In Dubious Battle

Someone recommended Steinbeck's In Dubious Battle to us at the blog a few years ago, perhaps in 2018. Now, after three years, we finally read the novel and cannot even recall why exactly it was recommended. Perhaps due to our interest in Georges Sorel, labor radicalism, communism, and anarchism during the years of 2017, 2018, and 2019. Regardless of the uncertain reasons why it was suggested reading for us, it was a worthwhile read. Steinbeck's short novel about a doomed strike and the ways in which their dubious battle harms all parties remains a timeless tale of the deeply unequal American society of the 1930s. And despite the casual racism and, as expected, problematic gender roles of these working stiffs and the Communist agitators Jim and Mac, there is a charming quality to these beaten and downtrodden working fruit pickers in the fictional Torgas Valley. 

The novel also brings to mind our experience with the nefarious ways of various incarnations of communists who believe the ends justifies the means. And we see some truly reprenhensible behavior from Mac and Jim, True Believers who want to use the strike to agitate and push their socialist vision, even as they know the strike will fail. Steinbeck faced criticism for his depiction of the Party in this novel, but to us at the blog it rings true of so many types encountered in today's world. Sure, let's hope they don't assault high school children like Mac, and their heart is in the right place. 

But one cannot help but feel that Doc Burton is the most compelling character in the novel. He rightly calls to question the difference between group-man and individuals, and need for something besides blood to motivate the crowd (or, mob). Burton can see the totality of the problem, whereas Mac and Jim are so obsessed by their ideology and the requirement of "blood" for motivating the strikers to continue their doomed struggle against the Growers. Perhaps, like Sorel suggested, the strikers need that sense of heroic sacrifice, violence, and a 'myth' to rally their forces and continue their strike. But Burton serves as a voice of reason, pointing out how the violent tactics and repercussions of the strike will only result in more violence. We here at the blog will continue to ponder the question of the dangers of the crowd, doctrinaire Marxism, and the disastrous outcomes considered in Steinbeck's ouevre. 

Lamaute and the Bourgeoisie Nationale

One of the important theorists and activists in the annals of the Haitian Left, Alix Lamaute was one of the victims of the massacre of both PUCH members and innocent bystanders ordered by dictator François Duvalier.  Besides Lamaute, several prominent Haitian Communists were also killed, including Brisson, The  attack on the village of Cazale was particularly brutal, as young Communists and locals were mercilessly slaughtered by Duvalierist forces eager to end Communist armed uprisings. By 1969, Duvalier was already president for life with apparent total rule. Nonetheless, by the late 1960s, the two main Haitian Marxist parties unified into the Parti unifié des communistes haïtiens, which would embrace revolutionary violence to overthrow Duvalier. Rebels arriving from Cuban bases or across the Dominican border made clear the degree to which left-wing rebels poised a threat to the regime, even if their influence in numbers was rather small. 

Nevertheless, some of the ideas expressed by intellectuals within the PUCH are worth remembering for what it reveals of the nature of Haitian Marxism and political thought. Lamaute, whose La bourgeoisie nationale: une entité controversée encapsulates some of the main streams of Marxist thought in Haiti during the 1960s, deserves attention today for the still disturbing question of the Haitian prospects of a national bourgeoisie that could work with proletariat forces and a Marxist vanguard to transform Haiti. Lamaute, whose thought owes much to Alexis, Ambroise, Rameau, Pierre-Charles and other Haitian historians, economists, and intellectuals on the Left, presents an overview on primitive accumulation in Haiti, the idea of the 19th century Liberal party as progressive and the Nationals as feudal, and the weakness of the Haitian bourgeoisie. 

Lukacs and Christian Beaulieu also make an appearance on the caste question, as the so-called feudal or semi-feudal nature of the Haitian economy prevents the emergence of a full class-based society in which the embryonic national bourgoisie can truly emerge. Caste-like features actually, according to Lamaute, hinder the development of class consciousness among the bourgeoisie. Thus, the caste-like nature of Haitian social structure of that era is linked to the semi-feudal economy of rural Haiti and the dependence of the Haitian bourgeoisie on US and foreign capital and machinery. Borrowing from Gramsci, Lamaute also describes the the mimetism of the Haitian dominant classes and the forms of alienation one might suspect earlier generations of Haitian intellectuals to refer to as cultural bovarysme. But like Beaulieu, Lamaute probably saw the supposed caste system as being weakened by increasing industrialization and urbanization in Haiti over the course of the 20th century, particularly after 1915.

The remainder of the text focuses on the prospects of a joint anti-imperialist front connecting the proletariat and local bourgeoisie. Arguing against Fanon, who saw the bourgeoisie as a still-born class in the struggles of Third World liberation, Lamaute instead sees the development of a local bourgeoisie, primarily oriented towards the internal market and directing industries using local industry and labor and products as aligning itself with the proletariat and popular masses in the name of nationalism. For Lamaute, the national bourgeoisie only needs to see how nationalism could strengthen their class position. For, a truly national bourgeoisie (instead of the existing comprador Haitian one) would and could fight for a number of economic and social reforms that would benefit the proletariat and masses (free press, state policies, etc.) as well as accentuate the coming class conflict between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. This, to the Marxist teleological paradigm of Lamaute, would eventually usher in a socialist state with the proletariat and a vanguard of professional revolutionaries constantly pressuring the bourgeoisie to avoid too much collusion with imperialist powers.

In order to truly make sense of Lamaute's argument, however, one must see it as part of a trajectory of Haitian Marxist thought dating back to the 1940s and the Parti Socialiste Populaire. Like his 1940s forebears, Lamaute saw the peasantry, who comprised the majority of the Haitian population, as incapable of leading the path to socialism. Instead, Haiti must oppose imperialism and develop its bourgeoisie and proletariat, thereby strengthening class conflict and a shift in the mode of production to capitalism. Then, and only then, would a working-class revolution ultimately succeed. To Lamaute, who cited the example of the peasantry of Bolivia as a cautionary tale, the Haitian peasant will not come to a strict class consciousness and must be led by the proletariat in any alliance. Otherwise, the peasant will be used against the proletariat by the petit or moyenne bourgeoisie, as in Bolivia. In other words, the proletariat will make the revolution or there will be no revolution. But in order to reach that point, a truly national bourgeoisie must emerge that is not a comprador one, and which would heighten the class conflicts while further eroding the semi-feudal characteristics of the Haitian economy. 

One wonders if Lamaute, like Alexis, Roumain and other Haitian Marxists, may have adopted a somewhat anti-paysan perspective by viewing the religion of Vodou as encouraging fatalism. The complex question of the Haitian peasant in Haitian socialism, however, is beyond the immediate concerns of Lamaute's La bourgeoisie nationale. And after another half century, it is clear that the kind of national bourgeoisie called for by Lamaute did not emerge. If anything, an anti-national bourgeoisie strengthened itself under the rule of Baby Doc, and the question of the peasantry and democratic reforms would have to change. Nevertheless, Lamaute's treatise provides a window onto the thoughts and theoretical formulations that guided the young militants of the PEP, PPLN, and later PUCH in the turbulent 1960s and 1970s. 

CPUSA

Although problematic like most documentaries, this somewhat sympathetic history of the Communist Party is full of interesting anecdotes about the experiences of its members. Furthermore, the documentary recognizes how the Communists played a pivotal role in numerous progressive social causes, particularly during the Depression. For that reason alone, closer scrutiny of the CPUSA is required. Of course, my reasons for any interest in it at all is related to its connections with Caribbean organizations and figures. 

Henry Rosemond and the New York-Caribbean Nexus

Henry Rosemond in the Daily Worker 

Although the number of Haitians in New York City was very small in comparison to other Caribbean groups during the early decades of the 20th century, the Caribbean-New York nexus for black radicalism also existed for Haitians. The arrival of Haitians coincided with the US Occupation of the island. Some of the Haitians in New York at this time were involved with nationalist, anti-Occupation movements, such as the Union Patriotique (UP). Joseph Mirault, a journalist and member of the UP, for example, worked as a Pullman porter. Others, such as Henry Rosemond, was involved in the garment worker union, the Needle Trade Industrial Union, as well as anti-imperialist, black labor leftist circles (principally, the American Negro Labor Congress).

Margaret Stevens, in her excellent Red International and Black Caribbean: Communists in New York City, Mexico and the West Indies, 1919-1939, convincingly demonstrates how important this New York City-Caribbean connection was for Haiti. Rosemond, according to Stevens, returned to Haiti at some point in 1929, after the student strike, and was known to have disseminated anti-imperialist and radical literature. She demonstrates how Rosemond's involvement with the American Negro Labor Congress and Communists in the States shaped his belief in class struggle, radical rejections of US imperialism, and interracial struggle. 

The preponderance of West Indians among black radicals in New York likely also shaped Rosemond, since Richard B. Moore, George Padmore, and others, coming out of the African Blood Brotherhood and similar organizations, would have found commonality with him as  fellow immigrants from colonized Caribbean islands. Black nationalists, black socialists, and radical labor organizers of Harlem must have left an impact on Rosemond, and he appears to have had some sort of impact on Roumain and the first Communist party in Haiti. Thus, one must not only situate Roumain and the origins of Haitian Marxism within a Latin American context, but a wider African-American and Caribbean world in which debates on race, class, and nationalism were ongoing. 

Unfortunately, references to Rosemond do not, to my knowledge, appear in any of Roumain's writings, but Rosemond referenced Roumain in articles for the African-American press (Pittsburgh Courrier, for instance). Moreover, Stevens asserts that Rosemond played a role in establishing an Anti-Imperialist League cell in Haiti, which would have certainly attracted attention from Roumain, Petit, Beaulieu and others. It's not difficult to imagine that when Beaulieu and Roumain traveled to New York in 1932, they likely profited from contacts given by Rosemond. Rosemond's experience with labor organizing, strikes, and Communist party structures would have made him an ideal source of contacts for Roumain, Beaulieu, and Charlier.

In addition to the New York connection with left-wing Caribbean activism and ideologies, a Paris nexus would also appear to exist, particularly through Le cri des negres and the African, Antillean, and European leftist organizations in France. Michel Hector's work uses these Francophone sources, which may explain why Rosemond is not referenced in his work. However, the Paris-Caribbean nexus was likely just as important in terms of building upon earlier Pan-African congresses in Europe as well as directly putting into conversation Haitians, Antilleans, and Africans, such as Tiemoko Garan Kouyaté. Haitian contributors to these France-based Pan-African left journals included Ludovic Lacombe and Jean Barau, who contributed articles on events in their homeland from perspectives of labor, religion, race, and anti-imperialism. 

In summation, Henry Rosemond's experiences, writings, and activism require those interested in tracking the development of the Haitian labor movement and Marxism to consider the significance of New York as an epicenter of black radicalism. Paris, like New York, was also important, but New York was closer while producing Haitians directly engaged in labor struggles. Indeed, Rosemond was nearly beaten to death by police during a strike in 1929, the same strike in which he believed black and white workers could come together over to advance working-class interests. Yet, Rosemond and the ANLC were not class reductionists either, suggesting a possible nuanced interpretation of the interplay of class and race in Caribbean and US settings. What is needed is a more detailed overview of Rosemond's life and work in Haiti, and the extent to which the New York and Paris links were followed by similar developments in the island. 

René Depestre with Mao

Source

René Depestre with Mao Zedong in 1961. As Haitian History on Tumblr states, Depestre is a former Communist,now living in France. Though I have only read Festival of the Greasy Pole, the more famous Hadriana dans Tous mes Rêves has been praised and summarized for me by a young reader from Jacmel. For more information, read the original source of this photo, "La France et Haiti."