Blog 3: Sukarno and Cabral’s discourse on liberation and culture

In a world where the political and social framework was already established and dictated by European colonizers, it isn’t coincidental that Sukarno and Cabral’s speeches align to a large degree in matters of liberation and culture. Even though Sukarno is addressing multiple independent countries and Cabral’s focus is towards an African state, they are very similar in idealizing about the future. Sukarno focuses more on what countries should be doing collectively, in other words external politics, while Cabral is more concerned with internal relations of the African state.

 Both seem to be confident that a sovereign country comes with the promise of freedom. However, their sense of freedom also has undertones of implying that we will do everything different from our colonizers, as their methods of rule have failed. Thus, culture for both comes to be defined as not actually finding your own voice and values, but being an anti-west propagator in a new-found country. They fuel their future dreams for the world by outlining the negative features about colonialist rule, such as exploitation and racism. Also, the two speeches take on a very utopian form in suggesting new possibilities but not describing in detail what they really mean. For example, even we are not clear on what the culture of African people actually comprises or how unity will prevail in a diverse set of countries.

Sukarno accepts to some level that imperialism still exists to dictate the discourse of the new country, and Cabral even acknowledges the colonial past to have stained the new cultural movement in the country. Sukarno highlights that a hierarchical structure often exists and that allows one group to control the other. However, Sukarno’s views are limited to the colonizers, Cabral builds on this and accepts that one’s own culture is also capable of creating differentiation. Sukarno’s words “Let us not be bitter about the past, but let us keep our eyes firmly on the future” is how Cabral chooses to end his speech as well. While Sukarno emphasises the importance of the new-found liberty and what it actually means for the third world, Cabral builds on ways to progress culture and organize the country.

They both come together to form a central argument that despite there being differences we should all treat each other as equal and dignified individuals. Liberation for both means in its simplest sense, to be considered a “somebody” and have an impact in your own country. In both speeches, we see a common trend that liberation movements are knit together by unity. Cabral seems to feel that unity mainly comes from a very strong culture guiding the population towards a common goal. Sukarno argues that liberation should be attained from sympathy, equality and tolerance towards each other. This difference might not be that significant as it is evident that Sukarno is addressing a diverse group of people with varying cultures while Cabral is just addressing one nation with common interests. However, it does create a problematic trend in global politics, that countries individual pursuits often don’t coincide with international relations, a common issue created by colonialism.