Mr Gasssama,
"......Lurking behind such questions are the extended tentacles of the Wall
Street octopus. And its suction cups and muscular strength are provided
by a phenomenon dubbed ?The Invisible Government?, arising from Wall
Street?s connection with the Pentagon and various intelligence
services...."
Having in mind with what is happening right now in the US,who will tell this to an American,they know better.Thanks for sharing,we have such great giants thinkers in our history and they are many,Sekou Touray,Gabral,Fanon,Biko and many more,discovering them and puting their ideas in the right perspective,one will learn a lot from them. Keep them coming.
For Freedom
Saiks
> Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 20:59:21 +0200
> From: [log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [>-<] FWD: Neo-Colonialism, the Last Stage of imperialism by Kwame Nkrumah
>
> [ This e-mail is posted to Gambia|Post e-Gathering by "M. Gassama" <[log in to unmask]> ]
>
>
> Neo-Colonialism, the Last Stage of imperialism Kwame Nkrumah 1965
>
> The mechanisms of neo-colonialism
> IN order to halt foreign interference in the affairs of developing
> countries it is necessary to study, understand, expose and actively
> combat neo-colonialism in whatever guise it may appear. For the methods
> of neo-colonialists are subtle and varied. They operate not only in the
> economic field, but also in the political, religious, ideological and
> cultural spheres.
>
> Faced with the militant peoples of the ex-colonial territories in
> Asia, Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America, imperialism simply
> switches tactics. Without a qualm it dispenses with its flags, and even
> with certain of its more hated expatriate officials. This means, so it
> claims, that it is ?giving? independence to its former subjects, to be
> followed by ?aid? for their development. Under cover of such phrases,
> however, it devises innumerable ways to accomplish objectives formerly
> achieved by naked colonialism. It is this sum total of these modern
> attempts to perpetuate colonialism while at the same time talking about
> ?freedom?, which has come to be known as neo-colonialism.
>
> Foremost among the neo-colonialists is the United States, which has
> long exercised its power in Latin America. Fumblingly at first she
> turned towards Europe, and then with more certainty after world war two
> when most countries of that continent were indebted to her. Since then,
> with methodical thoroughness and touching attention to detail, the
> Pentagon set about consolidating its ascendancy, evidence of which can
> be seen all around the world.
>
> Who really rules in such places as Great Britain, West Germany, Japan,
> Spain, Portugal or Italy? If General de Gaulle is ?defecting? from U.S.
> monopoly control, what interpretation can be placed on his
> ?experiments? in the Sahara desert, his paratroopers in Gabon, or his
> trips to Cambodia and Latin America?
>
> Lurking behind such questions are the extended tentacles of the Wall
> Street octopus. And its suction cups and muscular strength are provided
> by a phenomenon dubbed ?The Invisible Government?, arising from Wall
> Street?s connection with the Pentagon and various intelligence
> services. I quote:
>
> ?The Invisible Government ... is a loose amorphous grouping of
> individuals and agencies drawn from many parts of the visible
> government. It is not limited to the Central Intelligence Agency,
> although the CIA is at its heart. Nor is it confined to the nine other
> agencies which comprise what is known as the intelligence community:
> the National Security Council, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the
> National Security Agency, Army Intelligence, Navy Intelligence and
> Research, the Atomic Energy Commission and the Federal Bureau of
> Investigation.
>
> ?The Invisible Government includes also many other units and agencies,
> as well as individuals, that appear outwardly to be a normal part of
> the conventional government. It even encompasses business firms and
> institutions that are seemingly private.
>
> ?To an extent that is only beginning to be perceived, this shadow
> government is shaping the lives of 190,000,000 Americans. An informed
> citizen might come to suspect that the foreign policy of the United
> States often works publicly in one direction and secretly through the
> Invisible Government in just the opposite direction.
>
> ?This Invisible Government is a relatively new institution. It came
> into being as a result of two related factors: the rise of the United
> States after World War II to a position of pre-eminent world power, and
> the challenge to that power by Soviet Communism...
>
> ?By 1964 the intelligence network had grown into a massive hidden
> apparatus, secretly employing about 200,000 persons and spending
> billions of dollars a year. [The Invisible Government, David Wise and
> Thomas B. Ross, Random House, New York, 1964.]
>
> Here, from the very citadel of neo-colonialism, is a description of
> the apparatus which now directs all other Western intelligence set-ups
> either by persuasion or by force. Results were achieved in Algeria
> during the April 1961 plot of anti-de Gaulle generals; as also in
> Guatemala, Iraq, Iran, Suez and the famous U-2 spy intrusion of Soviet
> air space which wrecked the approaching Summit, then in West Germany
> and again in East Germany in the riots of 1953, in Hungary?s abortive
> crisis of 1959, Poland?s of September 1956, and in Korea, Burma,
> Formosa, Laos, Cambodia and South Vietnam; they are evident in the
> trouble in Congo (Leopoldville) which began with Lumumba?s murder, and
> continues till now; in events in Cuba, Turkey, Cyprus, Greece, and in
> other places too numerous to catalogue completely.
>
> And with what aim have these innumerable incidents occurred? The
> general objective has been mentioned: to achieve colonialism in fact
> while preaching independence.
>
> On the economic front, a strong factor favouring Western monopolies
> and acting against the developing world is inter-national capital?s
> control of the world market, as well as of the prices of commodities
> bought and sold there. From 1951 to 1961, without taking oil into
> consideration, the general level of prices for primary products fell by
> 33.l per cent, while prices of manufactured goods rose 3.5 per cent
> (within which, machinery and equipment prices rose 31.3 per cent). In
> that same decade this caused a loss to the Asian, African and Latin
> American countries, using 1951 prices as a basis, of some $41,400
> million. In the same period, while the volume of exports from these
> countries rose, their earnings in foreign exchange from such exports
> decreased.
>
> Another technique of neo-colonialism is the use of high rates of
> interest. Figures from the World Bank for 1962 showed that seventy-one
> Asian, African and Latin American countries owed foreign debts of some
> $27,000 million, on which they paid in interest and service charges
> some $5,000 million. Since then, such foreign debts have been estimated
> as more than £30,000 million in these areas. In 1961, the interest
> rates on almost three-quarters of the loans offered by the major
> imperialist powers amounted to more than five per cent, in some cases
> up to seven or eight per cent, while the call-in periods of such loans
> have been burdensomely short.
>
> While capital worth $30,000 million was exported to some fifty-six
> developing countries between 1956 and 1962, ?it is estimated that
> interest and profit alone extracted on this sum from the debtor
> countries amounted to more than £15,000 million. This method of
> penetration by economic aid recently soared into prominence when a
> number of countries began rejecting it. Ceylon, Indonesia and Cambodia
> are among those who turned it down. Such ?aid? is estimated on the
> annual average to have amounted to $2,600 million between 1951 and
> 1955; $4,007 million between 1956 and 1959, and $6,000 million between
> 1960 and 1962. But the average sums taken out of the aided countries by
> such donors in a sample year, 1961, are estimated to amount to $5,000
> million in profits, $1,000 million in interest, and $5,800 million from
> non-equivalent exchange, or a total of $11,800 million extracted
> against $6,000 million put in. Thus, ?aid? turns out to be another
> means of exploitation, a modern method of capital export under a more
> cosmetic name.
>
> Still another neo-colonialist trap on the economic front has come to
> be known as ?multilateral aid? through international organisations: the
> International Monetary Fund, the Inter-national Bank for Reconstruction
> and Development (known as the World Bank), the International Finance
> Corporation and the International Development Association are examples,
> all, significantly, having U.S. capital as their major backing. These
> agencies have the habit of forcing would-be borrowers to submit to
> various offensive conditions, such as supplying information about their
> economies, submitting their policy and plans to review by the World
> Bank and accepting agency supervision of their use of loans. As for the
> alleged development, between 1960 and mid-1963 the International
> Development Association promised a total of $500 million to applicants,
> out of which only $70 million were actually received.
>
> In more recent years, as pointed out by Monitor in The Times, 1 July
> 1965, there has been a substantial increase in communist technical and
> economic aid activities in developing countries. During 1964 the total
> amount of assistance offered was approximately £600 million. This was
> almost a third of the total communist aid given during the previous
> decade. The Middle East received about 40 per cent of the total, Asia
> 36 per cent, Africa 22 per cent and Latin America the rest.
>
> Increased Chinese activity was responsible to some extent for the
> larger amount of aid offered in 1964, though China contributed only a
> quarter of the total aid committed; the Soviet Union provided a half,
> and the East European countries a quarter.
>
> Although aid from socialist countries still falls far short of that
> offered from the west, it is often more impressive, since it is swift
> and flexible, and interest rates on communist loans are only about two
> per cent compared with five to six per cent charged on loans from
> western countries.
>
> Nor is the whole story of ?aid? contained in figures, for there are
> conditions which hedge it around: the conclusion of commerce and
> navigation treaties; agreements for economic co-operation; the right to
> meddle in internal finances, including currency and foreign exchange,
> to lower trade barriers in favour of the donor country?s goods and
> capital; to protect the interests of private investments; determination
> of how the funds are to be used; forcing the recipient to set up
> counterpart funds; to supply raw materials to the donor; and use of
> such funds a majority of it, in fact to buy goods from the donor
> nation. These conditions apply to industry, commerce, agriculture,
> shipping and insurance, apart from others which are political and
> military.
>
> So-called ?invisible trade? furnishes the Western monopolies with yet
> another means of economic penetration. Over 90 per cent of world ocean
> shipping is controlled by me imperialist countries. They control
> shipping rates and, between 1951 and 1961, they increased them some
> five times in a total rise of about 60 per cent, the upward trend
> continuing. Thus, net annual freight expenses incurred by Asia, Africa
> and Latin America amount to no less than an estimated $1,600 million.
> This is over and above all other profits and interest payments. As for
> insurance payments, in 1961 alone these amounted to an unfavourable
> balance in Asia, Africa and Latin America of some additional $370
> million.
>
> Having waded through all this, however, we have begun to understand
> only the basic methods of neo-colonialism. The full extent of its
> inventiveness is far from exhausted.
>
> In the labour field, for example, imperialism operates through labour
> arms like the Social Democratic parties of Europe led by the British
> Labour Party, and through such instruments as the International
> Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), now apparently being
> superseded by the New York Africa-American Labour Centre (AALC) under
> AFL-CIO chief George Meany and the well-known CIA man in labour?s top
> echelons, Irving Brown.
>
> In 1945, out of the euphoria of anti-fascist victory, the World
> Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) had been formed, including all world
> labour except the U.S. American Federation of Labor (AFL). By 1949,
> however, led by the British Trade Union Congress (TUC), a number of pro-
> imperialist labour bodies in the West broke away from the WFTU over the
> issue of anti-colonialist liberation, and set up the ICFTU.
>
> For ten years it continued under British TUC leadership. Its record in
> Africa, Asia and Latin America could gratify only the big international
> monopolies which were extracting super-profits from those areas.
>
> In 1959, at Brussels, the United States AFL-CIO union centre fought
> for and won control of the ICFTU Executive Board. From then on a flood
> of typewriters, mimeograph machines, cars, supplies, buildings,
> salaries and, so it is still averred, outright bribes for labour
> leaders in various parts of the developing world rapidly linked ICFTU
> in the minds of the rank and file with the CIA. To such an extent did
> its prestige suffer under these American bosses that, in 1964, the AFL-
> CIO brains felt it necessary to establish a fresh outfit. They set up
> the AALC in New York right across the river from the United Nations.
>
> ?As a steadfast champion of national independence, democracy and
> social justice?, unblushingly stated the April 1965 Bulletin put out by
> this Centre, ?the AFL-CIO will strengthen its efforts to assist the
> advancement of the economic conditions of the African peoples. Toward
> this end, steps have been taken to expand assistance to the African
> free trade unions by organising the African-American Labour Centre.
> Such assistance will help African labour play a vital role in the
> economic and democratic upbuilding of their countries.'
>
> The March issue of this Bulletin, however, gave the game away: ?In
> mobilising capital resources for investment in Workers Education,
> Vocational Training, Co-operatives, Health Clinics and Housing, the
> Centre will work with both private and public institutions. It will
> also encourage labour-management co-operation to expand American
> capital investment in the African nations.? The italics are mine. Could
> anything be plainer?
>
> Following a pattern previously set by the ICFTU, it has already
> started classes: one for drivers and mechanics in Nigeria, one in
> tailoring in Kenya. Labour scholarships are being offered to Africans
> who want to study trade unionism in of all places-Austria, ostensibly
> by the Austrian unions. Elsewhere, labour, organised into political
> parties of which the British Labour Party is a leading and typical
> example, has shown a similar aptitude for encouraging ?Labour-
> management co-operation to expand . . . capital investment in African
> nations.'
>
> But as the struggle sharpens, even these measures of neo-colonialism
> are proving too mild. So Africa, Asia and Latin America have begun to
> experience a round of coups d'etat or would-be coups, together with a
> series of political assassinations which have destroyed in their
> political primes some of the newly emerging nations best leaders. To
> ensure success in these endeavours, the imperialists have made
> widespread and wily use of ideological and cultural weapons in the form
> of intrigues, manoeuvres and slander campaigns.
>
> Some of these methods used by neo-colonialists to slip past our guard
> must now be examined. The first is retention by the departing
> colonialists of various kinds of privileges which infringe on our
> sovereignty: that of setting up military bases or stationing troops in
> former colonies and the supplying of ?advisers? of one sort or another.
> Sometimes a number of ?rights? are demanded: land concessions,
> prospecting rights for minerals and/or oil; the ?right? to collect
> customs, to carry out administration, to issue paper money; to be
> exempt from customs duties and/or taxes for expatriate enterprises;
> and, above all, the ?right? to provide ?aid?. Also demanded and granted
> are privileges in the cultural field; that Western information services
> be exclusive; and that those from socialist countries be excluded.
>
> Even the cinema stories of fabulous Hollywood are loaded. One has only
> to listen to the cheers of an African audience as Hollywood?s heroes
> slaughter red Indians or Asiatics to understand the effectiveness of
> this weapon. For, in the developing continents, where the colonialist
> heritage has left a vast majority still illiterate, even the smallest
> child gets the message contained in the blood and thunder stories
> emanating from California. And along with murder and the Wild West goes
> an incessant barrage of anti-socialist propaganda, in which the trade
> union man, the revolutionary, or the man of dark skin is generally cast
> as the villain, while the policeman, the gum-shoe, the Federal agent ?
> in a word, the CIA ? type spy is ever the hero. Here, truly, is the
> ideological under-belly of those political murders which so often use
> local people as their instruments.
>
> While Hollywood takes care of fiction, the enormous monopoly press,
> together with the outflow of slick, clever, expensive magazines,
> attends to what it chooses to call ?news. Within separate countries,
> one or two news agencies control the news handouts, so that a deadly
> uniformity is achieved, regardless of the number of separate newspapers
> or magazines; while internationally, the financial preponderance of the
> United States is felt more and more through its foreign correspondents
> and offices abroad, as well as through its influence over inter-
> national capitalist journalism. Under this guise, a flood of anti-
> liberation propaganda emanates from the capital cities of the West,
> directed against China, Vietnam, Indonesia, Algeria, Ghana and all
> countries which hack out their own independent path to freedom.
> Prejudice is rife. For example, wherever there is armed struggle
> against the forces of reaction, the nationalists are referred to as
> rebels, terrorists, or frequently ?communist terrorists'!
>
> Perhaps one of the most insidious methods of the neo-colonialists is
> evangelism. Following the liberation movement there has been a
> veritable riptide of religious sects, the overwhelming majority of them
> American. Typical of these are Jehovah?s Witnesses who recently created
> trouble in certain developing countries by busily teaching their
> citizens not to salute the new national flags. ?Religion? was too thin
> to smother the outcry that arose against this activity, and a temporary
> lull followed. But the number of evangelists continues to grow.
>
> Yet even evangelism and the cinema are only two twigs on a much bigger
> tree. Dating from the end of 1961, the U.S. has actively developed a
> huge ideological plan for invading the so-called Third World, utilising
> all its facilities from press and radio to Peace Corps.
>
> During 1962 and 1963 a number of international conferences to this end
> were held in several places, such as Nicosia in Cyprus, San Jose in
> Costa Rica, and Lagos in Nigeria. Participants included the CIA, the U.
> S. Information Agency (USIA), the Pentagon, the International
> Development Agency, the Peace Corps and others. Programmes were drawn
> up which included the systematic use of U.S. citizens abroad in virtual
> intelligence activities and propaganda work. Methods of recruiting
> political agents and of forcing ?alliances? with the U.S.A. were worked
> out. At the centre of its programmes lay the demand for an absolute U.
> S. monopoly in the field of propaganda, as well as for counteracting
> any independent efforts by developing states in the realm of
> information.
>
> The United States sought, and still seeks, with considerable success,
> to co-ordinate on the basis of its own strategy the propaganda
> activities of all Western countries. In October 1961, a conference of
> NATO countries was held in Rome to discuss problems of psychological
> warfare. It appealed for the organisation of combined ideological
> operations in Afro-Asian countries by all participants.
>
> In May and June 1962 a seminar was convened by the U.S. in Vienna on
> ideological warfare. It adopted a secret decision to engage in a
> propaganda offensive against the developing countries along lines laid
> down by the U.S.A. It was agreed that NATO propaganda agencies would,
> in practice if not in the public eye, keep in close contact with U.S.
> Embassies in their respective countries.
>
> Among instruments of such Western psychological warfare are numbered
> the intelligence agencies of Western countries headed by those of the
> United States ?Invisible Government?. But most significant among them
> all are Moral Re-Armament QARA), the Peace Corps and the United States
> Information Agency (USIA).
>
> Moral Re-Armament is an organisation founded in 1938 by the American,
> Frank Buchman. In the last days before the second world war, it
> advocated the appeasement of Hitler, often extolling Himmler, the
> Gestapo chief. In Africa, MRA incursions began at the end of World War
> II. Against the big anti-colonial upsurge that followed victory in
> 1945, MRA spent millions advocating collaboration between the forces
> oppressing the African peoples and those same peoples. It is not
> without significance that Moise Tshombe and Joseph Kasavubu of Congo
> (Leopoldville) are both MRA supporters. George Seldes, in his book One
> Thousand Americans, characterised MRA as a fascist organisation
> ?subsidised by . . . Fascists, and with a long record of collaboration
> with Fascists the world over. . . .? This description is supported by
> the active participation in MRA of people like General Carpentier,
> former commander of NATO land forces, and General Ho Ying-chin, one of
> Chiang Kai-shek?s top generals. To cap this, several newspapers, some
> of them in the Western ;vorld, have claimed that MRA is actually
> subsidised by the CIA.
>
> When MRA?s influence began to fail, some new instrument to cover the
> ideological arena was desired. It came in the establishment of the
> American Peace Corps in 1961 by President John Kennedy, with Sargent
> Shriver, Jr., his brother-in-law, in charge. Shriver, a millionaire who
> made his pile in land speculation in Chicago, was also known as the
> friend, confidant and co-worker of the former head of the Central
> Intelligence Agency, Allen Dulles. These two had worked together in
> both the Office of Strategic Services, U.S. war-time intelligence
> agency, and in the CIA.
>
> Shriver?s record makes a mockery of President Kennedy?s alleged
> instruction to Shriver to ?keep the CIA out of the Peace Corps?. So
> does the fact that, although the Peace Corps is advertised as a
> voluntary organisation, all its members are carefully screened by the U.
> S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
>
> Since its creation in 1961, members of the Peace Corps have been
> exposed and expelled from many African, Middle Eastern and Asian
> countries for acts of subversion or prejudice. Indonesia, Tanzania, the
> Philippines, and even pro-West countries like Turkey and Iran, have
> complained of its activities.
>
> However, perhaps the chief executor of U.S. psychological warfare is
> the United States Information Agency (USIA). Even for the wealthiest
> nation on earth, the U.S. lavishes an unusual amount of men, materials
> and money on this vehicle for its neo-colonial aims.
>
> The USIA is staffed by some 12,000 persons to the tune of more than
> $130 million a year. It has more than seventy editorial staffs working
> on publications abroad. Of its network comprising 110 radio stations,
> 60 are outside the U.S. Programmes are broadcast for Africa by American
> stations in Morocco, Eritrea, Liberia, Crete, and Barcelona, Spain, as
> well as from off-shore stations on American ships. In Africa alone, the
> USIA transmits about thirty territorial and national radio programmes
> whose content glorifies the U.S. while attempting to discredit
> countries with an independent foreign policy.
>
> The USIA boasts more than 120 branches in about 100 countries, 50 of
> which are in Africa alone. It has 250 centres in foreign countries,
> each of which is usually associated with a library. It employs about
> 200 cinemas and 8,000 projectors which draw upon its nearly 300 film
> libraries.
>
> This agency is directed by a central body which operates in the name
> of the U.S. President, planning and coordinating its activities in
> close touch with the Pentagon, CIA and other Cold War agencies,
> including even armed forces intelligence centres.
>
> In developing countries, the USIA actively tries to prevent expansion
> of national media of information so as itself to capture the market-
> place of ideas. It spends huge sums for publication and distribution of
> about sixty newspapers and magazines in Africa, Asia and Latin
> America.
>
> The American government backs the USIA through direct pressures on
> developing nations. To ensure its agency a complete monopoly in
> propaganda, for instance, many agreements for economic co-operation
> offered by the U.S. include a demand that Americans be granted
> preferential rights to disseminate information. At the same time, in
> trying to close the new nations to other sources of information, it
> employs other pressures. For instance, after agreeing to set up USIA
> information centres in their countries, both Togo and Congo
> (Leopoldville) originally hoped to follow a non-aligned path and permit
> Russian information centres as a balance. But Washington threatened to
> stop all aid, thereby forcing these two countries to renounce their
> plan.
>
> Unbiased studies of the USIA by such authorities as Dr R. Holt of
> Princeton University, Retired Colonel R. Van de Velde, former
> intelligence agents Murril Dayer, Wilson Dizard and others, have all
> called attention to the close ties between this agency and U.S.
> Intelligence. For example, Deputy Director Donald M. Wilson was a
> political intelligence agent in the U.S. Army. Assistant Director for
> Europe, Joseph Philips, was a successful espionage agent in several
> Eastern European countries.
>
> Some USIA duties further expose its nature as a top intelligence arm
> of the U.S. imperialists. In the first place, it is expected to analyse
> the situation in each country, making recommendations to its Embassy,
> thereby to its Government, about changes that can tip the local balance
> in U.S. favour. Secondly, it organises networks of monitors for radio
> broadcasts and telephone conversations, while recruiting informers from
> government offices. It also hires people to distribute U.S. propaganda.
> Thirdly, it collects secret information with special reference to
> defence and economy, as a means of eliminating its international
> military and economic competitors. Fourthly, it buys its way into local
> publications to influence their policies, of which Latin America
> furnishes numerous examples. It has been active in bribing public
> figures, for example in Kenya and Tunisia. Finally, it finances,
> directs and often supplies with arms all anti-neutralist forces in the
> developing countries, witness Tshombe in Congo (Leopoldville) and Pak
> Hung Ji in South Korea. In a word, with virtually unlimited finances,
> there seems no bounds to its inventiveness in subversion.
>
> One of the most recent developments in neo-colonialist strategy is the
> suggested establishment of a Businessmen Corps which will, like the
> Peace Corps, act in developing countries. In an article on ?U.S.
> Intelligence and the Monopolies? in International Affairs (Moscow,
> January 1965), V. Chernyavsky writes: ?There can hardly be any doubt
> that this Corps is a new U.S. intelligence organisation created on the
> initiative of the American monopolies to use Big Business for
> espionage. It is by no means unusual for U.S. Intelligence to set up
> its own business firms which are merely thinly disguised espionage
> centres. For example, according to Chernyavsky, the C.I.A. has set up a
> firm in Taiwan known as Western Enterprises Inc. Under this cover it
> sends spies and saboteurs to South China. The New Asia Trading Company,
> a CIA firm in India, has also helped to camouflage U.S. intelligence
> agents operating in South-east Asia.
>
> Such is the catalogue of neo-colonialism?s activities and methods in
> our time. Upon reading it, the faint-hearted might come to feel that
> they must give up in despair before such an array of apparent power and
> seemingly inexhaustible resources.
>
> Fortunately, however, history furnishes innumerable proofs of one of
> its own major laws; that the budding future is always stronger than the
> withering past. This has been amply demonstrated during every major
> revolution throughout history.
>
> The American Revolution of 1776 struggled through to victory over a
> tangle of inefficiency, mismanagement, corruption, outright subversion
> and counter-revolution the like of which has been repeated to some
> degree in every subsequent revolution to date.
>
> The Russian Revolution during the period of Intervention, 1917 to
> 1922, appeared to be dying on its feet. The Chinese Revolution at one
> time was forced to pull out of its existing bases, lock stock and
> barrel, and make the unprecedented Long March; yet it triumphed.
> Imperialist white mercenaries who dropped so confidently out of the
> skies on Stanleyville after a plane trip from Ascension Island thought
> that their job would be ?duck soup?. Yet, till now, the nationalist
> forces of Congo (Leopoldville) continue to fight their way forward.
> They do not talk of if they will win, but only of when.
>
> Asia provides a further example of the strength of a people?s will to
> determine their own future. In South Vietnam ?special warfare? is being
> fought to hold back the tide of revolutionary change. ?Special warfare?
> is a concept of General Maxwell Taylor and a military extension of the
> creed of John Foster Dulles: let Asians fight Asians. Briefly, the
> technique is for the foreign power to supply the money, aircraft,
> military equipment of all kinds, and the strategic and tactical command
> from a General Staff down to officer ?advisers?, while the troops of
> the puppet government bear the brunt of the fighting. Yet in spite of
> bombing raids and the immense build-up of foreign strength in the area,
> the people of both North and South Vietnam are proving to be
> unconquerable.
>
> In other parts of Asia, in Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, and now the
> Philippines, Thailand and Burma, the peoples of ex-colonial countries
> have stood firm and are winning battles against the allegedly superior
> imperialist enemy. In Latin America, despite ?final? punitive
> expeditions, the growing armed insurrections in Colombia, Venezuala and
> other countries continue to consolidate gains.
>
> In Africa, we in Ghana have withstood all efforts by imperialism and
> its agents; Tanzania has nipped subversive plots in the bud, as have
> Brazzaville, Uganda and Kenya. The struggle rages back and forth. The
> surging popular forces may still be hampered by colonialist legacies,
> but nonetheless they advance inexorably.
>
> All these examples prove beyond doubt that neo-colonialism is not a
> sign of imperialism?s strength but rather of its last hideous gasp. It
> testifies to its inability to rule any longer by old methods.
> Independence is a luxury it can no longer afford to permit its subject
> peoples, so that even what it claims to have ?given? it now seeks to
> take away.
>
> This means that neo-colonialism can and will be defeated. How can this
> be done?
>
> Thus far, all the methods of neo-colonialists have pointed in one
> direction, the ancient, accepted one of all minority ruling classes
> throughout history ? divide and rule.
>
> Quite obviously, therefore, unity is the first requisite for
> destroying neo-colonialism. Primary and basic is the need for an all-
> union government on the much divided continent of Africa. Along with
> that, a strengthening of the Afro-Asian Solidarity Organisation and the
> spirit of Bandung is already under way. To it, we must seek the
> adherence on an increasingly formal basis of our Latin American
> brothers.
>
> Furthermore, all these liberatory forces have, on all major issues and
> at every possible instance, the support of the growing socialist sector
> of the world.
>
> Finally, we must encourage and utilise to the full those still all too
> few yet growing instances of support for liberation and anti-
> colonialism inside the imperialist world itself.
>
> To carry out such a political programme, we must all back it with
> national plans designed to strengthen ourselves as independent nations.
> An external condition for such independent development is neutrality or
> political non-alignment. This has been expressed in two conferences of
> Non-Aligned Nations during the recent past, the last of which, in Cairo
> in 1964, clearly and inevitably showed itself at one with the rising
> forcesof liberation and human dignity.
>
> And the preconditions for all this, to which lip service is often paid
> but activity seldom directed, is to develop ideological clarity among
> the anti-imperialist, anti-colonialist, pro-liberation masses of our
> continents. They, and they alone, make, maintain or break revolutions.
>
> With the utmost speed, neo-colonialism must be analysed in clear and
> simple terms for the full mass understanding by the surging
> organisations of the African peoples. The All-African Trade Union
> Federation (AATUF) has already made a start in this direction, while
> the Pan-African Youth Movement, the women, journalists, farmers and
> others are not far behind. Bolstered with ideological clarity, these
> organisations, closely linked with the ruling parties where liberatory
> forces are in power, will prove that neo-colonialism is the symptom of
> imperialism?s weakness and that it is defeatable. For, when all is said
> and done, it is the so-called little man, the bent-backed, exploited,
> malnourished, blood-covered fighter for independence who decides. And
> he invariably decides for freedom.
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------gambiapost.NET------------------------------
> SUBSCRIPTION: http://thegambiapostforum.com/membership
> We thank you for joining our forum. The purpose of The Gambia Post Forum is
> to provide a place for national discourse, a place where we can exchange ideas
> and share common interests. The Gambia Post is the largest Gambian online
> community on the Web where a variety of issues are discussed. We maintain an
> Open Forum for ALL Gambians and Friends of The Gambia, accessible to people of
> all works of life, and ages. And so while we understand that it is human nature
> to lose one's temper occasionally, a consistent pattern of profanity, especially
> against the parents of others will not be tolerated. This may result in a
> suspension and if necessary an indefinite ban. Once again, welcome to the Gambia
> Post and in the spirit of our motto, we encourage you to 'let your thoughts fly'.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ©2002 Our Guiding Principle : "Va, pensiero", "Let thought(s) fly forth"
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html
To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤