In Lieu of Orthodoxy: The Socialist Theories of Nkrumah and Nyerere

Author(s): Steven Metz

Source: The Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 20, No. 3 (Sep., 1982), pp. 377-392
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/160523
Accessed: 10-09-2019 18:28 UTC

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].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Journal of Modern African Studies

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Journal of Modern Afrisan Studies, 20, 3, 1982, pp. 377-392

In Lieu of Orthodoxy: the Socialist

Theories of Nkrumah and Nyerere
by STEVEN METZ*

A QU A R T E R-C E N T U R Y after its inception, the diversity within 'African

socialism' remains astonishing. This category now includes development
strategies which range from traditional capitalism with limited sectoral
planning to collective forms of national autarky. Although it is generally
agreed that none of the forms of African socialism incorporates an
'orthodox' type of Marxism, the tremendous intellectual impact which
Marx and Lenin have had on all aspects of social, economic, and
political thought means that it is impossible to construct a theory of
socialism which is totally outside their shadows. In effect, Marxist
orthodoxy inevitably serves as a tool for the evaluation of socialist
theory.
But Marx and Lenin would have been the first to admit that the
validity of any theory of socialism depends on the historical condition
which form the context for its promulgation and application. As
C. L. R. James has written, 'Marxism is a guide to action in a specif
system of social relations which takes into account the always changin
relationship of forces in an always changing world situation.'1 Since th
contemporary post-colonial situation is so different from early twentiet
century Russia or nineteenth-century western Europe, socialism i
Africa has been driven beyond the parameters of Marxist-Lenini
orthodoxy.
It is thus imperative to understand African socialism both as a
outcome of a specific matrix of historical conditions, and as at leas
distant decendent of Marxism. There are three major tenets of t
intellectual context of African socialism which are most important fo
a full understanding of the phenomenon: (i) the ethics of pre-colonial
Africa which were based on humanistic values and often on an
egalitarian method of production and distribution; (2) the colonia
which challenged the ethics of the pre-colonial system with t
capitalism; and (3) the present, representing a stage of inco

* Doctoral Candidate, Department of Political Science, The Johns Hopkins Un

Baltimore, and Visiting Instructor, Department of Political Science, Towson State Uni
Maryland.
1 C. L. R. James, Nkrumah and the Ghana Revolution (London and Westport, I977 edn.), p. 74.

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
378 STEVEN METZ

synthesis, mixing elements of the colonial and pr

socialism is predicted on the belief that the resul
of production - the potential to fulfil human ne
from the ethics of capitalism, which are based o
exploitation. African socialism is thus an atte
perceived as the dominant ethics of pre-colo
productive power of modern capitalism.
As Mao Tse-Tung pointed out, every socia
'principal contradiction '. In the African set
contrast between the useful potential of capit
reality ofneo-colonialism which augments human
to Mao's argument, in this case the solution
inexorable logic from the contradiction. Ther
proposing the synthesis of African ethics with
there are theorists. Because of this, the category
so heterogeneous, so broad, and so diverse that it
understood by an examination of the differ
between the leading advocates. It is thus the p
compare the theories of two of the 'foundin
socialism: Kwame Nkrumah and Julius Nyere
Like a number of other African politicians,
attempted both to explain the need for a socialis
this process. Because of this their theories are bo
containing a social ontology and epistemology
action. It is often impossible to separate the two
theory and the practice - and both are interr
that one cannot be comprehended without t
understand the programmes by which Nkrumah
to implement socialism, it is first necessary to
logic which imparted coherence to their strategie
socialism as it is, or was, in Ghana and Tanzan
to isolate, analyse, and dissect the theories whic
leaders. Since the implementation of the pol
Nyerere have been well recorded,2 this art
theory underlying their politics.

1 Mao Tse-Tung, 'On Contradiction', in Selected Works of Mao

p. 33I-
2 Among the better works on this topic are Andrew Coulson, African Socialism in Practice
(Nottingham, 1979); Goran Hyden, Beyond Ujamaa in Tanzania: underdevelopment and an uncaptured
peasantry (London and Berkeley, I980); Bismarck U. Mwansasu and Cranford Pratt (eds.),
Towards Socialism in Tanzania (Toronto, 1979); James, op. cit.; and Basil Davidson, Black Star
(London, 1973).

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOCIALIST THEORIES OF NKRUMAH AND NYERERE 379

A leitmotif of the study is Marxist orthodo

which Nkrumah and Nyerere deviated from
to, the issue of orthodoxy will not be used a
rather as a currency or common language fo
two theories. Although even a perfunctory
work will show that Marxism influenced Nkrumah's work to a much
greater degree than that of Nyerere,1 the use of this criterion of distinc-
tion can help to clarify the differences between the two. The measure
of Marxist orthodoxy is, as Georg Lukacs has pointed out, the use
of a particular method and not the application of a specific historica
analysis.2
Following this point, it will become obvious that while the material
conditions faced by Nkrumah and Nyerere were similar, the historical
logics which they used differed radically. It will be argued that
Nkrumah was the 'more orthodox' of the two, not because he espoused
revolution and industrialisation while Nyerere focused on rural socialism,
but because he subjected history and political economy to an analysis
based on historical materialism. By this use of Marxist orthodoxy as a
third variable in the comparison of these two African leaders, it will be
possible both to outline the distinctions between their theories more
readily, and to place them within the larger context of the intellectual
history of political and economic phenomena.
Nkrumah and Nyerere each recognised the deep impact which
capitalism had had on their societies, and they realised that socialism
was a goal to be sought rather than an extant condition. Thus the
essence of their theories is the process of the transition to socialism. But,
as Marx and Engels noted, in order to chart a direction of change or
a method of transformation, one must begin with the 'real premises'
of social conditions.3
It is for this reason that the theories of both Nkrumah and Nyerere
1 For instance, according to Cranford Pratt, The Critical Phase in Tanzania, i945-i968: Nyerere
and the emergence of a socialist strategy (Cambridge, 1976), p. 63, classical liberalism and Fabianism
have influenced Nyerere to a greater degree than Marxism, and in his essay on 'Tanzania's
Transition to Socialism: reflections of a democratic socialist', in Mwansasu and Pratt (eds.), op.
cit., Pratt categorises Nyerere as a democratic socialist. A. Fenner Brockway, African Socialism
(Chester Springs, Pa., 1963), places Nkrumah within the category of 'African Marxists' and
Nyerere in 'African Pragmatic Socialists'. John S. Saul refers to Nyerere's 'incomprehension of
Marxism', in 'African Socialism in One Country: Tanzania', in Giovanni Arrighi and Saul, Essays
on the Political Economy of Africa (New York and London, I973), p. 237. Julius Nyerere himself
considered Marxism too much the result of specifically European events to be relevant to Africa;
see his 'Ujamaa - the Basis of African Socialism', reprinted in Ujamaa: essays on socialism (Oxford,
1968), pp. 1-12.
2 Georg Lukaics, History and Class Consciousness: studies in Marxist dialectics (Cambridge, Mass.,
197 ), p. i. Issa G. Shivji makes the same arguments in Class Struggles in Tanzania (New York and
London, 1976 edn.), p. I3.
3 Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, The German Ideology (Moscow, I976 edn.), pp. 36-7.

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
380 STEVEN METZ

concerning the transformation of post-colonia

from their evaluations of societies which mix
and capitalist systems with visions of a post-ca
three key elements of their theories of soci
standing of the sociology of African states
period of partial transformation; (2) an analysis
and methods of the transition to socialism;
socialist society.

THE CONCEPT OF SOCIETY: DIFFERING FOCI

Both Nkrumah and Nyerere believe tha

simply a form of political economy. But alth
Marx's contention that the 'real foundation
of production',l they disagree as to exactl
basic unit for the social organisation of pro
In their analyses of this issue, Nkrumah an
use of traditional African society. Both often
longing for a return to some sort of idyllic
the pressures of capitalist society. Both arg
content, the pre-colonial era was far sup
situation. But while both utilised this vision of a bucolic Africa to

generate a variation of the Weberian ideal type, the role whic

played in their theories of socialism differed.
For Nyerere the element of traditional African life which gave
theory what has been called its 'anthropocentric' bent,2 was the v
content of production based on communalism. Nyerere emphasised
in pre-colonial Africa the means of production - especially land -
owned in common.3 In such a setting, 'everybody was a worker
there was no social division of labour.4 Hence the dominant ethic was
egalitarian, whereby the social hierarchy was, as in the family, based
on wisdom, age, and experience, rather than on economic or class
differences. This idea is in accord with Marx's thinking when he
wrote:

The first form of property is tribal property... The division of labo

1 Karl Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (Moscow, I977 ed

2 James N. Karioki, Tanzania's Human Revolution (University Park, Pa., 1979),
3 Nyerere, op. cit. pp. 81-5 and o6--8. See also Julius K. Nyerere, Freedom and S
ua Ujamaa: a selectionfrom writings and speeches, i965-i967 (Oxford and Dar es Sa
I98-9.
4 Ibid. p. 4.

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOCIALIST THEORIES OF NKRUMAH AND NYERERE 38I
stage still very elementary and is confined to a furth
division of labour existing in the family.'

Because the ethical content of pre-colonial

heavily utilised by Nyerere, critics who focus
weakness of his vision of traditional society misu
type has been emphasised. Although Michael
correctly notes that the purpose of the traditio
thought is the attempted substitution of moral
in the Tanzanian economy, his argument that
model is doomed to failure because of its hist
convincing:

Whether Nyerere intended a historical purpose or not

in his mythology are a matter of no small importan
of the sort Nyerere espouses is historically inaccurat
success are considerably lessened, since it must i
corresponding to the life experiences of those to wh

But by definition, a mobilising myth need not co

life experiences' of those to whom it is being
case, these life experiences are those of coloni
partially transformed - social organisation rather
in an unadulterated form. In effect, his use of t
traditional Africa is important because it does no
experience of Tanzanians; the purposes of the my
for Nyerere are, asJohn Nellis points out, transc
not explanation.3
The key difference here - not sufficiently
Lofchie or Nellis - is between ideology-as-exp
as-transcendental-myth. Nyerere does not us
construct an explanatory ideology, but rather
transcend an unhappy present. The past is ess
Thus the image of a traditional, ethical Africa p
Nyerere as the myth of the general strike in the

Marx and Engels, op. cit. p. 38. For an elaboration of their thi
Marx, Pre-Capitalist Economic Formations (New York, 1980 edn.
evolutionary and mechanistic approach in The Origins of the Family
(New York, I978 edn.).
2 Michael F. Lofchie, 'Agrarian Socialism in the Third Wo
Comparative Politics (New York), 8, 3 April I976, pp. 488-9.
3 John R. Nellis, A Theory of Ideology: the Tanzanian exam
While extremely pessimistic about Nyerere's attempts to use the
create a unifying ideology, this is a useful explanation of the me
4 See Georges Sorel, Reflections on Violence (New York, I950),

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
382 STEVEN METZ

The use of African pre-history to generate a m

more overt in Nkrumah's theory. While Ny
interconnectedness of traditional values and the structures which

generated them, and thus attempted to modernise some aspects of

traditional method of social organisation, Nkrumah totally jett
the institutional format of traditional Africa and concentrated on the

emotive and motivational aspects of pre-colonial life. For this reaso

those who criticise Nkrumah's use of traditional images - for example,
Imanuel Geiss, when he argues that Nkrumah's theory represented
'pronounced oscillation between modern and traditional ideas1 - als
misunderstand the role of myth. But while Nkrumah sought to foster
a particular image of pre-colonial Africa which emphasised 'an attitude
towards man which can only be described, in its social manifestations,
as being socialist ,2 he also argued that 'a return to pre-colonial Africa
society is evidently not worthy of the ingenuity and efforts of ou
people '.3 Thus Nkrumah remained aware of the fact that the true valu
of traditional Africa was its ability to aid in the generation of a
motivational myth. This was expressed when we wrote that 'what
socialist thought in Africa must recapture is not the structure o
"traditional African society" but its spirit.'4
Nkrumah was aware that colonialism, and the ensuing partia
transformation of the production process, had led to a dominant
ideology or myth in Africa which was inconsistent and incomplete5 -
namely, that the continent was largely without a history, intellectuall
underdeveloped, and naturally subservient to European culture.6 Fo
Nkrumah the image of traditional African life was to be deliberatel
altered in order to form the embryo of a new ideology which woul
transcend the intellectually moribund status of post-colonial Africa. The
bases of this new ideology would be the egalitarianism, humanism, and
communalism of the pre-colonial ethical system.
But while Nyerere and Nkrumah began with a similar analysis of the
status of partially transformed African society, and witli related ideas
about the role of traditional Africa in overcoming this condition, they
differed in their assessments of the unit of the social organisation of

1 Imanuel Geiss, The Pan-African Movement (New York and London, 1974 edn.), p. 371.
2 Kwame Nkrumah, Consciencism: philosophy and ideology for decolonization and development wit
particular reference to the African Revolution (New York and London, I970 edn.), p. 68.
3 Kwame Nkrumah, Revolutionary Path (New York, 1972 edn.), 'African Socialism Revisited
pp. 441. This article was first publisied in African Forum (New York), i, 3, 1966, pp. 3-9.
4 Ibid. p. 441.
5 This is the major thesis of Consciencism.
6 While this argument is most vividly and forcefully made by Frantz Fanon, especially in Th
Wretched of the Earth (New York, 1968 edn.), it is also advanced by James, op. cit. pp. 27--40.

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOCIALIST THEORIES OF NKRUMAH AND NYERERE 383
production on which the transition to socialism
Nyerere, the basic rationale for this transition
the existence of socialism is the value system i
Pratt notes, 'Nyerere's commitment to soci
concern with the moral quality of life'.l Bec
between this desired ethical condition and
extended family, the basic unit of productio
Tanzania was to be the ujamaa. Traditional A
motivational myth and some institutional guid
socialism were inseparable from their instituti
and ujamaa were considered congruent conce
reorganisation of rural production into uja
socialism, which had been sublimated but
re-emerge.2
For Nkrumah, capitalism was not simply a tide which had flowed
in to swamp traditional values and could be made to ebb, thus leaving
them uncovered. The effects of colonialism could not be reversed so
easily because the changes brought by capitalism were permanent, and
the contradictions which accompanied them could only be alleviated
dialectically. Nkrumah thus argued that to recreate the ethics of
traditional Africa it was not necessary (or possible) to re-establish the
institutions which spawned them, but rather that it was essential to
build a structure in which 'the principles underlying communalism are
given expression in modern circumstances '.3 The advent of these
'modern circumstances' meant that the traditional method for the
social organisation of production - the village - was obsolete; mode
production was class production.4
Thus both Nyerere and Nkrumah begin with a common premise: th
ethical values of traditional communal production. But they differ on
the format of production which would best encourage the renaissance
of these values. While allowing for some degree of technological
derived change, Nyerere argued that the institutions which first bred
1 Pratt, op. cit. p. 71.
2 Julius K. Nyerere, Freedom and Development/Uhuru na Maendeleo: a selection from writings an
speeches, 1968-i973 (Oxford and Dar es Salam, I973), pp. 6-7. Susanne D. Mueller has noted
striking similarities between the ujamaa programme in Tanzania and the Narodnik movement
Russia, which was founded on the belief that traditional peasant communalism, based on the m
would form the basis of a truly Russian socialism; see' Retarded Capitalism in Tanzania', in Ra
Miliband and John Saville (eds.), The Socialist Register, ig80 (London, I980), pp. 203-26. Muell
argues that the 'reactionary utopianism' and economic stagnation which result from movemen
of this type have thwarted the transition to socialism in Tanzania.
3 Nkrumah, Revolutionary Path, p. 444, extracted from Kwame Nkrumah, Handbook ofRevolutiona
Warfare (London, 1968).
4 See Kwame Nkrumah, Class Struggle in Africa (New York, 1979 edn.).

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 384 STEVEN METZ
these old values must be recreated. In ef
social organisation of production coul
leadership. Nkrumah, on the other h
dialectical materialism, believed that c
channelled in a certain direction, but ne
that the ethics of African communalism
would not re-emerge by copying the
produced them. For Nkrumah, only 'p
Even at this point, their divergence fr
to appear. In addition to Nyerere's failur
Issa Shivji is convinced that the mino
proletariat in the development of Tan
to rule by a bureaucratic bourgeoisie.1 I
deviated from a Marxist perspective not
lack of dialectical analysis, but also in o
importance given to the class struggle. A
a true socialist revolution would depend
tion of the proletariat,2 he accepted the
stage of this revolution required the est
a coalition of the embryonic proletariat
the peasantry.3 This too deviates from
and the Russian Mencheviks, which
historical development through stages.
to have been influenced by Trotsky, s
creation of a socialist and unified Africa would lead to the destruction
of capitalism in the core states.

THE TRANSITION TO SOCIALISM: REVOLUTION VERSUS

REFORM

Although Nkrumah and Nyerere agreed that socia

inevitable and desirable, they held different views
methods.
For Nyerere, social contradictions could be abated by sublimation.

1 Shivji, op. cit. For a survey of 'left' critiques of Nyerere's theory, see Cranford Pratt,
'Tanzani-a's Transition to Socialism', loc. cit. pp. 194-207.
2 Nkrumah, Class Struggle in Africa, pp. 64-74.
3 Nkrumah was unclear as to whether the peasantry in Africa was, in fact, part of the proletariat.
For instance, in Class Struggle in Africa, p. 79, he writes that 'The countryside is the bastion of the
revolution. It is the revolutionary battlefield in which the peasantry in alliance with their natural
class allies - the proletariat and revolutionary intelligentsia - are the driving force' (my emphasis),
while on p. 80 he refers to the proletariat as 'comprising workers and peasants'.

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOCIALIST THEORIES OF NKRUMAH AND NYERERE 385
He considered that the desired state of events - the ethical matrix of
egalitarian socialism - had been damaged but not destroyed by capital-
ism. That is, the ethics which determined the form of traditional social
relations need only be uncovered; capitalism was so alien to the African
psyche that it had not transformed indigenous society in any lastin
way.1 In other words, Nyerere strongly believed that the legacy of
capitalism and colonialism could not have destroyed a sense of natura
socialism which had developed over centuries. The very artificialnes
of the ethics of capitalism meant that their removal would proceed
almost spontaneously once the structures which bolstered them -
colonialism and neo-colonialism - had been destroyed. In effect, the
transition to socialism was not to be a revolutionary act of creation, bu
an evolutionary renaissance of extant but sublimated values.
The key to this line of thought is found in Nyerere's idealism, and in
his definition of socialism as 'an attitude of mind .2 Unlike Marx, who
argued that consciousness was determined by the social organisation of
production, Nyerere felt that the relationship between material con
ditions and consciousness was more bi-directional. While the 'attitude
of mind' contention 'did not mean that institutions and organisations
are irrelevant',3 Nyerere felt that a basic incongruity can exist between
institutions and ethics. For this reason the transition to socialism would
proceed along corollary institutions. All that was needed in Tanzania
was to find some way of bringing the institutions of production back
into line with the spirit of socialism which had survived the period of
colonialism. This idea that the common man possessed an intrinsic
moral goodness, which had been dimmed but not extinguished by an
unjust system, illustrates the impact of classical political theory on
Nyerere's thought.4
Nkrumah, on the other hand, appeared to be closer to the orthodox
Marxist view that material conditions alone determined consciousness.
The 'humanism' of traditional Africa had not been sublimated but
drastically altered; the structures which formed the premises of th
transition to socialism were not those of the far past, but those of
contradictory, neo-colonial present. That is, Nkrumah always believed
that social evolution is a dialectical process, and that the only solution
to the contradictions of a partially transformed society was the syntheti
creation of a new matrix of social values.5 Any form of evolutionar
socialism, whether the parliamentary type proposed by Eduard

1 See Nyerere, Ujamaa, p. I. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. pp. 88-9.

4 This point is made by Pratt, op. cit. pp. 72-7.
5 Nkrumah, Consciencism, pp. 58ff.

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
386 STEVEN METZ7

Bernstein,1 or the autarky approach of Nyerere, was impossible.

Nkrumah believed that reform does not synthetically alleviate contra-
diction, but only refines its methods:

The passage from... capitalism to socialism can only lie through revolution:
it cannot lie through reform. For in reform, fundamental principles are held
constant and the details of their expression modified.2

The differing logics incorporated in the theories of Nkrumah and

Nyerere become more evident at this point. The Tanzanian leader, who
believed that African society was generally homogeneous,3 felt that
when two conditions were contradictory, the solution was to remove or
sublimate one. Nkrumah, who believed that capitalism had disintegrated
the basic social homogeneity of Africa,4 argued that, according to the
theory of dialectical materialism, when two situations were contra-
dictory, the solution was a synthesis-generating conflict. Thus, for
Nyerere the transition to socialism would come through adjustments to
the institutions which encouraged the attitudes of capitalism; for
Nkrumah it would come through a revolutionary struggle between the
force of the future - the proletariat - and the forces of the present,
namely bourgeois capitalism and neo-colonialism.
This debate on the method of the transition to socialism - the struggle
between reform and revolution - has a long history within Marxism,
dating at least from the publication of Bernstein's major work in I899.5
Some of the most virulent polemics of those arguing for the necessity
of revolutionary change (the 'left' Marxists) have been aimed at those
who favoured a non-revolutionary transition to socialism.6 When
Nkrumah writes that reform is never truly progressive because it does
not represent the synthetic combination of contradictory elements,7 he

1 Eduard Bernstein, Evolutionary Socialism (London, g909; republished, New York, 196I).
2 Nkrumah, Consciencism, pp. 73-4.
3 See, for example, Nyerere, Ujamaa, p. I I. Pratt notes, op. cit. p. 77, that 'Nyerere... argued
that there were no sharply differentiated economic classes in African society'. For a discussion
of the issues concerning the existence or absence of classes in Africa, see Robin Cohen, 'Class in
Africa: analytical problems and perspectives', in Ralph Miliband and John Savile (eds.), The
Socialist Register, i972 (London, 1972), pp. 231-56.
4 Cf. Nkrumah, Class Struggle in Africa, p. o, 'A fierce class struggle has been raging in Africa'.
5 Bernstein first developed his ideas on reform and parliamentary socialism in a series of articles
between 1896 and 1898 in Die neue Zeit. These were expanded and published in book form in 1899
under the title Die Voraussetzungen des Sozialismus und die Aufgabe der Sozialdemokratie, from which
Evolutionary Socialism was drawn. For an explanation of Bernstein's arguments and the criticisms
they draw, see David McLellan, Marxism After Marx (Boston, I 979), pp. '0 -4 I, and Sidney Hook's
introduction to Evolutionary Socialism.
6 The most important and searing criticisms of Bernstein can be found in Lenin's What Is to
Be Done? and Rosa Luxemburg's Social Reform or Revolution? The former has been republished, for
example, in Robert C. Tucker, The Lenin Anthology (New York, 1975), and the latter in Dick
Howard (ed.), Selected Political Writings of Rosa Luxemburg (New York and London, 1977).
7 See, for example, Nkrumah, Consciencism, p. 72.

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOCIALIST THEORIES OF NKRUMAH AND NYERERE 387

is well within the mainstream of a methodol

orthodoxy. When he continues one step further and
exploitativeness of neo-colonialism demands
he becomes as much the heir of Sorel as of R
But, as was true with Lenin, Nkrumah's f
violence came after he had exhausted all other avenues for real social
change. As Ralph Miliband points out, violent revolution is a strategy
dictated by political conditions, and is not the diametric opposite of
reform.2 Thus the difference between Nkrumah and Nyerere on this
point is not as simple as that between reform and revolution. Prior to
the I966 coup d'etat, the Ghanaian leader too was much closer to a
reformist than a revolutionary position. The emphasis on the revolu-
tionary potential of reform, wlhether in Bernstein or in pre-g966
Nkrumah, is obviously a result of incumbency. The key remains with
the method: reform for Nyerere was a way of sublimating conflict; for
Nkrumah it was, in congruence with orthodox Marxism, a way of
continuing 'struggle and more specifically class struggle on many
different fronts and at many different levels'.3 Different logics bred
a variety of methods and, equally, various definitions of exactly what
socialism was to be.

THE CONCEPT OF SOCIALISM: DIFFERING DEFINITIONS

Both Nkrumah and Nyerere held the almost

purpose of the state was to create a proper
blossoming of a desired ethical condition. Nkr
of the transition to socialism was to reconstruc
a manner that the humanism of traditional African life reasserts itself
in a modern technical community ', while Cranford Pratt points out that
Nyerere held a similar view:

[socialism in Tanzania was] a way to utilize modern technology selectively so

as to advance the welfare of her people while also building social and economic
institutions which will express in modern and national terms the socialist values
of traditional African society.5

These two leaders also agreed on the most basic feature of the socialist
state during this re-flowering of traditional values. According to

1 Cf. Nkrumah, Class Struggle in Africa, p. 85, ' But as long as violence continues to be used against
the African peoples, the Party cannot achieve its objectives without the use of all forms of political
struggle, including armed struggle'.
2 Ralph Miliband, Marxism and Politics (Oxford, I977), p. i66.
3 Ibid. p. I6I.
4 Nkrumah, Revolutionary Path, p. 439. 5 Pratt, op. cit. p. 243.

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 388 STEVEN METZ

Nkrumah, the first tenet of soci

means of production, distribution
and not for profit.'1 One of th
Declaration, which was the most e
of socialism, stated that 'The maj
are under the control of the peasa
almost tautological aspects of t
differing logics used by Nyere
divergence of concepts.
Nkrumah's use of dialectical materialism meant that he considered

socialism to be merely an historical stage that would itself be transcen

once the forces of production in Africa had reached the full potenti
of their development. The primary problem in Africa during t
process resembled that faced by Lenin and the Russian Social Democr
How can the transitional, socialist phase of the development of societ
be effected in the most progressive, and, as far as possible, lea
exploitative way? Or, in other words, How can the development o
classless society be encouraged without the long and tumultuou
growth, hegemony, and eventual overthrow of the bourgeoisie?
Nkrumah's answer was virtually the same as Lenin's. This necessary
social transformation was to be accomplished by a class-conscio
vanguard acting in the name of the proletariat, and promulgat
industralisation and the destruction of neo-colonialism.3 Like Lenin and
Trotsky, Nkrumah argued that the only method by which these goals
could be attained was through the spread of the revolution to other
neo-colonial areas: pan-Africanism, which was seen as a tool for the final
destruction of the neo-colonial world economy, was essential.4 Thus,
Nkrumah's definition of a socialist society contained three essential
elements: (i) the control of the state by a class-conscious vanguard; (2)
industrialisation and the ensuing growth of the proletariat; and (3)
pan-Africanism and the destruction of neo-colonial dependency.
According to Nyerere, in what has become one of the most frequently
quoted statements of his theory, 'Socialism - like democracy - is essen-
tially an attitude of mind ',5 rather than an institutional structure. This
might at first seem to represent a radical departure from a materialist
philosophy, and to place the Tanzanian leader more squarely in the

1 Nkrumah, Revolutionary Path, p. 466. 2 Nyerere, Ujamaa, p. i6.

3 Within Ghana this vanguard was the Convention People's Party (C.P.P.). Later Nkrumah
proposed the formation of an All-African Committee for Political Co-ordination and an All-African
People's Revolutionary Army to play this role for the continent as a whole. See Book 2, ch. i,
pt. B of Handbook of Revolutionary Warfare, extracts of which appear in Revolutionary Path.
4 See, for instance, Kwame Nkrumah, Africa Must Unite (London and New York, 1963).
5 Nyerere, Ujamaa, p. i.

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOCIALIST THEORIES OF NKRUMAH AND NYERERE
389
idealist school. This appearance is reinforced b
that even a millionaire, if in possession of the id
be a good socialist.1 If, in fact, he did claim that
consciousness and ethics, then the idealist lab
However, Nyerere realised that the relations
organisation and socialist consciousness is dynam
on the other. If socialism was strictly an attit
argued, this attitude was extant but dorman
would have been required for the transition to s
removal of the neo-colonial restraints on this nascent socialism. But from
Nyerere's vigorous efforts to re-organise social production in ujamaa
units, it is obvious that he felt that the institutional structure of socialism
played a major role in the growth of the proper consciousness. Thus
although it can be argued that Nyerere placed greater emphasis on the
mental aspects of socialism than Nkrumah, there is no evidence that he
was oblivious to the need for this consciousness to receive institutional
encouragement.
This emphasis on consciousness is indicative of the defining element
of Nyerere's conception of socialism. What delineates socialism from
capitalism is not control of the means of production, but the method
of social distribution. A society is socialist when its produce is distributed
equitably, and it is capitalist when exploitation is used to fuel personal
accumulation.2

This focus on the attitudinal aspects of socialism again illustrate

the key role which the ethical element of social relations played i
Nyerere's theory. Socialism for Nyerere was not necessary, as Mar
argued, because it was the most efficacious solution to social
contradications,3 but was sought because of the ethical state which
entailed. So in effect, Nyerere considered that the ethics of socialis
formed the teleological foundation of the social organisation of produc
tion rather than simply a part of the social superstructure.
Because of Nyerere's emphasis on the ethical and psychological
elements of socialism, his institutional prescriptions differed from tho
of Nkrumah. Although the Ghanaian leader remained painfully awa
of the essential role which economic development played in th
overthrow of neo-colonialism and in the creation of the proletariat, h
placed tremendous emphasis on industrialisation and mechanisation
1 Ibid. 2 Ibid.
3 This reading of Marx appli
Economic and Philosophic Manuscri
4 For a discussion of the econo
Political Economy of Ghana', in
1975), PP- 49-92.

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
390 STEVEN METZ

Nyerere, on the other hand, focused on the improvement and growth

of agricultural production.1 Since the purpose of socialism for Nyerere
was the creation of a certain ethical order rather than the alleviation

of contradictions in the social organisation of production, he felt tha

the use of traditional methods of social organisation would foster at le
an acceptable level of economic growth while preserving the humanis
elements of production.2

CONCLUSION: DIFFERING LOGICS

Nkrumah and Nyerere began with simil

problems which their nations faced and e
notions of what the social organisation
society would look like. Why then, are their
conclusions so different? The answer lies
social and historical epistomology and ontol
Nkrumah utilised a form of dialectical mat
saw social development as determined not
by empirical changes in the organisation of
Marxist vein, Nkrumah felt that this stage
by the status of class conflict and the f
Contradiction, which was an inevitable
alleviated synthetically, through struggle. T
social progress was that which operated with
the laws of history could be quickened, but
For Nyerere there were no fixed stages of
of history was closer to that of classical
forward can be controlled through effort,
tional African life had provided the goal of
egalitarian society. The strategy of the p
discovery of the paths to this goal and the e

1 Two section headings of the Arusha Declaration, which

development of socialism in Tanzania, were entitled 'W
Industries', and 'Agriculture Is the Basis of Development'. Fo
programme, see Jonathan Baker, 'The Debate on Rural
Boesen, 'Tanzania: from ujamaa to villagization', both in
also Peter Temu, 'The Ujamaa Experiment', in Kwan S. Kim
Economy of Tanzania (Nairobi, I979), pp. 197-2', .
2 For example, according to Nyerere, Ujamaa, p. 92, 'If the
like human dignity and social equality, then the latter will b
in 'Agrarian Socialism in the Third World', the abysmal e
programme has led to its de-emphasis. However, Goran Hy
similar to Nyerere's argument, when he notes that a social
evaluated on economic performance alone.

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 SOCIALIST THEORIES OF NKRUMAH AND NYERERE 391

towards its achievement. The contradictions faced by African stat

not to be solved through internal social struggle, but by eliminati
elements which caused them. Exploitation and capitalism were
be transcended, but simply removed. While Nkrumah felt that t
could be changed by social relations, Nyerere argued that the
revolutionise the state.

It is possible, at least on a tentative basis, to place Nkrumah and

Nyerere within the larger context of socialist thinking. Given the
former's emphasis on dialectical materialism and the transformation of
society through the leadership of a state controlled by a vanguard party,
Nkrumah undoubtedly falls somewhere within what can be called
orthodox Marxism-Leninism. However, according toJitendra Mohan,
although 'Nkrumahism... was vaguely seen as the "adaptation" of
Marxism to Africa... what the precise adaptations were remained
obscure'.1 By way of contrast, Bethwell A. Ogot suggests that in many
ways Nkrumah's adaptation of Marx was just as 'orthodox' as Lenin's
was in his time.2
Nyerere is even less easy to categorise, although he has been often
called a 'populist' or 'democratic' socialist. His theory of history, as
noted above, is similar to that of the European liberals. His emphasis
on the role of pre-capitalist social organisation, on the formation of
small, democratic political units, and on 'natural' or traditional forms
of social life asjustification of socialism, often appear closer to Rousseau
than to Marx.3
Does the fact that Nkrumah was the 'more orthodox' of the two have
more than a passing interest? Perhaps. Nyerere, of course, has been able
to retain political power while Nkrumah was removed by a coup de'tat
in I966. But while Tanzania has moved further and further from the
path outlined in Nyerere's theory,4 Nkrumah's analysis seems vindicated

1 Jitendra Mohan, 'Nkrumah and Nkrumahism', in Miliband and Savile (eds.), op. cit. i967,
p. 211.

2 Bethwell A. Agot, 'Nkrumah Revisits Marx', in East Africa Journal (Nairobi), i, 3,J
p. 30.
3 The parallels between Nyerere and Rousseau have been noted by Pratt, op. cit. p. 73.
4 According to Pratt, loc. cit. p. 203, 'Marxist socialists have come to the conclusion that
Tanzania can no longer be judged to be in transition to socialism'. Examples and further
discussions of these 'left' critiques can be found in Shivji, op. cit.; William Tordoff and Ali
A. Mazrui, 'The Left and the Super-Left in Tanzania' in The Journal of Modern African Studies
(Cambridge), 10, 3, October 1972, pp. 427-45; Christopher Mulei, 'The Predicament of the Left
in Tanzania', in East Africa Journal, 9, 8, August I972, p. 32; Susanne D. Mueller, 'Retarded
Capitalism in Tanzania'; and Colin Leys, 'The Overdeveloped Post-Colonial State: a re-
evaluation', in Review of African Political Economy (London), 5, January-April I976, pp. 39-48.
14 MOA

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
392 STEVEN METZ

since he continually argued tha

impossible so long as the bon
through pan-Africanism. But
the experiment of African so
Nyerere's and Nkrumah's th
contrasted, a complete evaluati

This content downloaded from 154.120.229.35 on Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:28:30 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms