Nkrumah was born in Nkroful in the British colony of the Gold
Coast, later to become Ghana. He studied in Gold Coast schools and obtained
a
college degree in 1939 from Lincoln University, Pennsylvania. He
was the first president of the Republic of Ghana and was active life-long
in African
nationalism and in Pan-African unity. He developed the notion of
"neo-colonialism" which outlined the features of continued exploitation
of former
colonies after formal political independence was achieved.
from Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism, 1966
The neocolonialism of today represents imperialism in its final and
perhaps its most dangerous stage. In the past it was possible to convert
a country
upon which a neo-colonial regime had been imposed--Egypt in the
nineteenth century is an example-into a colonial territory. Today this
process is no
longer feasible. Old-fashioned colonialism is by no means entirely
abolished. It still constitutes an African problem, but it is everywhere
on the
retreat. Once a territory has become nominally independent it is
no longer possible, as it was in the last century, to reverse the process.
In place of
colonialism as the main instrument of imperialism we have today
neocolonialism.
The essence of neocolonialism is that the State which is subject
to it is, in theory, independent and has all the outward trappings of international
sovereignty. In reality its economic system and thus its political
policy is directed from outside.
The methods and form of this direction can take various shapes. For
example, in an extreme case the troops of the. imperial power may garrison
the
territory of the neo-colonial State and control the government of
it. More often, however, neo-colonialist control is exercised through economic
or
monetary means. The neo-colonial State may be obliged to take the
manufactured products of the imperialist power to the exclusion of competing
products from elsewhere. Control over government policy in the neo-colonial
State may be secured by payments towards the cost of running the
State, by the provision of civil servants in positions where they
can dictate policy, and by monetary control over foreign exchange through
the
imposition of a banking system controlled by the imperial power.
Where neo-colonial exists the power exercising control is often the
State which formerly ruled the territory in question, but this is not necessarily
an
example, in the case of South Vietnam the former imperial power
was France, but neo--colonial control of the State has now gone to the
United
States. It is possible that neo-colonial control may be exercised
by a consortium of financial interests which are not specifically identifiable
with any
particular State. The control of the Congo by great international
financial concerns is a case in point.
The result of new-colonialism is that foreign capital is used for
the exploitation rather than for the development of the less developed
parts of the
world. Investment under neo-colonialism increases rather than decreases
the gap between the rich and the poor countries of the world.
The struggle against neocolonialism is not aimed at excluding the
capital of the developed world from operating in less developed countries
being
used in such a way as to impoverish the less developed . . ..
Neo-colonialism is also the worst form of imperialism. For those
who practice it, it means power without responsibility and for those who
suffer from
it, it means exploitation without redress. In the days of old-fashioned
colonialism, the imperial power had at least to explain and justify at
home the
actions it was taking abroad. In the colony those who served the
ruling imperial-power could at least look to its protection against any
violent move
by their opponents. With neocolonialism neither is the case.
Above all, neocolonialism, like colonialism before it, postpones
the facing of the social issues which will have to be faced by the fully
developed sector
of the world before the danger of world war can be eliminated or
the problem of world poverty resolved.
Neo-colonialism, like colonialism, is an attempt to export the social
conflicts of the capitalist countries. The temporary success of this policy
can be
seen in the ever-widening gap between the richer and the poorer
nations of the world. But the internal contradictions and conflicts of
neocolonialism
make it certain that it cannot endure as a permanent world policy.
How it should be brought to an end is a problem that should be studied,
above all,
by the developed nations of the world because it is they who will
feel the full impact of the ultimate failure. The longer it continues the
more certain it
is that its inevitable collapse will destroy the social system of
which they have made it a foundation.