Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism

by Kwame Nkrumah

The Last Stage of Imperialism

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, History, Africa, Theory, Economics, Philosophy

280 pages, Paperback

First published April 1, 1965

About the author

Kwame Nkrumah PC was a Ghanaian politician and revolutionary. He was the first prime minister and president of Ghana, having led it to independence from Britain in 1957. An influential advocate of Pan-Africanism, Nkrumah was a founding member of the Organization of African Unity and winner of the Lenin Peace Prize in 1962.

Reviews

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Neo-colonialism, like colonialism, is an attempt to export the social conflicts of the capitalist countries." - Kwame Nkrumah

The unofficial sequel in the period of decolonialization to Vladimir Lenin's Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism , which itself was written in a time of crucial development in the global political economy - monopolization and financial imperialism's emergence. This thorough analysis of the division of Africa among western finance capital and its imminent perpetual underdevelopment deserves to be held aloft with Lenin and the essentials of Marxist Political Economy and Critical Political Economy.

Nkrumah purports that inherent features of the system of neo-colonialism produce contradictions which themselves will spell the end of this system, not unlike similarly produced conclusions drawn by Marx on the capitalist social relations themselves. Where the agent of history in Marxist iconography is the proletariat at-large, or the vanguard party-as-class-representative in Bolshevism & Marxism-Leninism, Nkrumah asserts it is up to the now decolonized, free nations of Africa to build a form of nation-class solidarity - African unity - in order to oppose the ongoing forces of imperialism. These imperialistic forces have merely changed form, shifting from colonialism to a more distanced, abstract, corporate form of surplus value extraction in neo-colonialism, where...

...the State which is subjected to [neo-colonialism] is, in theory, independent and has all the trappings of international sovereignty. In reality its economic system and thus its political policy is directed from the outside.

Neo-colonialism differs from colonialism through several key mechanisms. The major instrument of neo-colonialism is Balkanization. By way of creating weak, independent states whose decentralized federalist structures and lack of market power makes central planning impossible and reliance on colonial "aid" (more on this later) inevitable, neo-colonialism allows for imperialist nations and their capitalist cadres to divide, (re-)conquer, and coerce with punitive and exploitative financial strictures. Even the larger de-colonial states like Nigeria and Ghana were subject to less a political Balkanization than an economic one as they were carved into multiple administrative regions in a federalist manner, which served to obstruct central planning. French-colonized nations, previously administered under colonial federations comprising many nation-states, were individually assigned de-colonization imperatives by the Loi-Cadre, and were punished if they did not agree to the terms imposed by France - Guinea had all federally administered staff, equipment, and documents withdrawn from the country, and pensions and financial assistance were cut off as punishment for not agreeing to France's terms. As Balkanization is the major instrument of neo-colonialism, Nkrumah calls for the resistance of neo-colonialism by a strategy of African Unity: a united federation of African states who conduct their affairs independent of colonial powers and through collective co-operation and subsistence.

Whereas Balkanization was a political tool, it served to lay the groundwork for economic exploitation. Independence in de-colonial Africa was, in a word, fraud. Former colonial masters maintained their claim on the division of Africa, as de-colonial 'packages' offered (with punishment of deprivation for declining) allowed for maintained control over the vast key agricultural and mineral industries of African nations. Additionally, in order for decolonial states to maintain guaranteed markets and prices for their natural resources, in turn they had to purchase surplus and uncompetitive machinery, textiles, sugar, and flour from Europe at profitable prices. Most decolonial nations used a colonially imposed currency (many countries still use the West and Central African Franc in 2023), with their central banks being staffed and controlled primarily by colonial residents from Europe. Because different African countries were subsumed to the political and economic needs and arrangements of their colonial masters - and because the emergence of the EU's common market - these Balkanized countries were forced to pursue strategies of production and trade that were incoherent among one another: where they could have been trading with one another based on their specializations and needs, some were exporting goods under exploitative arrangements while others resisted and maintained relative self-sufficiency (agriculturally at least).

The key part of the fraud of de-colonial independence was the forced reliance on colonial aid, which was anything but. In short,

There are several definitions of 'aid,' as B. Chango Machyo in his Aid and Neo-Colonialism has pointed out.

'The definition varies with different blocs. Thus the U.N. has its own definition, the imperialist camp has its own, so has the socialist camp, and probably the non-aligned camp might also have one. But, generally speaking, there are two main definitions: one by the U.N. and another as understood by the so-called donor countries. According to the U.N., "economic aid consists only of outright grants and long-term lending, for non-military purposes, by Government and international organisations". But the so-called aid-giving countries include tin the term "aid", private capital investment and export credits, even for relatively short periods, as well as loans for military purposes.'

As Professor Benham in Economic Aid to Underdeveloped Countries remakrs: 'It is pleasant to feel that you are helping your neighbours, and at the same time increasing your own profits.' Before the decline of colonialism what today is known as aid was simply foreign investment. (p.50-1)

Following the World War II, the war economies did not come to a halt. When faced with a need for the utilization of excess capital beyond the discretion of domestic consumption, exportation makes the most sense for capitalist empires. Largely unindustrialized and at the time unplundered, investment of capital in Africa provided bountiful returns, to the tunes of several hundred percent gains over the course of just a few years. Additionally, neo-colonial policy and aid restricts foreign capital to the sectors of natural resources and agriculture, so as to not create industrial competitors for the future back home in the imperial core.

With this in mind, the context of the Marshall Plan, USAID's existence and the west's role in distributing aid is completely flipped on its head. It is another form of imperialist exploitation veiled by the abstraction of aid, just like the aforementioned de-colonial 'packages' offered by the European colonial powers. USAID's declared policy was "to employ United States assistance to aid-receiving countries in such a way as will encourage the development of private sectors in their economies. Thus, [A.I.D.] will normally not be prepared to finance publicly owned industrial and extractive enterprises, although it is realised that there may be exceptions..." (p.55).

'Aid,' itself being foreign direct investment, allowed for neo-colonial plunder and the formation of imperial monopolies controlling Africa's crucial resources, exported back home for production in the West or for cheap consumption with imperial superprofits in hand. American firms invested $4.5b in developing countries between 1950 and 1959, helped along by Marshall Plan aid, and received net profits of $8.3b, a return of investment of nearly 200% in 10 years. Marshall Aid was the United States' key vehicle in securing a monopolistic foothold in Africa, as "it was announced by E.C.A. [Marshall Plan] in July 1949 that 'American experts with Marshall Plan aid are probing Africa from the Atlas Mountains to the Cape of Good Hope for agricultural and mineral wealth" (p.60). Financial consortia formed out of combinations of financial capital firms use aid and predatory loans as a vehicle for controlling the means of production of Africa. "The prime objective is to monopolise Africa's sources of raw materials, not, as it is claimed, to assist the African countries to develop their economies. For the materials are carried off largely in their raw state or as concentrates to enhance the productive output of the imperialist countries and to be returned to them in the form of heavy equipment for extractive industry and the infrastructure for carrying the resources away" (p.65).

An enlightening case study of the mechanisms of financial plunder and underdevelopment is the Liberian example. At the turn of the 20th century, the largest debt Liberia held was an 1871 loan of £100,000 of which only £27,000 was delivered. This financial robbery would snowball into successive loans of both ballooning size in £s and number of major banking houses contributing to the credit. Liberia's government received meagre cash, well below their creditor's obligations, while over $1,000,000 in their 'rescue' loan was distributed in bonds to England, Germany, Netherlands, and the USA, plus reparations payments for having to sell German properties in Liberia to settle pre-existing debts. This particular loan was paid off by yet another loan (this is common for indebted, underdeveloped countries - the IMF is mostly responsible for this coercion today) of $5m from the tire and rubber company Firestone (Liberia has significant rubber resources) in 1926, for which only half had been subscribed 20 years later. To settle the newer, larger debt, Liberia's rubber planting was surrendered, and the office of the Receiver of Customs was replaced by a rubber industry-appointed financial advisor.

One of the principal functions of finance capital is the issue of securities on which the discount rates are ridiculously high. (p. 81)

Nkrumah goes into utterly meticulous detail disentangling the web of colonial ownership of Africa's tin, iron, manganese, copper, bauxite, chrome, asbestos, cobalt, antimony, cotton, zinc, lead, phosphates, rubber, silver, gold, diamonds, coal, oil, and so on. Diagrams of international networks of affiliated financial firms under major conglomerates operating in African mining are spattered across the second half of the book as Nkrumah chronicles the extent to which financial imperialism has penetrated Africa and perpetuated its underdevelopment and exploitation. It is an enlightening exercise for the reader to trace Nkrumah's painstaking research and imagine the work it took to map out the cross-pollinated ownership of multiple industries by a given banking house, and the cross-pollinated ownership by multiple banking houses of a given country's key industry. Names like Banque de Paris et des Pays-Bas (Paribas), Deutsche Bank, Morgan (JP Morgan), Oppenheimer, Alcan, Rio Tinto, and many others will pop up repeatedly as Nkrumah discusses ownership combines of every major industry in most of Africa. They will be carved into your brain.

Neo-colonialism holds up incredibly well, just as Lenin's Imperialism still does. Was Nkrumah vindicated on the contradictions of neo-colonialism? Unfortunately not. There has been no autodestruction of neo-colonialism. The mechanisms of neo-colonialism, the system of its accumulation and reproduction he expounded were spot on. It still looms large over Africa and the rest of the world, as the expansion of borderless capital exportation in the age of the WTO fomented sweatshop labour and continued superprofits extracted across the world's peripheries. He is crystal clear about the necessary union of oppressed states to resist the combined powers of imperialist coercion and financial exploitation. Nkrumah makes it clear as day that Africa has all of the resources and tools to sufficiently trade and develop without relying on their predatory de-colonial masters.

[Σταμάτης Καρασαββίδης · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a splendid piece of work and research! Extremely important for anyone wishing to understand how modern monopolies form and operate but also where and how they draw and derive their material. Obviously also extremely important on understanding the basis of the modern world.

Kwame Nkrumah defines the essence of neocolonialism as the condition where a state appears to be nominally independent, its economic and therefore its political system is controlled by outside forces, namely the western monopoly capital specifically. Nkrumah defines neocolonialism as the last, worst, most developed and desperate stage of imperialism.

Neocolonialism can prevent countries from trading with countries of their choosing by imposing sanctions on them and creating a condition where they are forced to buy the ready made products of the west, which products although were made out of resources and labour extracted by neocolonized countries, especially from Africa.

Neocolonialism changes both colonialism and imperialism. While under old colonialism, there were specific countries which held rule of their colonial territories and everything inside them, such as England, France, Belgium etc, under neocolonialism it is the combined western monopoly capital which operates in the whole of the neocolonised world through its cartels, trusts, consortiums and banks. Old colonies become obsolete and even colonizing countries like Portugal become neocolonized themselves, as Nkrumah mentions specifically how Portugal's colonies were subject of trading between Germany and England without the consent of Portugal itself.
Some old remnants of old colonialism can remain even under neocolonialism like settler colonialism in the style of South Africa, Rhodesia back then and Mauritania, where the western european population of these countries would be paid more and would have much bigger control of the countrie's wealth and political resources than the non white population.

Another very important aspect of neocolonialism is the extraction of social struggles of the West in the neocolonized world and we see this VERY intensely in the arab speaking world with notable examples like Wahhabism, Salafism, ISIS, Al Qaeda etc. These regions enjoyed a fair amount of peace and prosperity before western interference. We can see that social progress in the middle east was much better and developed than the extremely patriarchical and homophobic foundamentalist West. These social struggles of the west were transported there and today we see the opposite. It is the hypocritical western world that is a self proclaimed 'champion of human rights' and 'social progress', while the 'backward arab speaking people are lagging behind and remain in the middle ages'. We see a very similar example in Eastern Europe after the fall of the antifascist wall in 89' and the dissolution of the USSR in 91'.

The solution and answer against neocolonialism according to Nkrumah is unity. And I cant help but agree. Panafricanism, Panarabism, movements which aim for unity against the western monopoly capital are the only ones that can win and strike a great punch down neocolonialism.

The only thing that the future proved Nkrumah 'wrong' was the rise of neoliberalism. Nkrumah argues that a basic condition of neocolonialism is the overly exploiting nature of neocolonialism in neocolonised countries like in Africa, with a huge amount of the population living under extreme poverty and horrible working conditions, and through that, the maintenance of a fairly stable, healthy and prosperous living standard in Western countries. This today can may be seen only in countries like Netherlands, Norway, Iceland etc but the extreme poverty and underdevelopment that neoliberalism caused to the working classes of USA (even to a percentage of the white working class which was historically much more privilaged. While still being privileged to this day over the black and indigenous working class, its living conditions are worsening). We can see the same for the working classes of UK, France, Germany and Belgium.

According to Nkrumah, the main mechanisms of neocolonialism are these, which are extremely relevant today:

1. It uses "aid" for development in countries that just got their independence but traps these countries through debt traps
2. Behind every imperialist policy today is USA, Wall Street and what he calls "the invisible government" (see Hong Kong, DPRK, Ukraine, Venezuela etc)
3. The information and army agencies create counter revolutionary mercenaries that aim to topple a new independent state (see Syria)
4. It benefits western monopolies in trading in contrast to trading with other countries and in this way regulates market prices
5. It uses extremely high interest rates through lending and "aiding", thus creating a new form of export capital
6. It uses syndicalism and social democracy to either corrupt popular movements or take part directly in the looting of the neocolonised world
7. It directly funds coups and assassinations of political leaders
8. Through the use of lies and ideological and cultural influence it infiltrates and influence the people of the neocolonised world turning them against their independence
9. Heavy use of military bases and advisors in the neocolonised countries
10. It uses Hollywood which depicts the "civilized white cop" as the hero and the "non white rebel" as the villain
11. It uses religious sects like Jehovah's witnesses and evangelicals in ideological influence
12. Army corps take part directly in looting and destroying the independence of other countries under the guise of 'peacekeeping' (see the Peace Corps, White Helmets and several UN military missions in Syria, Yugoslavia, Mali etc)

Overall, perfect work, a bit tiring with details in the middle of the book but definitely necessary in both proving his point and also making the reader really understand how monopolies function in modern capitalism. Definitely suggest reading AFTER finishing Lenin's foundational work "Imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism".

5/5

[Matthew Quest]

Kwame Nkrumah's Neo-Colonialism is the classic statement on the post-colonial condition. African, Caribbean and Third World nation-states after flag independence find they have achieved government or state power but still cannot control the political economies of their country as they appear to be directed from the outside by multi-national corporations. Many African Americans use this analysis to suggest even when Black people win elections they really are not in charge and this is consistent with the theory found in this work. The problem with this approach is twofold. First, why do people still strive to get state power under capitalism in the name of "independence" if it is clear there will be no sovereignty? Why is it seen as a radical analysis? If the nation-state under capitalism secures no sovereignty then why not permanently organize resistance outside state power? Neo-colonialism is an application of Lennin's last writings, where he said there would be no socialism in Russia, to the African world. It deceivingly sets up terms for valuating statesmen as "progressive" when they actually attack the independent self-mobilization of independent people of color, especially workers, at the post-colonial moment. When Nkrumah came up with this theory in Ghana that was in fact what he was doing. He was overthrown the next year and many blamed the CIA. Instead, we need to ask why he did not retain the support of the people of Ghana? Still a classic of political theory, which need not be true for all time, still addresses the questions humans are perennially asking.

[Christopher Moltisanti's Windbreakers fan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Neocolonialism is extension of colonialism that doesn't rely on physical force. But, uses non-violent forces (though it is indeed violent and fierce) of capitalism (cultural and market) to control the raw-materials and fate of newly "freed" nation states of Global South. Nkrumah correctly identifies that so called civilized nation states of global north are incapable of giving up the whips of colonialism and imperialism which provided them wealth at the expense of immeasurable blood of people in global south. As a result, they incorporated their ideology of oppression into the form of capitalism, trade, monetary aid, corporate dictatorship, and other NGOs such as IMF and others to control the economy, culture, and politics of newly freed nation states. By not giving reparations of hundred of years of brutalization and murders, these former colonizers and new powerhouse in post WWII (US, Canada, Australia) keep the machine of colonization and imperialism running in much more covert liberal form.


Nkrumah is not opposed to Global South receiving "aid" from Colonizers. However, he is opposed to the demands of theirs that dictate the fate of people in global south and that oppose the process of decolonization.

TL DR: This is banger baaaaabby

PS: Rest in Power Nkrumah who got ousted by CIA for his radical ideas of decolonization, pan-Africanism, and African-socialism, and who died in exile.

[.🍃. thecursed_Reader · Rating 4 out of 5]

In other for capitalism to survive, it needs to exploit African countries and when Africans are truly free. The capitalist will have to face the poor in their own countries this resulting to the destruction of their civilization

[Brad · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Thus are African riches brought to support the manipulative ramifications of international finance capital."

"The neo-colonialist aim is not only to export capital but also to control the overseas market. Thus attempts are subtly made to prevent developing countries from taking any decisive steps towards industrialization...at all costs the Trust must secure a participation in a development it cannot prevent. And by its very nature this participation thwarts any further progress."

This about sums it up. Nkrumah shows this through exhaustive detailing of the financialized monopoly combinations controlling mining and general resource extraction in a "new scramble for Africa". What he calls a "facade of separateness" masks both the collaboration of ostensibly different industrial firms under monopoly financial interests, and the collaboration of comprador regimes. Finally, the speculative nature of such a scramble propels the financialization of industrial capital, with lasting ramifications today.

What really makes this hit home is the outlining of horizontal integrations surrounding Inco, later to become Vale Canada Ltd. as a subsidiary of the Brazilian mining company Vale. Given the Canadian state's activities involving meetings with energy firms and spying on Brazil's energy ministry, and of course the continued extraction of raw materials from the global south, the legacy of these particular interests remains sadly relevant 60 years later as a reflective example of broader neo-colonial patterns.

One is reminded of Michael Parenti's words, "These countries are not underdeveloped. They're overexploited.

Ending with a call for pan-Africanism as a prerequisite for marshalling the necessary unity of decolonial forces, and a lamentation about the myopia of labour aristocracy in the imperial core, Nkrumah says, "World capitalism has postponed its crisis but only at the cost of transforming it into an international crisis."

Hopefully, as he prophesied, "Neo-colonialism is not a sign of imperialism's strength, but rather of its last hideous gasp."

[Ali Hassan · Rating 4 out of 5]

The essence of neo-colonialism 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.
The result of neo-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 neo-colonialism is not aimed at excluding the capital of the developed world from operating in less developed countries. It is aimed at preventing the financial power of the developed countries being used in such a way as to impoverish the less developed.
A State in the grip of neo-colonialism is not master of its own destiny. It is this factor which makes neo-colonialism such a serious threat to world peace. The growth of nuclear weapons has made out of date the old-fashioned balance of power which rested upon the ultimate sanction of a major war. Certainty of mutual mass destruction effectively prevents either of the great power blocs from threatening the other with the possibility of a world-wide war, and military conflict has thus become confined to 'limited wars'. For these neo-colonialism is the breeding ground.
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 neo-colonialism neither is the case.
The rulers of neo-colonial States derive their authority to govern, not from the will of the people, but from the support which they obtain from their neo-colonialist masters. They have therefore little interest in developing education, strengthening the bargaining power of their workers employed by expatriate firms, or indeed of taking any step which would challenge the colonial pattern of commerce and industry, which it is the object of neo-colonialism to preserve. 'Aid', therefore, to a neo-colonial State is merely a revolving credit, paid by the neo-colonial master, passing through the neo-colonial State and returning to the neo-colonial master in the form of increased profits.
Secondly, it is in the field of 'aid' that the rivalry of individual developed States first manifests itself. So long as neo-colonialism persists so long will spheres of interest persist, and this makes multilateral aid—which is in fact the only effective form of aid—impossible.
Once multilateral aid begins the neo-colonialist masters are faced by the hostility of the vested interests in their own country. Their manufacturers naturally object to any attempt to raise the price of the raw materials which they obtain from the neo-colonialist territory in question, or to the establishment there of manufacturing industries which might compete directly or indirectly with their own exports to the territory.
Even education is suspect as likely to produce a student movement and it is, of course, true that in many less developed countries the students have been in the vanguard of the fight against neo-colonialism.
In the end the situation arises that the only type of aid which the neo-colonialist masters consider as safe is 'military aid'.
Military aid in fact marks the last stage of neo-colonialism and its effect is self-destructive. Sooner or later the weapons supplied pass into the hands of the opponents of the neo-colonialist regime and the war itself increases the social misery which originally provoked it.
The less developed world will not become developed through the goodwill or generosity of the developed powers. It can only become developed through a struggle against the external forces which have a vested interest in keeping it undeveloped.

________________________________________________________
This book will help you out to understand Pakistan's policy drivers and implications of the so-called aids, particularly, being a military client to the US.

[Bytes Lee · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a Ghanaian, I never met Dr. Kwame Nkrumah but his legacies continue and the infrastructure that he built for the nation is still operational and fully functional, though most have been sold to individual and private companies. Dr. Kwame Kkrumah, Ghanaians really miss you. Wherever you are in the universe find a way to visit us one more time and don't punish us for the evil that some of our forefathers did to you. We love you.

[JRT · Rating 5 out of 5]

“The essence of Neo-colonialism 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 struggle against neo-colonialism is not aimed at excluding the capital of the developed world from operating in less developed countries. It is aimed at preventing the financial power of the developed countries being used in such a way as to impoverish the less developed”

“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.”

“When Africa becomes economically free and politically united, the monopolies will come face to face with their own working class in their own countries, and a new struggle will arise within which the liquidation and collapse of imperialism will be complete.”

This book is a classic analysis of the sociopolitical and economic system of domination that has come to characterize global affairs. Kwame Nkrumah’s “Neo-Colonialism” is brilliant not just due to its sheer breath of detail, but because of its deep insight into how the world works. Nkrumah recognized that the powers that be needed to reorganize after the faltering of conventional colonialism, and identified monopoly capital and financialization as the major vehicles for the new world order. This is also a book about the importance of political unity as a necessary condition for economic freedom and national sovereignty. As Nkrumah makes clear, Africa was a playground for Western monopolists due to its fragmented nature. This fragmentation made a mockery of “independence,” and paved the way for corporate interests to dominate African labor, resources, and politics.

I highly recommend this classic to anyone who wants to learn about how colonialism never really died.

[Jana · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you read & liked Lenins „Imperialism“, you‘ll love this. As the title suggests, Nkrumah uses the same methods as Lenin, looking at economic and political methods of control, but applying it to the world since World War 2.
Nkrumah is a lot easier to read than Lenin, possibly because he writes a few decades later. Most of this book is, like „Imperialism“, an analysis of economics and politics. However, where I feel like I got more out of reading „Neo-Colonialism“ than Lenin, was the last chapter and the conclusion, where Nkrumah uses the momentum he build through his analysis to put forward his suggestions on how to fight imperialism.

[Evan J. Morrison · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nearly 60 years later, this research remains integral to understanding how the Western powers maintain covert control over developing nations. Unfortunately, this book is inaccessible to the average reader, as it is riddled with technical terminology. A contemporary reading draws upon unfamiliar historical examples that sends one scouring across the internet for clarity. Nonetheless, those who struggle with this book have a a lot to gain from it.

[Thomas Ray]

Kwame Nkrumah 1909-1972

HC502 N5 Memorial Library

Ghana 1966. President Kwame Nkrumah published a book, /Neo-Colonialism--The Last Stage of Imperialism/. The CIA then overthrew him. --/Killing Hope/, William Blum, 2014, p. 198.

[Prismo · Rating 3 out of 5]

"If world war is not to occur it must be prevented by positive action. This positive action is within the power of the peoples of those areas of the world which now suffer under neo-colonialism but it is only within their power if they act at once, with resolution and in unity.“

This work, in which Dr. Nkrumah coined the term "neo-colonialism," is an extremely thorough dissection of the neo-colonialism affecting Africa while he wrote this. It's really amazing how he managed to do such a deep dive into the nitty-gritty of how specific conglomerates manipulated economies to maximize their super-profits while being the leader of Ghana! Unfortunately for readability, this detail gets a little monotonous from roughly chapters 5–17, as the intricate webs of companies and their ownership structure doesn't make for the most engaging read, in my opinion. However, the final chapter is extremely powerful as a summation of his findings and a call to action that still rings true to this day — only through unity can the exploited masses take down the neo-colonial systems which maintain power through the classic "divide and conquer" strategy.

Overall, it is quite an interesting read, but I'm giving it only 3 stars due to how difficult it was to get through the finances of the Oppenheimer empire. Definitely recommend reading the first 4 chapters and chapter 18, though!

[Aine · Rating 3 out of 5]

"The essence of neo-colonialism 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."

Published the year before he was overthrown, the then-President of Ghana, Kwame Nkrumah uses "Neo-Colonialism: the last stage of imperialism" as a warning of an emergent trend experienced by the newly-independent nations. He says that neo-colonialism is "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."

"Africa," Nkrumah explains, "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."

According to Nkrumah, in the post-war era the wealthy nations needed to maintain peace at home through the development of the welfare state. This meant that, while before the war Africa's riches had gone to the elite, they now diverted to support the welfare state. This could not be achieved with the pre-war colonial system and the neo-colonial system took its place. While it has been positive for the powerful countries in the short term, "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."

Nkrumah then goes on to explain Africa's resources and the extraction of those resources to enrich those who "operate Africa's impoverishment", the continent's disunity, and the consortia which operate the extraction. He observe the constant penetration of a few banking and financial institutions into large industrial and commercial undertakings, creating a chain of links that bring them into a connective relationship making for domination in both national and international economy. The process has sped up since Lenin looked at it in 19116. At its imperialist stage finance capital's primary news is to find spheres of overseas investment which will return profits at a greater rate than can be obtained at home. The export of capital therefore becomes the dynamo of imperialism, which turns the export of commodities and leads to the capture of colonies as the means of assuring monopolist control.

For a modern reader, both accustomed to the concept of monopolies and unaccustomed to the names of companies from 60 years ago, the list of monopolies and combinations is a bit much. But, as well as being a significant piece of research, these chapters show the wide variety of companies involved in resource extraction, the connection between the colonial and post-colonial periods, and the amount of knowledge that was already out there by the 1960s about this.

The answer? African unity: "It is only when the artificial boundaries that divide her are broken down so as to provide for viable economic units, and ultimately a single African unit, that Africa will be able to develop industrially, for her own sake, and ultimately for the sake of a healthy world economy." His logic is that "their [the monopolies and combines] financial and economic empires are pan-African and they can only be challenged on a pan-African basis. Only a united Africa through an All-African Union Govern can defeat them." An all-Africa planning body could take immediate steps towards the development of large scale industry and power.

This will have an impact on the neo-colonists' front doors: "When Africa becomes economically free and politically united, the monopolists will come face to face with their own working class in their own countries, and a new struggle will arise within which the liquidation and collapse of imperialism will be complete."

For a modern reader its instructional to see reminders of the important role that the Soviet Union played as part of the anti-colonials movement: "the existence of the socialist nations makes it impossible to enforce the full rigour of the neo-colonialist system The existence of an alternative system is itself a challenge to the neo-colonialist regime".

What's more, Nkrumah puts forward an argument that is underpinned by global solidarity and a belief in change: "The less developed world will not become developed through the goodwill or generosity of the developed powers. It can only become developed through a struggle against the external forces which have a vested interest in keeping it underdeveloped."

[Jon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Nkrumah was the leader of the Gold Coast independence movement which successfully broke away from the British Empire in 1957, renaming itself Ghana. From 1957 to 1960 Nkrumah was Ghana's first Prime Minister, and from 1960 to 1966 its first President. Nkrumah was also the coiner of the term neo-colonialism, giving it this definition:

The essence of neo-colonialism 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.

By "outside" Nkrumah means foreign interests. In his understated style he describes the predicament like this:

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 used for the greater development of the Western world.

Nkrumah uses the Marxist-Leninist framework to lay out his argument, and follows a very clear line from Lenin's Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism. True to Lenin's form Nkrumah maps out the corporate conglomerate empires which seamlessly spanned African decolonization, and whose profits only increased after so-called independence. But unlike Lenin's short pamphlet, this work digs far deeper into its subject, documenting overwhelming (if a little dry) evidence for its argument that globe spanning monopolies dominate the economies of Africa, and by keeping them relatively undeveloped against the West, ensure they continue to as a source of outsized profits.

Nkrumah was overthrown in 1966 by a regime more amenable to Anglo-American influence, and died in exile from prostate cancer six years later. Neo-colonialism is a colossal work of living world history. It has been largely ignored in the West, but has more to say about global political-economic development since the beginning of the previous century than most work produced in our sphere since.

[Manraj]

Excellent work

“Faced with the militant people peoples of the ex-colonial territories in Asia, Africa the Caribbean and Latin America, imperative 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 the cover of such phrases, however, it devises innumerable ways to accomplish objectives formally achieved by naked colonialism. It is the 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.”

Western financial monopoly that exploits African resources (causing its underdevelopment) are explained in depth. The west u will fall through unity (will read up upon pan-Africanism and Afro-Asian and Latin America solidarity).

[Matt B · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a hard book to read and understand completely, but taking the time to do so will teach you legit *exactly* how the world works. Nkrumah names all the names that steal and exploit Africas resources and people. This is the follow up to Lenin’s imperialism, set in the last stage, and current stage, of capitalism. The introduction alone is packed with Nkrumahs first hand and well researched analysis of imperialism and its tactics. Cant recommend this book enough, 10/10

[Benjamin Acquah]

I want to read

[Jason Friedlander · Rating 4 out of 5]

It feels a little silly to rate this 4 stars. I'm sure it's perfect as it is. It's essential reading, probably. Sections of it at least. My main issue is that it's difficult to read through continuously because so much of the bulk of the book is meant as an exposé, Nkrumah is showing how the West/former colonial powers have incontrovertibly extracted so much more value from the newly "independent" countries than they are helping out in "aid" or other programs similar to it, that they are continuing their unfair economic relations developed during the colonial era, and even exacerbating it. Sections of the book read like a long receipt of names of corporations that will likely be impossible to remember for the average person. Nkrumah is pointing directly at companies, governments organizations, trade agreements, laws, and so on, one industry at a time. But as an individual disconnected from Nkrumah's context in 1960s Africa (for the most part), it's not only difficult to keep track of any of it, but it is impossible to meaningfully engage with it apart from simply nodding along and thinking, "I guess that's all true." And it probably is, I don't doubt that, but it just doesn't make for the most interesting reading experience.

The insights he does relay are absolutely powerful. The first few chapters here and the last two or three should be canon reading for anyone interested in decolonization, economic imperialism, or "neo-colonialism" as Nkrumah says here. It'll be worth the read. But I wouldn't recommend going through every single industry-specific chapter.

[Luís Garcia · Rating 5 out of 5]

The ultimate definition of (Western) genocidal neo-colonialism.

Kwame Nkrumah (former president of Ghana) had a better understanding of USA/European history and politics than most Western politicians running their nations for the benefit of the very few lords behind the global Anglo-Saxon empire of plunder and death.

A superb and unmissable work for those who want to understand how the US, Canada and Europe undermine human dignity and well-being in Africa and throughout the world.

A work that offers plenty of facts to expose the evil nature of French, Belgian and Portuguese presence in Africa, both during and after the traditional colonialism/imperialism.

Together with the reading of Walter Rodney's How Europe Underdeveloped Africa, any reasonable person can understand why Africa became what it is today.

[Michael Wayne · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was genuinely an excellent work, but it took me forever to get through it. I think it's because I lingered too long on the middle chapters, which are very dense with statistics about banks and mergers and things. I'd say if you're going to read this one, which you SHOULD, focus on these chapters––

Introduction
1-5 and maybe 6
15-18 (ESPECIALLY 18)
Conclusion

It's a very compelling and moving argument that Nkrumah makes, and even though the examples he uses are from the sixties, it's hard not to see parallels at every corner to things that happened just the other day. The military coup in Guinea, the OAS coup in Bolivia, ISIS and the Taliban using American weapons, Biden's plan to subvert the Cuban state using not guns but the *internet*...

Quotes that I like:

“Neo-colonialism, like colonialism, is an attempt to export the social conflicts of the capitalist countries. ... 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.” xii

“But all this indirect subversion is as nothing compared with the brazen onslaught of international capitalists. Here is ‘empire,’ the empire of finance capital, in fact if not in name, a vast sprawling network of inter-continental activity on a highly diversified scale that controls the lives of millions of people in the most widely separated parts of the world, manipulating whole industries and exploiting the labor and riches of nations for the greedy satisfaction of a few.

Here resides the mainspring of power, the direction of policies that stand against the advancing tide of freedom of the exploited people of Africa and the world. Here is the adamantine enemy of African independence and unity, braced in an international chain of common interest that regards the likely coming together of the new nations as a major blow at its continued domination of the resources and economies of others. Here indeed are the real workings of neo-colonialism. Here indeed are the economic ramifications of the monopolies and combines. Their financial and economic empires are pan-African and they can only be challenged on a pan-African basis. Only a united Africa through an All-African Union Government can defeat them.” 36

“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.” 239

“The budding future is always stronger than the withering past.” 252

“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. ... This means that neo-colonialism can and will be defeated.” 253

I absolutely love Nkrumah.

[Pozzo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ziemlich gute Analyse von Neokolonialismus aufbauend auf das Werk von Lenin. Zeigt ganz gut auf wie die Monopole nach den Unabhängigkeiten in Afrika ihre ökonomische Macht gestärkt haben und wie stark sie dort verwickelt waren

Kapitel 7-15 sehr langwierig da anhand einzelner Unternehmen oder Branchen sehr sehr detailliert erklärt wird wie sie mit anderen verwickelt sind

[Peter J Katsakis · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5

[Khazziro · Rating 4 out of 5]

Te-ai întrebat vreodată de ce națiuni care și-au declarat independența cu decenii în urmă rămân prinse într-o roată nesfârșită a datoriilor externe, a subdezvoltării și a dependenței economice? De ce resursele lor bogate alimentează prosperitatea altora, în timp ce propriile popoare se luptă cu sărăcia? Răspunsul la aceste întrebări a fost formulat acum aproape 60 de ani de Kwame Nkrumah în cartea sa „Neo-Colonialismul: Cel Mai Înalt Stadiu al Imperialismului”.

AVERTISMENT:
Cartea nu este ușoară, ba dimpotrivă, este o carte densă, plină de date precum analize ale corporațiilor și mecanisme financiare care pot părea greu de înțeles, însă tocmai asta o transformă, dintr-o simplă continuare a analizei lui Lenin, într-un instrument cu ajutorul căruia putem diseca mecanismele de putere ale lumii actuale.

Subiectul principal al cărții este că sistemul colonialist clasic, bazat pe control politic direct și ocupație militară, nu a dispărut niciodată, ci doar s-a transformat. A evoluat într-o formă mai subtilă, dar la fel de dăunătoare: NEO-COLONIALISMUL. Un sistem, în care un stat este teoretic independent, cu steag și imn propriu dar cu o economie și politică ce sunt dictate din exterior. Puterea nu se mai exercită prin conducători colonialiști, ci prin capital financiar, corporații multinaționale, instituții financiare internaționale și elite locale corupte, transformate în „guverne-marionetă” care servesc interesele capitalului străin în locul propriilor cetățeni... Rezultatul final fiind folosirea capitalului nu pentru dezvoltarea națiunii, ci pentru continuarea subdezvoltării sale, un proces care lărgește diferențele dintre bogații ce sunt complici și omul de rând ce este exploatat.

Această nouă formă de imperialism este, poate, cea mai înșelătoare. Nkrumah argumentează că, „pentru cei ce o practică, înseamnă o putere imensă față de care nu trebuie să dai explicații când o exerciți, iar pentru cei asupra cărora este aplicată, înseamnă exploatare fără o șansă de reparare”. Dacă în epoca colonială puterile imperialiste se simțeau obligate să ofere justificări pentru acțiunile lor, fie ele și false, în era neo-colonială, deciziile devastatoare luate în consiliile de administrație ale unor bănci sau corporații la mii de kilometri distanță nu mai necesită niciun motiv public.

Profitul este singura justificare.

Unul dintre pilonii acestui sistem este strategia de „divide et impera” (dezbină și stăpânește), pe care o putem identifica în „balcanizarea” continentelor, în special a Africii. Fragmentarea unor regiuni vaste în state mici, slabe și adesea rivale le face incapabile să se apere sau să negocieze în mod colectiv, devenind ușoare de înfruntat. Nkrumah a înțeles că o Africă unită, un proiect pan-african, ar fi un gigant imposibil de supus prin „războaie limitate”. În schimb, într-o regiune fărâmițată, este suficient „să trimiți câteva mii de pușcași marini sau să finanțezi o forță de mercenari pentru a securiza un rezultat decisiv” favorabil intereselor neo-colonialiste. Această dependență se extinde și la nivel militar: pentru a ne „apăra”, ne bazăm pe alianțe precum NATO, un aranjament care, deși pare un beneficiu, vine cu un preț imens, ce se plătește prin subordonare politică și economică.

Mecanismele de control ale colonialismului sunt multiple și subtile, așa-numitul „ajutor extern” este folosit ca un cal troian. Împrumuturile de la FMI sau Banca Mondială vin la pachet cu niște condiții stricte: privatizarea industriilor strategice, liberalizarea pieței în favoarea capitalului străin, politici de austeritate care distrug serviciile publice și drepturile muncitorilor. Nkrumah a demascat această viclenie cu decenii în urmă, arătând cum acest ajutor este conceput nu pentru a scoate o țară din sărăcie, ci pentru a crea dependență și a garanta că profiturile se întorc, înzecit, la cei ce au „ajutat”. La fel funcționează și comerțul invizibil: companiile occidentale controlează peste 90% din transportul maritim global și asigurări, extrăgând anual miliarde de dolari din Sudul Global prin tarife și taxe. Un sistem modelat perfect pentru extracția de plusvaloare, în cazul României, vedem acest mecanism în acțiune: capitalul și resursele noastre sunt exportate la preț de nimic către comerțul european, în timp ce primim înapoi produse finite scumpe și „ajutoare” care ne adâncesc datoria și dependența.

Controlul neo-colonialist nu este doar economic și militar.

El se sprijină pe o imensă structură ideologică. Presa, controlată în mare parte de câteva agenții de știri occidentale, acționând ca mașinării de propagandă. Orice mișcare de rezistență anti-imperialistă este etichetată drept „terorism”, orice lider naționalist este un „tiran”, iar orice proiect de dezvoltare independentă este nimicit prin campanii de dezinformare. Până și Hollywood-ul joacă un rol, producând pe bandă rulantă narațiuni care glorifică intervenționismul occidental și demonizează popoarele care i se opun. Așa se ajunge la situațiile în care tineri din Africa sau Asia aclamă eroi de film care masacrează nativi americani sau alți „inamici” ai Imperiului...

În timp ce scriam asta mi-a adus aminte de o glumă care îmi trece din când în când prin minte:
„America o să îți bombardeze țara, iar peste 20 de ani o să facă un film despre cât de triști erau soldații în timp ce făceau asta.”

Nu este o glumă, ci un adevăr ce se întâmplă deja de zeci de ani.

Astăzi, vedem consecințele ale acestui sistem în timp real, genocidul care se desfășoară în Gaza nu este o excepție, ci punctul cel mai marcant al unui proiect colonialist vechi de peste un secol, susținut și înarmat de aceleași puteri neo-colonialiste.

Cartea lui Nkrumah nu este un manifest al disperării, ci o chemare la luptă și, mai presus de orice, la UNITATE. Dacă monopolurile capitaliste acționează la o scară globală, singura replică este solidaritatea popoarelor oprimate, unitatea africană, consolidarea solidarității afro-asiatice și extinderea acesteia către frații din America Latină reprezintă, în viziunea autorului, singura cale de a construi o contra-putere capabilă să distrugă acest sistem.

„Neo-Colonialismul: Cel Mai Înalt Stadiu al Imperialismului” este o carte ce demolează mitul „dezvoltării” promis de capitalismul global și expune adevărul crud al exploatării, așa cum a concluzionat, decenii mai târziu, un alt mare critic al imperialismului, Michael Parenti:

„Africa este un continent bogat, America Latină este un continent bogat, Asia este un continent bogat. Imperialiștii, colonialiștii nu se duc în locuri sărace, ei se duc în locuri bogate, se duc acolo pentru a le lua piețele, pentru a le lua petrolul, lemnul, bumbacul, cânepa, inul, aurul, argintul, diamantele și o mie de alte lucruri și se duc acolo pentru a exploata și a exploata fără milă forța lor de muncă. [...] Africa este bogată, doar oamenii ei sunt săraci.”

The U.S. War Against Yugoslavia: Why U.S. Leaders Are Demonizing and Destroying Yet Another Country" at the University of Washington, Seattle on May 16, 1999.

Solidaritate, nimeni nu este liber până toți suntem liberi. ✊

[Ellis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Incredibly good book, absolutely essential in understanding modern imperialist relations between Europe and the United States with Africa. It describes how neo-colonial regimes are set up and stand in the way of genuine progressive governments. It also exposed how the imperial powers balkanise and tactically divide up the resources and political power in Africa between themselves and the roles of the major banks in this process.

The only fault I can give this book is it isn’t for those who don’t want to read statistics since it contains a lot of quantitive data which gives you a full over view. And also in this regard it is dated given this book was wrote in the 60s and the world has changed since this time with even more larger and more powerful Trans National Corporations, the global institutions and free trade agreements have expanded.

Really can’t fault the book as it is in regards to its analysis of imperialism 10/10

[KT · Rating 5 out of 5]

Builds on Lenin's seminal work, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism, Nkrumah makes a convincing case for African uniting in action to destroy Neo-colonialism in Africa.
Nkrumah explains the economic and political mechanisms set in place by Western imperialists for their benefit, which hinders the development of African countries, several chapters were dedicated to how Western imperialist institutions, in particular the components of Harry Oppenheimer's empire of extractive companies, came to be and the impact it's had on governing Africa's economic life.

[Grace · Rating 4 out of 5]

an essential exposition of the workings of neo-colonialism in africa.

[Dan · Rating 5 out of 5]

An incredible expose of how monopoly capital strangles the third world.

[Jamal Bray · Rating 4 out of 5]

Awesome read, Kwame Nkrumah R.I.P

[Jaime · Rating 4 out of 5]

Didn’t quite slap like I anticipated. I think the issue is it’s telling me something I already understood on a basic, barely conscious level: industrially developed first world countries that “ended” formal, militarily imposed colonialism in exchange for economic imperialism, or neocolonialism. Boots are no longer on the ground but in exchange for economic “development” in the form of extortionate loans, and assuming the former colony in question plays along, they’ll continue to get a steady influx of cash (most of which mysteriously doesn’t find its way to the people).

My biggest criticism is that I probably skipped over at least a solid dozen pages that were listing all the corporations that were extracting wealth from the global south, but this is ultimately his point: there’s a shit load of these companies all involved in the same game of extracting raw materials for a fraction of their worth taking in billions. Forming trade “partnerships” with former colonies was more profitable than militarily occupying these countries.

He also points at that after the USSR and CCP removed 1/6 of resources from the face of the earth from the grip of former colonizers, they would never be forgiven for this. These were acts of war to western imperialism and were responded to as such. Also touches on many of the mining corporations having close ties with South African and Rhodesian apartheid.

Wealth extraction is something I implicitly understand, but this was revolutionary to talk about in the early 60’s. One thing I had to remind myself was Nkrumah discussing the total numbers of wealth extraction in the billions. Can’t imagine what those figures would be adjusted for inflation.