Post Colonial Progress

Three concerns pervade the words of both Cabral and Sukarno, evidencing the significant extent to which there is alignment between the two with respect to the question of national liberation and culture. Namely, these are preventing the slide into cultural chauvinism and regressive nationalism, achieving a global unity towards the cause of anti-imperialism and the liberation of oppressed peoples, and redressing the, oft colonially engineered and enhanced, social inequities that render meaningless the liberation movement. The prevalence of these themes is countered only slightly by the difference in approach demonstrated, namely Sukarno’s call for a unity in cultural diversity oriented towards the desire for a lasting peace and Cabral’s characterization of resistance as a distinct cultural act that constitutes the basis for Africa’s cultural reality, precluding any mention of the existence of racial and continental cultures (to which Sukarno often refers).

Sukarno states that the end of European colonialism and the emergence of independent nation states cannot be confused with freedom for many parts of these countries “still labor under the lash” even going so far as to say colonialism has not ended so long as vast portions of Africa and Asia remain unfree and that colonization represents in its modern dress economic exploitation by a small and “alien” community. The term “alien” is used to exemplify precisely this point when Cabral discusses who he calls the “petite bourgeois”, the indigenous elite who are culturally alienated from the masses and assimilated into a culture that is not their own and who seek to use the liberation movement to perpetuate the cultural prejudices of class into their own system of domination that will succeed European colonization. Just as Sukarno states clearly that colonialism lives so long as exploitation persist, Cabral also states that ignoring the exploitation by the indigenous elite would be tantamount to ignoring the objectives of the liberation movement as a whole. This therein demonstrates that Cabral and Sukarno are aligned significantly on the inextricable link between colonialism and economic exploitation.

Moreover, emphasis on unity is expressed often in the words of both Cabral and Sukarno to preempt the instinct to recede into one’s indigenous localized culture, foregoing cognizance of the broader aims of collective resistance against imperialism. Cabral states how “undiscerning praise” and “systematic exaltation” of one’s own culture halt progress just as much the racialist prejudices that presided before and similar claims are made by Sukarno when he discusses how religion itself is “debased” if all religions are not by virtue of the State afforded equal protection and support. Both Cabral and Sukarno therein are cautious to orient anti-colonial vigor towards progress, the former stressing that any liberation movement must be cautious to discern the positive from the negative highlighting how self-reflection is a distinct component of progress. This latter sentiment is prevalent also in the opening portion of Sukarno’s speech as he mentions the ethical and moral content of independence which translates to a responsibility that the nascent states have in a world that has grown to host an unprecedented capacity for violence. We see thus how both leaders establish the need for critical self-evaluation and moral development in a continuous march forward towards progress, progress which is not attained by the mere notion of independence but from the development of a “universal culture” aimed at the assimilation of human accomplishment towards the evolution of humankind as a whole as stated by Cabral and the mobilization of the Moral Violence of Nations towards peace and not war. It therefore also be said that both Cabral and Sukarno view liberation as a project transcending countries and continents and culture as an expression which binds multiple social categories, presumably diverse categories of race, gender, and religion, into a single force.

Lastly, on the topic of unity and convergence, we see both Sukarno and Cabral highlight the importance of understanding and awareness. For Cabral, the liberation movement and the armed revolutionary struggle achieves a “cultural development” as it allows the alienated petite bourgeois begin to understand the masses, creating space for the rejection of social rules that halt progress. This same understanding is emphasized by Sukarno as he mentions the Light of Understanding which will be key in inspiring any sort of collective action. Understanding and self-reflection as key milestones in the journey towards progress, first within nations, and then across continents is a concept that underpins both Sukarno’s and Cabral’s vision for how the embrace of culture and liberation can result in progress.