By: Christopher Hussey
In his 1987 essay entitled “The Constitution of Indian Nationalist Discourse,” Partha Chatterjee adopts Antonio Gramsci’s theory of passive revolution and explains that it is “a ‘molecular transformation’ of the old dominant classes into partners in a new historical bloc and only a partial appropriation of the popular masses, in order first to create a state as the necessary precondition for the establishment of capitalism as the dominant mode of production.”[i] Chatterjee goes on to use this theory of passive revolution to explain processes occurring in India, specifically nationalism.[ii] Although, Chatterjee’s definition of passive revolution is accurate, the way he adopts it fails to embody the essence of how Gramsci used the term, that which is a “response to specific social and historical situations.”[iii] This paper will describe how the theory of passive revolution can be properly translated and adopted into different contexts by first taking into account the Haitian Revolution. Furthermore, to exemplify this process, it is useful to translate it to a specific country; in this case, Singapore will be used. Thus, by incorporating the Haitian Revolution into the theory of passive revolution, the concept can be adopted to understand country-specific processes of decolonization.
Adam Morton argues on behalf of Gramsci that “the theory of passive revolution refers to how ‘restoration becomes the first policy whereby social struggles find sufficiently elastic frameworks to allow the bourgeoisie to gain power without dramatic upheavals.”[iv] In other words, passive revolution refers to a ‘revolution-restoration’ whereby there is a ‘molecular transformation’ that allows for certain social groups to maintain domination over the masses.[v] Contrary to Chatterjee’s usage of the term, Gramsci’s use of passive revolution was historically and geographically specific to Italy, Europe and the rest of the ‘Western’ world. Gramsci argues that passive revolutions were a response by dominant social groups to ‘bourgeois’ revolutions in Europe, specifically the French Revolution of 1848, the Paris Commune in 1871 and the Russian Revolution in 1917, in three specific phases.[vi] This grounding in spatiotemporal specificities while also acknowledging the fact that individual countries are always interconnected with the world is the proper use of ‘passive revolution’. This is what Morton argues is ‘travelling theory’ whereby, as stated earlier, it is a “response to specific social and historical situations”.[vii] In effect, the theory must not be inserted into a historically and geographically specific context but must be ‘translated’ to those specificities by taking into account interconnections. Morton notes that the use of passive revolution must move “away from a literal application of the theory of passive revolution to different locales, sites, situations…and, instead, engaging in a critical historicist method consisting of identifying and internalizing Gramsci’s way of thinking about seemingly discrepant experiences and conditions.”[viii] However, what Gramsci fails to do is take into account the processes and their interconnections with the world outside of Europe, Russia and the United States. Should he have taken into account the other parts of the world and their specific processes, specifically the Haitian Revolution, the theory of passive revolution would be able to travel the globe, not as an abstract concept, but one grounded in history and geography.
By putting the Haitian revolution at the forefront of the theory of passive revolution, one can begin to use the theory of passive revolution in the context of decolonization. Before doing so, it is important to understand the history as well as the implications of the Haitian Revolution. As an exploited slave colony, yet also the jewel of the French Crown as a result of its profitable sugarcane plantation industry, Haiti was very much connected to Europe, the Caribbean and the rest of the Americas. In fact, Susan Buck-Morss, whose analysis of the Haitian Revolution is in a spatiohistorical form, notes that one inspiration for the Haitian Revolution were the numerous slave uprisings occurring throughout Latin America and the Caribbean.[ix] Another example that Buck-Morss puts forth is that the ‘factory’, “which has become synonymous with industrial progress, was an invention of Europe’s colonizing project.”[x] To her, “by imagining modernity as synonymous with Europe, we have misunderstood how much modern capitalism was a product of the colonial system, which was in many ways ahead of European developments.”[xi] Again, Buck-Morss shows how “Toussaint Loverture’s constitution of 1801…took universal history to the farthest point of progress by extending the principle of Liberty to all residents regardless of race” and influenced British antislavery activists.[xii] Moreover, C.L.R. James argues that the sugar plantations were modern in their efficiency and ability to reap profits.[xiii] Therefore, these examples exemplify the interconnections between Haiti and the rest of the world. In light of this, it is possible to now apply the Haitian Revolution to the theory of passive revolution.
Keeping in mind global interconnections, the Haitian Revolution started other passive revolutions throughout the world, mainly in the Western hemisphere. As described earlier, Gramsci used passive revolution to explain the Risorgimento and Fascism in Italy as well as other passive revolutions in Europe and the United States. All of these were triggered by a ‘bourgeois revolution’ thus producing fear—fear of the revolutionary spread. If we apply the same ‘fear of the revolutionary spread’ to areas with interconnections to Haiti, it is visible that the theory of passive revolution can be applied. The Haitian Revolution sparked off passive revolutions in other places in South America.[xiv] With this laid out, passive revolution can start to be used in the decolonization context.
Similar to how Gramsci explained that passive revolutions occurred in three phases sparked by bourgeois overthrows, it is important to bring that theory into conversation with contemporary events and contexts. For example, Gramsci notes that the third phase of passive revolution was sparked by the Russian Revolution in 1917, which led to the rise of Fascism in Italy and Germany as well as Fordism in the United States.[xv] What it also did was inspire Mao and his comrades in China to take up arms against the Nationalist Party (Kuomintang or KMT) and wealthy landowners, leading to the Chinese Revolution in 1949. Coupled with the Chinese Revolution is the Cuban Revolution, which also had similar repercussions on the Americas. With the Castro brothers and Che Guevara, the Cuban Revolution led to revolution-restorations in many parts of Latin America, funded mainly by the United States.[xvi] Together, the Cuban and Chinese Revolutions in the mid-20th century would be that trigger for a new phase in the era of passive revolution, especially in the context of decolonization.
To exemplify the process of passive revolution in the context of decolonization outside of Haiti, we can turn to the history of Singapore. Colonized by the British in 1824, Singapore was a trading post between China and India whose ethnic make up was and still is diverse with people of Chinese, Indian, Malay, and Eurasian descent, the majority of which are Chinese.[xvii] Occupied by the British for over a hundred years, then subsequently occupied by the Japanese during World War II, the country’s history of colonization is relevant to this new conception of passive revolution. The Chinese Revolution of 1949 coupled with the Russian Revolution earlier in the century were examples of successful bourgeois revolution, inspiring socialists and communists alike that they were possible. This was the case in Singapore and in parts of Malaysia, Singapore’s neighbor, as communist activity was widespread.[xviii] What the previous communist revolutions did was instill fear in the Singaporean bourgeoisie and the British colonists. A true bourgeois revolution in the city-state was the last thing these elites wanted. At the same time, the British understood that they had to let go of their colonies—they were too costly for the Crown as a result of World War II.
In 1963, Singapore was given independence by the British. According to records, communist activity in Singapore and neighboring Malaysia were at their highest in late 1950s and early 1960s.[xix] The ‘fear of the spread’ was evident in a Singaporean leader’s response: “Malaya could not allow Singapore to become the Cuba of Malaysia, a safe base from which MCP (Malayan Communist Party) could launch a political offensive against Malaysia.”[xx] Operation Cold Store commenced on 2 February 1963, which imprisoned 113 suspected communists without trial. The theory of passive revolution can be applied to the case of Singapore whereby global events, in this case the Chinese and Cuban Revolutions and their inspiration from the Russian Revolution, made the Singaporean bourgeois fearful. Therefore, a significant reordering of social structures and relations occurred as the British left, the Singapore bourgeoisie took assumed power and kept the communists locked away.
By reworking the theory of passive revolution to take into account the Haitian Revolution, we can begin to use it in the context of the decolonization and even in today’s context. Only through a historical-geographical and interconnected analysis of a country can the theory of passive revolution be applied to areas outside Europe and the United States. In fact, we can begin to translate the theory to global events occurring today—changes in governments in Myanmar, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Syria and other places—of course, not using passive revolution as an abstract concept that can be picked up and implanted into any situation. It must trace its roots to Gramsci’s conception, it must be reworked to include the Haitian Revolution and engage it within its own historical-geographical specificities. It must be grounded historically and geographically and to the rest of the world. By rethinking the theory of passive revolution to incorporate the Haitian Revolution, one can begin to expose the greater interconnectedness between different countries, regions and throughout the world.
Endnotes
[i] Chatterjee 2010 [1987] 38.
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Morton 2013, 50.
[iv] Ibid, 52. Originally cited in Gramsci Q10II §61; SPN 115.
[v] Morton 2013, 55.
[vi] Hart 2013a.
[vii] Morton 2013, 50.
[viii] Ibid, 61. Originally cited in Morton 2010. [Original emphasis]
[ix] Buck-Morss 2009, 90.
[x] Ibid, 101.
[xi] Ibid, 100.
[xii] Ibid, 94-100.
[xiii] James 1989 [1963], 392.
[xiv] Hart 2013.
[xv] Hart 2013a.
[xvi] For example: US-sponsored authoritarian governments in Guatemala, Chile, Nicaragua and others just to name a few.
[xvii] Singapore.sg 2013.
[xviii] Yap, Lim and Leong 2009.
[xix] Ibid.
[xx] Ibid, 248.
References
Buck-Morss, Susan. 2009. Hegel, Haiti, and Universal History. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Chatterjee, Partha. 2010. Originally published in 1987. “The Constitution of Indian Nationalist Discourse.” In Empire and Nation: Selected Essays. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hart, Gillian. 2013. “The Haitian Revolution.” Lecture for Postcolonial Geographies. University of California, Berkeley. 3 October.
----. 2013a. “Gramsci.” Lecture for Postcolonial Geographies. University of California, Berkeley. 24 October.
James, C.L.R. 1989. Originally published in 1963. The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution. New York: Vintage Books.
Morton, Adam. 2010. “The Continuum of Passive Revolution.” Capital & Class 34(3): 315-42.
----. 2013. “Traveling with Gramsci: The Spatiatility of Passive Revolution.” In Gramsci: Space, Nature, Politics, edited by Michael Ekers, Gillian Hart, Stefan Kipfer and Alex Loftus. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Singapore.sg. 2013. “Founding of Modern Singapore.” About Singapore: History. Available from <http://app.singapore.sg/about-singapore/history/founding-of-modern-singapore>. Accessed 15 December 2013.
Yap, Sonny, Richard Lim and Leong Weng Kam. 2009. Men in White: The Untold Story of Singapore’s Ruling Political Party. Singapore: Singapore Press Holdings.