mean that there would be little possibility for economic and cultural development.  The formation of national and international alliances was necessary.

     Toussaint saw the Jacobin values of the French Revolution as providing a foundation for a practical alliance with France that would facilitate economic and social development.  “What revolutionary France signified was perpetually on his lips, in public statements, in his correspondence, in the spontaneous intimacy of private conversation . . . .  It was not only the framework of his mind.  No one else was so conscious of its practical necessity in the social backwardness and primitive conditions of life around him. . . .  His unrealistic attitude to the former masters, at home and abroad, spring not from any abstract humanitarianism or loyalty, but from a recognition that they alone had what San Domingo society needed” (James 1938:290).

        We would not today use the language that C.L.R. James employed, writing in 1938, when he describes blacks as lacking in culture.  We today are more sensitive to the fact that all people have culture, which is expressed in popular language, religion, and music.  But his point is valid.  The majority of emancipated slaves had little knowledge of the world beyond the plantations, of the historical and social forces that had established the plantations, of the policies that could be adopted to defend the people, and of the possibilities for human life that education could provide.   But they had the wisdom to appreciate the limitations in their understanding and to lift up Toussaint to speak on their behalf.  This humility and practical wisdom of the people is an important factor in the emergence of charismatic leaders in revolutionary processes.

 
References

James, C.L.R.  1989.  The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution, Second Edition, Revised.  New York: Vintage Books, Random House.


Key words: Third World, revolution, colonialism, neocolonialism, imperialism, democracy, national liberation, sovereignty, self-determination, socialism, Marxism, Leninism, Cuba, Latin America, world-system, world-economy, development, underdevelopment, colonial, neocolonial, blog Third World perspective, French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, Toussaint L’Ouverture, charismatic leader, North-South cooperation

Posted December 16, 2013
​
     As we have seen (“Toussaint L’Ouverture” 12/10/2013), Toussaint by 1795 had been appointed Brigadier-General of San Domingo colony, achieved on the basis of the black revolutionary army that he had formed, and he was given the charge of expelling foreign and counterrevolutionary armies that controlled the Southern province.  His influence among the people was growing, strengthening and further legitimating his charismatic authority.  “If the army was the instrument of Toussaint’s power, the masses were its foundation and his power grew with his influence over them” (James 1989:151).  “These years 1795 and 1796 marked the growth of confidence in him by the labourers in the North Province, not only as a solder, but as a man devoted to their interests, whom they could trust in all the difficulties that surrounded them, the man who was on their side in the struggle against slavery.  By his incessant activity on their behalf he gained their confidence, and among a people ignorant, starving, badgered and nervous, Toussaint’s word by 1796 was law—the only person in the North whom they could be depended upon to obey” (James 1989:153-54).

     The masses over whom Toussaint had influence had just been liberated from the degradation of slavery and now entered “a world of indiscriminate murder and violence” (James 1989:151).  During the slave rebellions of 1791, before Toussaint had joined the movement, in the desperate struggle between slaves seeking liberty and those whose economic interests mandated the preservation of slavery, there was violence and abominable cruelty on both sides, including the displaying of the heads of victims, designed to instill terror in the enemy camp (James 1989:94-96). 

     Toussaint invoked his charismatic authority to prevent terrorist violence.  For example, in 1796, upon hearing that black labourers had massacred some whites, he traveled all night to arrive on the scene.  “He calls the blacks together and gives them an address on the way they should conduct themselves.  If they have grievances, assassination is not the way to have them redressed.”  One of them protests, saying that the white owners have not given adequate provisions and have taken their animals, and anyone who protests is put into prison.  “‘The reasons you have given me seem justified,’ says Toussaint, ‘but if even you had a house full of them, you have rendered yourself wrong in the sight of God.’”   He obtains their support and their commitment to follow the rules he is laying down, and he appoints a commander over them (James 1989: 152-53).   Later, in the victorious military campaigns of 1798, when English and mulatto armies were overcome, James reports that “Toussaint’s Africans. . . , starving and half naked, marched into the towns, and such was their discipline that no single act of violence or pillage was committed” (1989:204).

     In 1801, as Bonaparte prepared an invasion of San Domingo in order to restore slavery, there was an insurrection against Toussaint, led by his nephew, Moise.  Apparently, Moise wanted the plantations broken up and distributed, at least to the officers.  And he advocated a policy of alliance with mulattoes instead of white planters.  These proposals imply the creation of an agricultural petty bourgeoisie among black officers, who would form an alliance with petty bourgeois mulattoes, with the masses of blacks receiving more limited benefits. Toussaint dealt with the insurrectionists harshly.  Moise was quickly tried and executed, and some of his followers were summarily shot (James 1989:275-79).  Moise had violated a fundamental rule of revolutionary processes: unity must be maintained, and disagreements in strategy must be contained within the context of a unified struggle.  In response to a treacherous rebellion just prior to an invasion by France, Toussaint felt justified in taking harsh action against his own people, in order to ensure unity.  Nevertheless, the killing of persons without due process is not justifiable.  On the other hand, there is evidence that Toussaint later lamented his harsh treatment of the insurrectionists.  And Toussaint’s behavior on this occasion departed from the general norm, in which he was a constant voice against terror in a generally violent context.

     Popular vengeance against those who have systematically exploited and abused with impunity is a normal tendency.  When the structures of power have been turned up-side-down, and the abused people find themselves in power and their abusers without defense, a popular fury for justice is unleashed.  When the popular demand for justice expresses itself as uncontrolled popular vengeance, it administers punishments that are excessive, and its wave submerges some who actually have committed no crime.  The revolutionary leadership has the responsibility to control the popular need for vengeance and to ensure that popular justice is satisfied in a form that respects the right of all to due process and administers reasonable punishments.

       Toussaint complied with this ethical responsibility of revolutionary leadership.  His general opposition to terror and vengeful violence was rooted in a character that abhorred useless violence and in an understanding that the cooperation of whites and the support of France were indispensable for the economic and cultural development of the nation in the long term.  He thus consistently pursued a policy of no reprisals against whites, guaranteeing the protection of lives and property of the white population of the colony, and seeking financial and administrative support from France for the development of the colony.  In his consistent opposition to terror directed against whites, Toussaint stood in sharp contrast to the Jacobins who controlled the government of France from 1792 to 1794, who capitulated to popular demands for vengeance (see “Revolutionary Terror” 12/2/2013).

 
References

James, C.L.R.  1989.  The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution, Second Edition, Revised.  New York: Vintage Books, Random House.


Key words: Third World, revolution, colonialism, neocolonialism, imperialism, democracy, national liberation, sovereignty, self-determination, socialism, Marxism, Leninism, Cuba, Latin America, world-system, world-economy, development, underdevelopment, colonial, neocolonial, blog Third World perspective, French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, Toussaint L’Ouverture, terror

Posted December 17, 2013
​
     It is widely known that the Haitian Revolution generated such devastation that the nation never recovered, and Haiti became the poorest country in the Americas.  But it is not always appreciated that it was not the black revolution led by Toussaint that caused the devastation, for as we have seen (“Toussaint L’Ouverture” 12/10/2013; “The problem of dependency” 12/11/2013), Toussaint came to power through the formation of a black revolutionary army, and cultivation had been restored to its previous level during Toussaint’s government.  However, the colony subsequently was invaded by Bonaparte, and Toussaint was removed from power.  James writes that the war unleashed by Bonaparte “would devastate San Domingo as no war had ever devastated it before, ruin [Toussaint’s] work and let loose barbarism and savagery again, this time on an unprecedented scale” (1989:262-63).

     Toussaint purchased 30,000 guns from the United States, and he armed the masses, in preparation for an anticipated large-scale invasion by Bonaparte that would seek to restore slavery.  Yet he continued to hope that Bonaparte would not invade and that he would provide support for the development of the colony.  James writes that Toussaint “worked feverishly, hoping against hope, writing to Bonaparte, begging for skilled workmen, teachers, administrators, to help him govern the colony.  Bonaparte would not answer, and Toussaint could guess why” (James 1989:262-63). 

      The invasion began in February 1802.  After four months of various battles and heavy losses on both sides, Toussaint surrendered to the French.  He was arrested and taken to France.  The French government decreed the restoration of slavery and the slave trade in the West Indian colonies.  The decree stimulated a renewed insurrection in San Domingo that was led by Toussaint’s general Dessalines.  Both sides were bent on extermination: the blacks under Dessalines, with the intention of expelling everything French from the island; and the French, with the intention of replacing the black population with new slaves that had not been imbued with the slogans of liberty and equality.  When a renewed war between France and England broke out, the French forces in San Domingo were captured by the British.  Thus the French forces failed in their mission of reestablishing control over the colony in order to restore slavery (James 1989:295-369).

     During the devastating war, Toussaint, sick and in prison, still thought of himself as a part of the French Republic, and he wrote to the French government, hoping that it will see reason.  Toussaint died in prison on April 7, 1803 (James 1989:364-65). 

     On December 31, 1803, black revolutionary leaders declared the independence of the colony, and they renamed it Haiti.  In 1804, Dessalines was crowned Emperor of Haiti.  In the first months of 1805, Dessalines ordered massacres of whites, although British and American whites, priests, skilled workers, and health officials were exempted.  The massacres resulted in international sanctions and the isolation of Haiti (James 1989:369-74).  James considers the massacre to have been a tragedy not only for the whites but also for the blacks. “Haiti suffered terribly from the resulting isolation.  Whites were banished from Haiti for generations, and the unfortunate country, ruined economically, its population lacking in social culture, had its inevitable difficulties doubled by this massacre” (1989:374). Subsequently, the plantations were broken into small subsistence plots, resulting in economic decay and political disorder (James 1989:393). For the next two centuries, there would be little possibility for the development of the impoverished nation in the context of an evolving world-system in which global powers have used all possible means to maintain the core-peripheral relation and colonial and neocolonial structures.  Today, with a new political reality being forged from below in Latin America and the Caribbean, the support that Haiti receives from Cuba, Venezuela, and the other nations of ALBA points to an alternative more just and democratic world-system.

    The principal actors in the tragedy of Haiti did what is normal: they were pursuing their interests.  The slaveholders sought to preserve and later to restore slavery; the French bourgeoisie endeavored to preserve and restore the lucrative slave trade; the slaves used armed force to attain their emancipation, and they subsequently found revenge.  Rising above the normal tendency to pursue particular interests, Toussaint was developing in practice an alternative way: armed force to eliminate the barbarity of slavery, followed by cooperation, forged on a foundation of military strength, with ex-slaveholders and those who had benefitted from slavery, for the benefit of all in the long run.  In forging this just and democratic alternative in theory and in practice, Toussaint demonstrated that he was a person of exceptional capacities of understanding and leadership, whose charismatic gifts were appreciated by the people from whom he came. 

      There is a lesson in the tragedy of Haiti: when all pursue particular interests and do not seek common ground for the good of all in the long run, everyone loses.  In the context of the structural crisis of the world-system, which has been expressing itself since the 1970s, humanity today more urgently than ever confronts the challenge of finding common ground.  As in Toussaint’s time, the key is to listen to, appreciate, and take seriously the insights of the charismatic leaders that have been lifted up by the neocolonized peoples: Fidel, Chávez, Evo Morales, and Rafael Correa.

      
References

James, C.L.R.  1989.  The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution, Second Edition, Revised.  New York: Vintage Books, Random House.


Key words: Third World, revolution, colonialism, neocolonialism, imperialism, democracy, national liberation, sovereignty, self-determination, socialism, Marxism, Leninism, Cuba, Latin America, world-system, world-economy, development, underdevelopment, colonial, neocolonial, blog Third World perspective, French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, Toussaint L’Ouverture, terror

Posted December 18, 2013

      In seven posts from December 9 through December 17, I have discussed Toussaint L’Ouverture and the black revolution in the French colony of San Domingo.  As a conclusion to this series of posts, I offer the following reflections.

     (1)  There is a fundamental contradiction in the world-system between its ideological formulation and its material foundation.  Conquest, colonial domination, and peripheralization created the economic and cultural development of the nations of Western Europe and North America, a development that established the social and cultural conditions for the modern concept of democracy, according to which all persons and nations possess equal rights.  But the concept contradicts the structures of domination that continue to provide the material foundation of the world-system.

     (2) The movements formed by the colonized in opposition to domination have appropriated the democratic values proclaimed by the core powers of the system, expanding and deepening their meaning.  In the early 1970s, there was a tendency in Black Nationalist thought to radically reject Western values and to turn to African values for a moral and intellectual foundation, and this radical rejection has been a secondary tendency in the Third World movements.  But the predominant tendency has been the appropriation of Western democratic values, transforming them to adapt to the colonial situation.  This is clearly represented in San Domingo, where the slave rebellions were stimulated by the French Revolution, and where Toussaint would develop a vision for the future development of the nation on a foundation of Jacobin democratic values.

      (3)  Revolutionary processes are characterized by the emergence of charismatic leaders, persons with exceptional capacities to understand, whose gifts are recognized by the people, thus providing the leader with a capacity to unify the various popular sectors in the struggle.  In addition to Toussaint, examples include Lenin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel, Allende, Chávez, Evo Morales, and Rafael Correa.  The charismatic leaders do not emerge in a social vacuum; they are a product of the social conditions that have made possible the development of understanding.  In cases where a revolution is unable to take power, one reason that this occurs is the fact that a charismatic leader that can unify the various popular sectors has not emerged, as a consequence of inadequately developed social conditions.  Examples of this include the Mexican Revolution and the Revolution of 1968 in the United States, revolutions that we will be discussing in future posts.

      (4)  The mobilization of armed force or armed self-defense is a necessary condition for the taking of power by the revolutionary movement.  Toussaint never would have been able to take power without the formation of a black revolutionary army.  Nor would he have been able to obtain any degree of cooperation from the government of France and from white society in the colony had it not been for the black army that he commanded.

     (5)  The legitimate use of force is distinct from indiscriminate and uncontrolled popular violence and from violence against civilians in order to terrorize and instill fear.  Unconstrained violence damages the revolutionary process in the long run.  We have seen in the cases of the revolutions in France and Haiti that there is a tremendous thirst of the people for vengeance when an oppressive regime is overthrown from below.  A similar phenomenon occurred in Latin America following the fall of military dictatorships.  But the revolutionary leaders have the responsibility to ensure that the popular thirst for justice is constrained by respect for due process.  In accordance with the possibilities of his time, Toussaint correctly took concrete measures to control popular vengeance.  There has been some tendency in the Left to excuse revolutionary terror, rightly noting that the people were provoked by previous systematic abuses.  But we must be diligent in being opposed to terrorism in all of its manifestations.  There are not good terrorists and bad terrorists.

     (6)  Toussaint’s vision of the providing by France of capital, teachers, and administrators for the future development of San Domingo was remarkably advanced for its time.  The concept of North-South cooperation, although complemented by South-South cooperation, is an important component of the movement for a just and democratic world today, as can be seen with the discourses of leaders of progressive and leftist governments in Latin America as well as the declarations of the Non-Aligned Movement.  The cooperation of all of the peoples of the earth is necessary to confront the problems that humanity confronts.

     (7)  There is a tendency among socialists, particularly academics of the North, to hold to a fixed abstract concept of what socialism ought to be, and from this perspective to criticize measures taken by revolutionary leaders, without appreciation of the requirements of the particular context.  Accordingly, some may be critical of Toussaint’s strategy of maintaining the production of raw materials for export with large-scale private ownership of plantations.  But revolutionary leaders must choose the best option available in a concrete particular situation.  For this reason, projects in various nations that have proclaimed themselves socialist have developed a variety of strategies, particularly with respect to production and forms of property.  On the basis of observation of the socialist projects as they have developed in practice, it seems to me reasonable to conclude that socialism includes a variety of economic policies and strategies, in accordance with the various economic and social conditions in which they emerge.  The most important characteristic is not what decisions are made, but who makes them, and in representation of whose interests.


Key words: Third World, revolution, colonialism, neocolonialism, imperialism, democracy, national liberation, sovereignty, self-determination, socialism, Marxism, Leninism, Cuba, Latin America, world-system, world-economy, development, underdevelopment, colonial, neocolonial, blog Third World perspective, French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, Toussaint L’Ouverture