‘Negroes As an Oppressed National Minority’ by Joseph Prokopec from The Communist. Vol. 9 No. 3. March, 1930.

THE answer of the C.I. to this question is the affirmative. Our Party, however, is proceeding very slowly in approaching our Negro work from such an angle. As a matter of fact, our Party membership did not discuss this point yet, and when the discussion does come up in the near future, there will, undoubtedly, be much unclarity, particularly around the slogans that are to be raised in compliance with such estimation of the question. This is only to be expected, because, due to the lack of experience with national movements, our Party does not have yet a practical approach to the Leninist position on the national question in general. (While in America I found this to be true with many of our leading comrades.)

Before examining the question, let us clear up some terminology. First of all, we are accustomed to think of Negroes in America as a racial minority, but not as a special nationality. But just because they are not fully a nation, that does not prevent them being a national minority, distinguished by their race and color, and special oppression. It matters very little as to whether a minority speaks a special language. A minority must have other characteristics, more substantial, in order to fall into the Leninist category of an “oppressed national minority.” The language was not the driving force in the Irish movement; the Polish, or for instance, the movement of the Croats in Jugoslavia where they speak an identical language. It is essential that a minority in an imperialist country is (1) of sufficient number, (2) that it occupies a certain geographic territory in which it forms the majority of the population, (3) that it is subjected not only to the ordinary capitalist exploitation, but is also subjected to pre-capitalist oppression (feudal or slave remnants in agriculture), and (4) that it is discriminated and oppressed as a group of people, distinguished by race, color or religion. At the root of the national question is, therefore, the incomplete bourgeois-democratic revolution, checked by finance capital (imperialism). Leninism supports such movements, not only because they have revolutionary potentialities themselves, but because they undermine and weaken the imperialist power. If Negroes form such an oppressed group in the imperialist U.S. of America, then we must apply to them the Leninist policy to a revolutionary national minority movement.

Let us now examine briefly what are the facts about Negroes in America. The C.I. resolution gives the following characterization:

“The bulk of the Negro population (86 per cent) live in the southern states; of this number 74 per cent live in the rural districts and are dependent almost exclusively upon agriculture for a livelihood. Approximately one-half of these rural dwellers live in the so-called “Black Belt,” in which area they constitute more than 50 per cent of the entire population. The great mass of the Negro agrarian population are subject to the most ruthless exploitation and persecution of a semi-slave character. In addition to the ordinary forms of capitalist exploitation, American imperialism utilizes every possible form of slave exploitation (peonage, share-cropping, landlord supervision of crops and marketing, etc.) for the purpose of extracting super-profits. On the basis of these slave remnants, there has grown up a superstructure of social and political inequality that expresses itself in lynching, segregation, Jim Crowism, etc.”

If the total Negro population in U.S. is about twelve million, then, according to the above, there are still about only three million Negroes in the “Black Belt,” where they constitute the majority of the population, covering a consistent area of over two hundred counties. These are indisputable facts about Negroes. These facts remain true essentially in spite of the seemingly moving conditions; the migration of Negroes up North, and the industrialization of the South. ‘The finance capital of the North sees to it that the economic status of the Negroes does not change; in fact, the tendency is to worsen it.

No one, I suppose, will raise the argument that this “Black Belt” territory is not a separate state, defined by a special act of the congress of the U.S., or an isolated island somewhere on the Pacific. The fact is that the position of the Negroes is not different from that of any other national minority or colonial people. And, just like all the rest of the national and colonial revolutionary movements, are dealing blows to the imperialist powers, so can the movement of the American Negroes deal a blow to American imperialism, weaken it and thereby hasten the proletarian revolution in America. For this reason the C.I. resolution says as follows:

“To accomplish this task, the Communist Party must come out as the champion of the right of the oppressed Negro race for full emancipation. While continuing and intensifying the struggle under the slogan of full social and political equality for the Negroes, which must remain the central slogan of our Party for work among the masses, the Party must come out openly and unreservedly for the right of the Negroes to national self-determination in the southern states, where the Negroes form a majority of the population. The struggle for equal rights and the propaganda for the slogan of self-determination must be linked up with the economic demands of the Negro masses, especially those directed against the slave remnants and all forms of national and racial oppression.”

It is also clear from the above who must educate the Negroes and give a lead to their struggles. At the same time, the C.I. does not lose sight of the almost two million Negro proletariat in industry. They have a definite task to perform. The C.I. resolution says:

“The Negro working class has reached a stage of development which enables it, if properly organized and well led, to fulfill successfully its double historical mission:

(a) To play a considerable role in the class struggle against American imperialism as an important part of the American working class, and

(b) To lead the movement of the oppressed masses of the Negro population.”

Furthermore, the Negroes of America, as a whole, have a task to perform in relation to the Negro race in the other parts of the world:

“A strong Negro revolutionary movement in the U.S.A. will be able to influence and direct the revolutionary movement in all parts of the world where the Negroes are oppressed by imperialism.”

Someone may raise the objection that all that the Negroes themselves want is “equality,” and, furthermore, that they would be opposed to any idea of “separation,” because to them that means segregation. Let us, for a moment, analyze what it means to struggle for equality of a people. Essentially, it means that Negroes in America are struggling against social and political discrimination (to the point of armed resistance against lynching) and against the pre-capitalist, half-slavery oppression in the agricultural districts. This is what Negroes in America are struggling against, and these are, essentially, the forms of struggle of any national minority or colonial peoples. The only difference with Negroes in America is that their struggle, so far, was without a real content and a practical aim. Without a demand for the right of self-determination, struggle of a minority for “equality” is practically meaningless. “Equality” becomes an empty phrase. Equality in what? If we mean equality as people, then we must also mean that they have sovereignty as a people; they have the right to self-determination, as any other people. Bourgeoisie and the Social Democracy are willing to grant abstract “equality” to a minority, but when it comes to carrying this out to its logical conclusion, then they use every “democratic” means to keep these people subjected and oppressed. For this reason Lenin says:

“…Communist International cannot limit itself to mere formal verbal declaration of the recognition of the equality of nations, which does not involve any practical obligations…”

This means that if we are consistent when we recognize that Negroes are equal, we must face the obligation—we must grant them the right to self-determination. ‘The Soviet Union is the only government that holds this position in regards to its national minorities (separation of Finland) and where up to the present day each minority people enjoys that right. Slogan for the right to self-determination will put teeth into our slogan for equality of Negroes—it will, really, change our slogan from the abstract to concrete.

That Negroes in America actually form such a minority is not a recent discovery. From a hint Lenin made in 1920 in reference to Negroes in America, we can see how he looked upon them. When stating what the duty of Communists is in relation to the national revolutionary movements, he says:

“…to support the revolutionary movement among the subject nations (for instance, Ireland, American Negroes, etc.) and in the colonies.”

It is true, however, that owing to peculiar social-economic historical conditions (slavery, etc.) Negroes have not as yet a formed, organized national minority movement. They did not have the worship of national heroes of the past, and no real leaders of the present. But does that mean that they had no inkling of fighting as a revolutionary minority? No, when their struggles were sharpest during the World War, they objectively assumed the struggle of a revolutionary minority. The following quotation, written during the World War by one of the 450 Negro papers, shows that this is true:

“…have we not as much right as the Poles and Slavs to aspire to a free independent existence under which can be guaranteed and enjoyed ‘security of life,’ equal opportunities and unhampered development. And where are our leaders? Are their mouths stopped with the white man’s gold that they can do nothing but mumble out advice to be patient and await a crazily conceived, absolutely unprecedented ‘peaceful solution’…? Are they traitors or fools? Bought or untaught?”

What does this show? It shows that when a real struggle for equality develops, it cannot but assume the form of a revolutionary national minority movement. Another quotation appearing in the same paper of January 2, 1918, shows conclusively upon what geographic area this revolutionary national minority movement is to base itself:

“Can America demand Germany to give up her Poles and Austria her Slavs, while America still holds in the harshest possible bondage a nation of over ten million people, who occupy in the majority several of the Southern States…”

It was particularly because the struggle of the Negroes at that time was assuming such concrete forms that the struggle for equality of Negroes became really dangerous to the government of U.S. It was for this reason that the government tried every possible way to disorganize this crystalizing movement. A Negro was made special assistant to the Secretary of War; conferences of Negro editors were held in Washington, a captaincy promised to the then militant Du Bois, etc. Negro masses should learn a lesson from this, and we Communists, too.

Now, who is to lead such a movement and what forms will it take? The resolution also points out that “A concrete plan must also be presented to the Congress for an intensified struggle for the economic, social, political and national demands of the Negro masses.” This movement, then, will embody the demands of the oppressed Negro population. And although the Negro proletariat should have the beginning of this movement, the Negro peasantry, petty and middle bourgeoisie will be the driving force of this movement, because it is a national revolutionary movement. The ultimate task of this national revolutionary movement is bourgeois democratic revolution, and not as Pepper implies in his pamphlet “Negro Soviet Republic.” The establishment of soviet republics is the task of a proletarian movement (Communist Party) and not of a national revolutionary movement. But, of course, the task of the proletariat in this movement is to make this bourgeois democratic revolution as radical as possible, and if conditions are ripe, to turn the bourgeois democratic revolution into a proletarian revolution. This, however, is to be decided when the movement comes, in the light of the relationship of class forces of the whole country. At present, the A.N.L.C. must come out as the champion of the oppressed Negro masses. The slogan of “Right to self-determination” does not specify what form of government is to be established. The Negro people have the right to decide this. It may be a Negro republic. If we limit it to a Soviet Republic, we automatically limit the movement and transform it into a proletarian movement (Communist Party). By properly approaching the Negro masses, by educating them that they are a national minority, have rights as such, and that this is the proper way of fighting for equality, and they will fight for these demands, only with such approach can we fight the white chauvinism (white supremacy) effectively. It may mean slow, careful, and painstaking work, but, once we convince the Negro that he is equal to other peoples and as such has the right to self-determination, he will feel that he is “somebody” and will fight for his rights. The root of white chauvinism and discrimination of Negroes is not only that Negroes at one time were slaves, but that they are “nobody,” they “have no country,” etc. Once we explain to Negroes our policy, there is no danger that they will suspect that we advocate segregation, because only by having self-confidence and self-respect will the Negroes be able to fight the discrimination and segregation effectively.

Just as in the case of any national revolutionary movement, so in the case of Negroes in America, the slogan for the right to self-determination cannot be an isolated slogan of struggle. The C.I. resolution points out that the program of the A.N.L.C. should include not only the economic, social, political and national demands of the Negro masses, but “especially the agrarian demands of the Negro farmers and tenants in the South.” ‘The various existing Negro organizations (with the exception of the dying Garvey confused “back to Africa” movement), the 450 Negro papers, all of which are struggling, some more militantly than others, against the imperialist oppressor, can easily be won over and directed into an organized national revolutionary movement of the oppressed Negroes. The militancy of Negroes during the World War is pointed out above, their militancy to struggle now (resort to armed resistance against lynching, etc.) shows that such a revolutionary movement is possible. Such a national revolutionary movement will be the only real weapon for the liberation of the Negro masses, a movement that will deal a blow to American imperialism and thereby hasten the proletarian revolution.

There are a number of journals with this name in the history of the movement. This ‘Communist’ was the main theoretical journal of the Communist Party from 1927 until 1944. Its origins lie with the folding of The Liberator, Soviet Russia Pictorial, and Labor Herald together into Workers Monthly as the new unified Communist Party’s official cultural and discussion magazine in November, 1924. Workers Monthly became The Communist in March ,1927 and was also published monthly. The Communist contains the most thorough archive of the Communist Party’s positions and thinking during its run. The New Masses became the main cultural vehicle for the CP and the Communist, though it began with with more vibrancy and discussion, became increasingly an organ of Comintern and CP program. Over its run the tagline went from “A Theoretical Magazine for the Discussion of Revolutionary Problems” to “A Magazine of the Theory and Practice of Marxism-Leninism” to “A Marxist Magazine Devoted to Advancement of Democratic Thought and Action.” The aesthetic of the journal also changed dramatically over its years. Editors included Earl Browder, Alex Bittelman, Max Bedacht, and Bertram D. Wolfe.

PDF of full issue: https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/communist/v09n03-mar-1930-communist.pdf