Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism

“This book is therefore an attempt to examine neo-colonialism not only in its African context and its relation to African unity, but in world perspective.”

In the Introduction, Nkrumah clearly states that neo-colonialism is not only a problem of former colonial states. The issue is global and, thus, his analysis will not be limited to Ghana or any other former colony. In emphasizing the importance of a “world perspective,” Nkrumah introduces the theme of The Importance of Unity for Resistance amongst the exploited peoples of the world.

“If Africa’s multiple resources were used in her own development, they could place her among the modernized continents of the world.”

Among the many moral objections to colonialism and neocolonialism, Nkrumah alludes to the exploitative manner in which Western countries extract resources from their colonies, denying the colonies the opportunity to develop their own industries. The western powers then continue to refer to these former colonies as “developing countries” (See: Index of Terms) while ignoring that the opportunity for meaningful development has been taken from them, along with so much more.

“Balkanization is the major instrument of neo-colonialism and will be found wherever neo-colonialism is practiced.”

“Balkanization” refers to the fragmentation or division of a region, state, or society into smaller, often hostile, units or groups. The term originated from the historical breakup of the Balkan Peninsula in southeastern Europe during the 19th and 20th centuries, when the region fractured into several smaller, ethnically-diverse states after the decline of the Ottoman Empire. According to Nkrumah, the balkanization of Africa is a deliberate ploy by former colonial powers to maintain control over its resources. 

“The Jeanneney Report published in 1964 and expressing the official French view, pointed out that the protective system of the French zone was no longer in the interests of France and the Report therefore advocated the re-deployment of French aid.”

Nkrumah argues that foreign aid is a pitiful attempt to return the wealth extracted from colonized countries during the colonial period. Part of its lack of efficacy is the ease with which it can be withdrawn: The aid is not unconditional and can be withdrawn according to the whims of imperial domestic policy. This example of France reappraising the need for foreign aid demonstrates how quickly an important source of funding can be unilaterally removed for a developing country, reflecting The Implications of Foreign Interference.

“[The Russian Revolution] created the opportunity for a socialist break in the chain of imperialism that encircled the world.”

Nkrumah was a socialist, though his main focus in Neo-Colonialism is to advocate for Pan-African unity. Nevertheless, socialism is a vital force in the book because it offers an alternative to the imperialist framework erected by the capitalist powers. Socialism is an interruption of centuries of ideological exploitation, he suggests, which is all the more important for colonized countries seeking to exit the trappings of the capitalist system.

“In America, the farming smallholder still lives close to and even below the poverty line, while the extensive mechanized farms of banker-financed companies are spoon-fed by a bankers’ Government.”

Early in the book, Nkrumah described neo-colonialism as a global problem. Here, he demonstrates how the same networks of international finance and political oppression are turned against working-class farmers in the Western countries which are supposedly meant to benefit from colonialism or neo-colonialism. Nkrumah argues that class solidarity should transcend national borders, suggesting that a farmer in America has more in common with a person in a developing country than with the rich and powerful financiers who are exploiting them both. This argument reflects Nkrumah’s belief in The Importance of Unity for Resistance on a global scale.

“Greater intensity is infused into the struggle by the resurgence of rivals, of whom Germany and Japan are the most virile.”

There is a hint of irony in the way in which Nkrumah sketches the contours of the post-World War II world. Though Germany and Japan fought a brutal war against the Allied powers, including the United States, they have received far more post-war investment than developing countries. Even after all the bloodshed and genocide, these countries benefit from a level of investment and financial backing which is never offered to non-aligned countries.

“The Marshall Plan was used to push American imperialist penetrations into the fragmented German industries and financial institutions, into which it bought heavily.”

Though Nkrumah noted the irony of America’s former enemies receiving such vast sums of reinvestment after the end of World War II, he is not ignorant of the reasons for the financial mechanisms such as the Marshall Plan. The United States is seeking to solidify the foundations of the capitalist world: These countries may receive more investment, but the aim of the investment is the same as the aims of neo-colonialism. They are different aspects of the same broader capitalist movement toward domination.

“How is it possible that capitalism, rooted in free enterprise and competition, has arrived at a stage where competition is being eroded to the point where pyramidal monopolies exercise dictatorial rights?”

Nkrumah uses a rhetorical question to expose the inherent contradictions of The Nature of Neo-Colonialism. The system which espouses the benefits and importance of competition has, at the same time, created a tightly-bound monopoly of shared interests. This lack of competition in a system which claims to be competitive reveals the hypocrisy at the heart of the capitalist system, which benefits a rich elite while claiming to offer opportunity to all.

“Africa has failed to make much headway on the road to purposeful industrial development because her natural resources have not been employed for that end but have been used for the greater development of the Western world.”

Nkrumah examines neo-colonialism not only as a moral issue, but a practical issue as well. The extraction of resources from colonized countries—and the continued extraction in the neo-colonial era—not only transfers wealth from poor countries to rich countries, but denies poor countries the opportunity to raise their level of development. The gap between the rich and poor only widens at the expense of the poor, creating a system of transfer which perpetuates itself. This reflects one of The Implications of Foreign Interference.

“It is quite likely that Africa could provide enough phosphates not only to fertilize the abundant agricultural production that would cover its future food and industrial requirements, but to leave enough over to supply the needs of many other parts of the globe.”

Nkrumah argues that if African countries were allowed to keep hold of their wealth and resources, the entire continent could be elevated to a significant degree. He seeks to turn Africa into a land of plenty, arguing against neo-colonialism by framing the alternative as a thriving, dynamic system that is more equitable.

“The king of mining in South Africa, indeed in Africa, is Harry Frederick Oppenheimer.”

Throughout Neo-Colonialism, Nkrumah has discussed the subject in terms of broad, faceless networks of finance and capital. These networks are largely depersonalized mechanisms which seem to exist almost entirely in the abstract. By naming Harry Oppenheimer, however, Nkrumah is able to put a human face to the exploitation. While many millions of people in developing countries are kept poor, men like Oppenheimer make themselves extraordinarily rich. The personalization of exploitation makes it more human and—importantly for Nkrumah’s thesis—more defeatable.

“Our examination into Harmony Gold Mining Co. Ltd. has led us a long way round the world and into realms of power and prodigious wealth.”

In these chapters, Nkrumah provides an exhaustive list of the connections between the various neo-colonial interests around the world to expose The Nature of Neo-Colonialism. Though there are many company names, many countries, and many financial interests, Nkrumah is able to trace their ownership back to a small, select group of imperialist individuals. These chapters present a complex web of financial interests, while also revealing that the true ownership of these interests is actually relatively small.

“Biggest octopus in the Oppenheimer sea of operations is probably the Anglo American Corporation Ltd.”

The octopus is a visual metaphor for the web of subsidiaries and financial investments which obfuscate who is really in control of the neo-colonial operation. Harry Oppenheimer, in this metaphor, is the octopus and his various tentacles reach into developing countries in subtle, nefarious ways. The metaphor is deliberately dehumanizing because, for Nkrumah, the entire enterprise is inhuman. Oppenheimer is presented as a covetous animal rather than a man, painting him as an inhuman enemy who must be conquered in the name of freedom, equality, and independence.

“What seems at first glance to be a rather curious interest for a company engaged in the diamond industry is De Beer Consolidated’s 50 per cent holding of the issued share capital of African Explosives & Chemical Industries Ltd.”

The financial interests of neo-colonialism have diversified their portfolio. Through a system of mergers, acquisitions, and shell companies, a diamond mining firm also holds interest in the explosives which are needed to mine. The financial interests corner every part of the industry, no matter how seemingly unrelated, ensuring that no profits at all are left to the people of the developing countries.

“The British South Africa Company was a creation of Cecil Rhodes’ genius in empire building.”

Nkrumah demonstrates how many of the neo-colonial ventures have direct ties to the bloodshed of earlier colonialism. Cecil Rhodes (See: Key Figures) was a noted colonist. He was open in his belief that Western powers should subjugate the African people. His company is at the forefront of neo-colonialism, though his name is no longer attached. This illustrates how the colonial history of violence is masked behind the bureaucracy of neo-colonialism.

“In East Africa, one of the most powerful concerns is Tanganyika Concessions. The name is misleading. It was actually registered in London towards the end of January 1899.”

The bureaucracy of neo-colonialism allows imperial interests to mask their true intentions and to disguise The Implications of Foreign Interference. Tanganyika Concessions may be named for a region in East Africa, but its true ownership is in London. Whereas colonial empires operated under the banner of states, neo-colonial enterprises can invent names which gesture toward local interests but actually siphon money out of developing countries.

“Pechiney, registered in Paris at the opening of the year 1896, is the continuation of a company formed over a hundred years ago in 1855 and; like the other leading mining and metallurgical companies in France, has links with the country’s leading banking houses.”

The success of firms like Pechiney in the neo-colonial era demonstrates how the profiteering of the colonial era never ended. The same companies which extracted wealth from developing countries in the colonial era now do the same, except their extraction is backed by laws and contracts rather than imperial soldiers. For the people of the developing countries, the end result is the same.

“The Congolese were taxed 280 million francs to pay for European civil servants, 440 million francs for special funds of Belgium, 1,329 million francs for the army.”

Even after independence, Belgium continues to extract wealth from the Congolese people. This story illustrates the evolution from colonialism to The Nature of Neo-Colonialism. The end goal of wealth extraction remains the same, but now the imperial forces employ taxes, fines, debts, and other financial instruments to collect their profits. The Congolese people may have won their independence, but Belgium continues to impose financial penalties on them for the privilege of liberty.

“Less publicized, for obvious reasons, have been the involved economic aspects of the whole Congo tragedy.”

The murder of Patrice Lumumba illustrates the brutality of the imperial response to the independence of developing nations, yet the economic aspects demonstrate the nefarious ways in which neo-colonialism has grown out of colonialism. Physical violence is paired with economic violence to maintain imperial control of resources. They are inseparable, even if the economic aspect is less visible. Nkrumah seeks to raise awareness of this economic aspect as equally important as the physical violence of neo-colonialism.

“One of the most effective ways in which Britain and France have retained economic ties with former colonial territories is through action to ensure that the new States remained in the monetary zones centered on London and Paris.”

Nkrumah explores the quiet ways in which imperial control of former colonies is extended into the neo-colonial era, reflecting The Implications of Foreign Interference. Currency is one such method by which former colonies become dependent on the former imperial powers, because they lack agency over their own currency and, by extension, their economy. On paper, these places are independent, but they lack the true independence which comes with complete autonomy over an economy.

“Firestone is a byword in West Africa where, until the recent advent of iron-ore exploiting companies, it dominated the economy of Liberia.”

As a brand, Firestone has very different meanings in Africa and America. In America, Firestone is a brand of tire. In Africa, it is a byword for colonial exploitation. The same word is viewed from different perspectives due to the populations’ respective perspective on colonialism. Nkrumah wants to draw attention of the people for whom Firestone is just a tire brand, showing them that the tires on their car are bound to the mechanisms of colonialism.

“The general objective has been mentioned: to achieve colonialism in fact while preaching independence.”

The fundamental aim of neo-colonialism is, Nkrumah suggests, effectively a rebrand of the old exploitation. New structures are put into place which achieve the same goal of profit through colonial extraction, but these structures are draped in the legality and branding of independence. True independence for these countries is a shallow claim, as the old imperial forces are still exploiting them to the same degree, all while congratulating themselves for the moral accomplishment of ending colonialism.