part of a Message to Grassroots by Malcolm X October 10, 1963

We have a common enemy. We have this in common: We have a common oppressor, a common exploiter, and a common discriminator. But once we all realize that we have this common enemy, then we unite on the basis of what we have in common. And what we have foremost in common is that enemy —— the white man. He’s an enemy to all of us. I know some of you all think that some of them aren’t enemies. Time will tell.
In Bandung back in, I think, 1954, was the first unity meeting in centuries of black people. And once you study what happened at the Bandung conference, and the results of the Bandung conference, it actually serves as a model for the same procedure you and I can use to get our problems solved. At Bandung all the nations came together. Their were dark nations from Africa and Asia. Some of them were Buddhists. Some of them were Muslim. Some of them were Christians. Some of them were Confucianists; some were atheists. Despite their religious differences, they came together. Some were communists; some were socialists; some were capitalists. Despite their economic and political differences, they came together. All of them were black, brown, red, or yellow.
The number—one thing that was not allowed to attend the Bandung conference was the white man. He couldn’t come. Once they excluded the white man, they found that they could get together. Once they kept him out, everybody else fell right in and fell in line. This is the thing that you and I have to understand. And these people who came together didn’t have nuclear weapons; they didn’t have jet planes; they didn’t have all of the heavy armaments that the white man has. But they had unity.

They were able to submerge their little petty differences and agree on one thing: That though one African came from Kenya and was being colonized by the Englishman, and another African came from the Congo and was being colonized by the Belgian, and another African came from Guinea and was being colonized by the French, and another came from Angola and was being colonized by the Portuguese. When they came to the Bandung conference, they looked at the Portuguese, and at the Frenchman, and at the Englishman, and at the other —— Dutchman —— and learned or realized that the one thing that all of them had in common: they were all from Europe, they were all Europeans, blond, blue—eyed and white—skinned. They began to recognize who their enemy was. The same man that was colonizing our people in Kenya was colonizing our people in the Congo. The same one in the Congo was colonizing our people in South Africa, and in Southern Rhodesia, and in Burma, and in India, and in Afghanistan, and in Pakistan. They realized all over the world where the dark man was being oppressed, he was being oppressed by the white man; where the dark man was being exploited, he was being exploited by the white man. So they got together under this basis —— that they had a common enemy.

Instead of us airing our differences in public, we have to realize we’re all the same family. And when you have a family squabble, you don’t get out on the sidewalk. If you do, everybody calls you uncouth, unrefined, uncivilized, savage. If you don’t make it at home, you settle it at home; you get in the closet —— argue it out behind closed doors. And then when you come out on the street, you pose a common front, a united front. And this is what we need to do in the community, and in the city, and in the state. We need to stop airing our differences in front of the white man. Put the white man out of our meetings, number one, and then sit down and talk shop with each other. [That’s] all you gotta do.
I would like to make a few comments concerning the difference between the black revolution and the Negro revolution. There’s a difference. Are they both the same? And if they’re not, what is the difference? What is the difference between a black revolution and a Negro revolution? First, what is a revolution? Sometimes I’m inclined to believe that many of our people are using this word "revolution" loosely, without taking careful consideration [of] what this word actually means, and what its historic characteristics are. When you study the historic nature of revolutions, the motive of a revolution, the objective of a revolution, and the result of a revolution, and the methods used in a revolution, you may change words. You may devise another program. You may change your goal and you may change your mind.
Look at the American Revolution in 1776. That revolution was for what? For land. Why did they want land? Independence. How was it carried out? Bloodshed. Number one, it was based on land, the basis of independence. And the only way they could get it was bloodshed. The French Revolution —— what was it based on? The land—less against the landlord. What was it for? Land. How did they get it? Bloodshed. Was no love lost; was no compromise; was no negotiation. I’m telling you, you don’t know what a revolution is. ’Cause when you find out what it is, you’ll get back in the alley; you’ll get out of the way. The Russian Revolution —— what was it based on? Land. The land—less against the landlord. How did they bring it about? Bloodshed. You haven’t got a revolution that doesn’t involve bloodshed. And you’re afraid to bleed. I said, you’re afraid to bleed.
The Chinese Revolution —— they wanted land. They threw the British out, along with the Uncle Tom Chinese. Yeah, they did. They set a good example. When I was in prison, I read an article —— don’t be shocked when I say I was in prison. You’re still in prison. That’s what America means: prison. When I was in prison, I read an article in Life magazine showing a little Chinese girl, nine years old; her father was on his hands and knees and she was pulling the trigger ’cause he was an Uncle Tom Chinaman, When they had the revolution over there, they took a whole generation of Uncle Toms —— just wiped them out. And within ten years that little girl become [sic] a full—grown woman. No more Toms in China. And today it’s one of the toughest, roughest, most feared countries on this earth —— by the white man. ’Cause there are no Uncle Toms over there.
Of all our studies, history is best qualified to reward our research. And when you see that you’ve got problems, all you have to do is examine the historic method used all over the world by others who have problems similar to yours. And once you see how they got theirs straight, then you know how you can get yours straight. There’s been a revolution, a black revolution, going on in Africa. In Kenya, the Mau Mau were revolutionaries; they were the ones who made the word " Uhuru" [Kenyan word for "freedom"]. They were the ones who brought it to the fore.The Mau Mau, they were revolutionaries. They believed in scorched earth. They knocked everything aside that got in their way, and their revolution also was based on land, a desire for land. In Algeria, the northern part of Africa, a revolution took place. The Algerians were revolutionists; they wanted land. France offered to let them be integrated into France. They told France: to hell with France. They wanted some land, not some France. And they engaged in a bloody battle.
So I cite these various revolutions, brothers and sisters, to show you —— you don’t have a peaceful revolution. You don’t have a turn—the—other—cheek revolution. There’s no such thing as a nonviolent revolution. [The] only kind of revolution that’s nonviolent is the Negro revolution. The only revolution based on loving your enemy is the Negro revolution. The only revolution in which the goal is a desegregated lunch counter, a desegregated theater, a desegregated park, and a desegregated public toilet; you can sit down next to white folks on the toilet. That’s no revolution. Revolution is based on land. Land is the basis of all independence. Land is the basis of freedom, justice, and equality.
The white man knows what a revolution is. He knows that the black revolution is world—wide in scope and in nature. The black revolution is sweeping Asia, sweeping Africa, is rearing its head in Latin America. The Cuban Revolution —— that’s a revolution. They overturned the system. Revolution is in Asia. Revolution is in Africa. And the white man is screaming because he sees revolution in Latin America. How do you think he’ll react to you when you learn what a real revolution is? You don’t know what a revolution is. If you did, you wouldn’t use that word.
A revolution is bloody. Revolution is hostile. Revolution knows no compromise. Revolution overturns and destroys everything that gets in its way. And you, sitting around here like a knot on the wall, saying, "I’m going to love these folks no matter how much they hate me." No, you need a revolution. Whoever heard of a revolution where they lock arms, as Reverend Cleage was pointing out beautifully, singing "We Shall Overcome"? Just tell me. You don’t do that in a revolution. You don’t do any singing; you’re too busy swinging. It’s based on land. A revolutionary wants land so he can set up his own nation, an independent nation. These Negroes aren’t asking for no nation. They’re trying to crawl back on the plantation.
When you want a nation, that’s called nationalism. When the white man became involved in a revolution in this country against England, what was it for? He wanted this land so he could set up another white nation. That’s white nationalism. The American Revolution was white nationalism. The French Revolution was white nationalism. The Russian Revolution too —— yes, it was —— white nationalism. You don’t think so? Why [do] you think Khrushchev and Mao can’t get their heads together? White nationalism. All the revolutions that’s going on in Asia and Africa today are based on what? Black nationalism. A revolutionary is a black nationalist. He wants a nation. I was reading some beautiful words by Reverend Cleage, pointing out why he couldn’t get together with someone else here in the city because all of them were afraid of being identified with black nationalism. If you’re afraid of black nationalism, you’re afraid of revolution. And if you love revolution, you love black nationalism.
To understand this, you have to go back to what [the] young brother here referred to as the house Negro and the field Negro —— back during slavery. There was two kinds of slaves. There was the house Negro and the field Negro. The house Negroes — they lived in the house with master, they dressed pretty good, they ate good ’cause they ate his food —— what he left. They lived in the attic or the basement, but still they lived near the master; and they loved their master more than the master loved himself. They would give their life to save the master’s house quicker than the master would. The house Negro, if the master said, "We got a good house here," the house Negro would say, "Yeah, we got a good house here." Whenever the master said "we," he said "we." That’s how you can tell a house Negro.
If the master’s house caught on fire, the house Negro would fight harder to put the blaze out than the master would. If the master got sick, the house Negro would say, "What’s the matter, boss, we sick?" We sick! He identified himself with his master more than his master identified with himself. And if you came to the house Negro and said, "Let’s run away, let’s escape, let’s separate," the house Negro would look at you and say, "Man, you crazy. What you mean, separate? Where is there a better house than this? Where can I wear better clothes than this? Where can I eat better food than this?" That was that house Negro. In those days he was called a "house nigger." And that’s what we call him today, because we’ve still got some house niggers running around here.
This modern house Negro loves his master. He wants to live near him. He’ll pay three times as much as the house is worth just to live near his master, and then brag about "I’m the only Negro out here." "I’m the only one on my job." "I’m the only one in this school." You’re nothing but a house Negro. And if someone comes to you right now and says, "Let’s separate," you say the same thing that the house Negro said on the plantation. "What you mean, separate? From America? This good white man? Where you going to get a better job than you get here?" I mean, this is what you say. "I ain’t left nothing in Africa," that’s what you say. Why, you left your mind in Africa.
The field Negro was beaten from morning to night. He lived in a shack, in a hut; He wore old, castoff clothes. He hated his master. I say he hated his master. He was intelligent. That house Negro loved his master. But that field Negro —— remember, they were in the majority, and they hated the master. When the house caught on fire, he didn’t try and put it out; that field Negro prayed for a wind, for a breeze. When the master got sick, the field Negro prayed that he’d die. If someone come [sic] to the field Negro and said, "Let’s separate, let’s run," he didn’t say "Where we going?" He’d say, "Any place is better than here." You’ve got field Negroes in America today. I’m a field Negro. The masses are the field Negroes. When they see this man’s house on fire, you don’t hear these little Negroes talking about "our government is in trouble." They say, "The government is in trouble." Imagine a Negro: "Our government"! I even heard one say "our astronauts." They won’t even let him near the plant —— and "our astronauts"! "Our Navy" —— that’s a Negro that’s out of his mind. That’s a Negro that’s out of his mind.
Just as the slavemaster of that day used Tom, the house Negro, to keep the field Negroes in check, the same old slavemaster today has Negroes who are nothing but modern Uncle Toms, 20th century Uncle Toms, to keep you and me in check, keep us under control, keep us passive and peaceful and nonviolent. That’s Tom making you nonviolent. It’s like when you go to the dentist, and the man’s going to take your tooth. You’re going to fight him when he starts pulling. So he squirts some stuff in your jaw called novocaine, to make you think they’re not doing anything to you. So you sit there and ’cause you’ve got all of that novocaine in your jaw, you suffer peacefully. Blood running all down your jaw, and you don’t know what’s happening. ’Cause someone has taught you to suffer —— peacefully.
The white man do the same thing to you in the street, when he want [sic] to put knots on your head and take advantage of you and don’t have to be afraid of your fighting back. To keep you from fighting back, he gets these old religious Uncle Toms to teach you and me, just like novocaine, suffer peacefully. Don’t stop suffering —— just suffer peacefully. 
There’s nothing in our book, the Quran —— you call it "Ko—ran" —— that teaches us to suffer peacefully. Our religion teaches us to be intelligent. Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery. That’s a good religion. In fact, that’s that old—time religion. That’s the one that Ma and Pa used to talk about: an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth, and a head for a head, and a life for a life: That’s a good religion. And doesn’t nobody resent that kind of religion being taught but a wolf, who intends to make you his meal.
This is the way it is with the white man in America. He’s a wolf and you’re sheep. Any time a shepherd, a pastor, teach [sic] you and me not to run from the white man and, at the same time, teach [sic] us not to fight the white man, he’s a traitor to you and me. Don’t lay down our life all by itself. No, preserve your life. it’s the best thing you got. And if you got to give it up, let it be even—steven.
The slavemaster took Tom and dressed him well, and fed him well, and even gave him a little education —— a little education; gave him a long coat and a top hat and made all the other slaves look up to him. Then he used Tom to control them. The same strategy that was used in those days is used today, by the same white man. He takes a Negro, a so—called Negro, and make [sic] him prominent, build [sic] him up, publicize [sic] him, make [sic] him a celebrity. And then he becomes a spokesman for Negroes —— and a Negro leader.
I would like to just mention just one other thing else quickly, and that is the method that the white man uses, how the white man uses these "big guns," or Negro leaders, against the black revolution. They are not a part of the black revolution. They’re used against the black revolution. 
It’s just like when you’ve got some coffee that’s too black, which means it’s too strong. What you do? You integrate it with cream; you make it weak. If you pour too much cream in, you won’t even know you ever had coffee. It used to be hot, it becomes cool. It used to be strong, it becomes weak. It used to wake you up, now it’ll put you to sleep.

What would Nkrumah have us do? What would he say about our current circumstances and situation?

(All the Nkrumah quotes in this article are from Nkrumah's book Handbook of Revolutionary Warfare.)

As you peruse this short piece, keep in mind what is happening in the African world and what is happening to Africans across the world.  We are at war and have been for centuries.  However, it is the job of our enemy, of whatever color or gender, to convince us otherwise, to make us as Malcolm said, "don't stop suffering..suffer peacefully" Message to the Grassroots.

This is precisely what is happening today, we are supposed to take any indignity they choose to heap upon us. And we are supposed to just lay down and take it.

But revolutionary Africans have never endorsed such a comprador position.  And among the legions upon legions of arch-angels of the African revolution, Kwame Nkrumah stands out as both Michael and Gabriel.

So what would he think about what is happening today, in Zimbabwe for example?  I think all of us would agree that consideration of the Zimbabwe situation is instructive for our prosecution of our liberation struggle on every front, in all parts of the world.

Well, first let us look at Nkrumah's signature clarion call to Africans all over the world:

"People of Africa, arise!
Defeat Imperialism, neo-colonialism and settler domination,
Stand together and unite in the revolutionary struggle
Forward to victory,
We shall conquer"
p 122

Now let us look at his view of settler states such as the former "Rhodesia" and by inference his view of the imperialist and neo-colonialist elements who wish to reestablish the exploitation and oppression that defined Rhodesia:

"The predominant racial group must, and will, provide the government of a country.  Settlers, provided they accept the principle of one man one vote, and majority rule, may be tolerated; but settler minority government, never. They are a dangerous anachronism, and must be swept away COMPLETELY and FOR EVER." p. 48

Taking up the gauntlet explicit in this call,  first requires the proper knowledge and general understanding of the war we must fight and how we must fight it:

"The dimension of our struggle is equal to the size of the African continent itself." p. 43

"Revolutionary warfare is the highest, inevitable answer to the political, economic and social situation in Africa today. We do not have the luxury of an alternative.  We are faced with a necessity." p. 42

"The continental scope now attained by popular insurrection in Africa is a realiity.  It remains for us to design effective co-ordinating machinery." pp. 55-6

"...the people are the makers of history and it is they who, in the final analysis, win or lose wars." p.75

"The people's armed struggle, the highest form of political action, is a revolutionary catalyst in the neo-colonialist situation." p. 52

"...if armed militia are not organised the masses cannot manifest their power in the struggle against the enemy." p. 60

"The creation of our continental people's militia is the logical consequence of the unfolding of the African liberation struggle, and it is the essential  condition for the emergence of a people's free and united Africa." p. 63

"Between a zone under enemy control where the masses are awakening and a hotly-contested zone, there is only one missing link: a handful of genuine revolutionaries prepared to organise and act " p. 49

What he would say about taking back the land?

"We must have every inch of our land and every one of our mines and industries" p.. 80

Nkrumah has also left instruction to help us understand the relationship of specific fronts to the whole revolutionary war of liberation:

"These isolated battles must be fought as part of the great revolutionary, liberation struggle, and within the framework of our politico-military organisation (AAPRA-AACPC)."  p. 89

What does he tell us to do to prepare to fight? How should we go about it, what are the prerequisites to preparing ourselves to fight and win?:

"Our propagandists must leave no problem untackled, no mistake unexposed.  Truth must always be told.  It is a proof of strength, and even the hardest truth has a positive aspect which can be used." p. 100

"Propaganda is a means of liberation, an instrument of clarification, information, education and mobilisation." p. 95

What are the critical human factors that we must definitely involve in the war? Workers, peasants, every patriot from around the world, with an emphasis on development of the women and the youth - and particularly the "spark" the students:

"The degree of a country's revolutionary awareness, may be measured by the political maturity of its women." p.  91

"The youth belong to the revolution... students must constantly guard and revitalise the revolution. On our youth depends the future of Africa and the continent's total liberation and unity." p.  88

What would he say to the leadership of the African States, who are supposedly acting in unison via the AU, the successor to the fatally flawed OAU?  He would remind them of the stakes and the nature of the contending parties, capitalist imperialism on one hand and the oppressed and exploited African people on the other; and the constantly shifting balance of power between the two forces:

"Independence must never be considered as an end in and of itself but as a stage, the very first stage of the people's revolutionary struggle." p. 16

"Internally"

"The capitalist imperialist states face serious economic and social difficulties. Rising prices, balance of payments problems, widespread and repeated strikes are only a few of the symptoms of the general malaise. In the United States, the grave domestic situation is aggravated by the massive counter-attacks of the African-American revolutionaries. Almost everywhere, behind the smoke screens, the social and economic situation is unhealthy, and particularly in the second class capitalist states. And these mounting economic crises mean heavier dependence on the exploitation of the peoples of Africa, Asia and Latin America.

"The need for self-critical objective diagnosis."

"If imperialists are faced with so many external and domestic difficulties, how then can they afford to step up their aggression in Africa? To answer this question, it is necessary to examine the internal factors which make our continent so vulnerable to attack, and particularly to look closely at the whole question of African unity. For this lies at the core of our problem. There are three conflicting conceptions of African unity which explain to a large extent, the present critical situation in Africa:

"1. The mutual protection theory: that the OAU serves as a kind of insurance against any change in the status quo, membership providing a protection for heads of state and government against all forms of political action aimed at their overthrow. Since most of the leaders who adhere to this idea owe their position to imperialists and their agents, it is not surprising that this is the viewpoint which really serves the interests of imperialism. For the puppet states are being used both for short-term purposes of exploitation and as springboards of subversion against progressive African states.

"2. The functional conception: that African unity should be purely a matter of economic co-operation. Those who hold this view overlook the vital fact that African regional economic organizations will remain weak and subject to the same neo-colonialist pressures and domination, as long as they lack overall political cohesion. Without political unity, African states can never commit themselves to full economic integration, which is the only productive form of integration able to develop our great resources fully for the well-being of the African people as a whole. Furthermore, the lack of political unity places inter-African economic institutions at the mercy of powerful, foreign commercial interests, and sooner or later these will use such institutions as funnels through which to pour money for the continued exploitation of Africa.

"3. The political union conception: that a union government should be in charge of economic development, defence and foreign policy, while other government functions would continue to be discharged by the existing states grouped, in federal fashion, within a gigantic central political organization. Clearly, this is the strongest position Africa could adopt in its struggle against modern imperialism.

"However, any sincere critical appraisal of past activities and achievements of the OAU would tend to show that, as it is now constituted, the OAU is not likely to be able to achieve the political unification of Africa.

"This is obviously why imperialists, although against the idea of political union, will do nothing to break the OAU. It serves their purpose in slowing down revolutionary progress in Africa. This state of affairs is mirrored both in the discouragement of freedom fighters in the remaining colonial territories and South Africa, and in the growing perplexity amongst freedom fighters from neo-colonized territories.

"The struggle for African continental union and socialism may be hampered by the enemy WITHIN, - those who declare their support for the revolution and at the same time, by devious means, serve and promote the interests of imperialists and neo-colonialists. Examination of recent events in our history, and of our present condition, reveals the urgent need for a new strategy to combat imperialist aggression, and this must be devised on a continental scale.

"Either we concentrate our forces for a decisive armed struggle to achieve our objectives, or we will each fall one by one to the blows of imperialism in its present stage of open and desperate offensive." pp. 39-41


"...in unity lies strength, African states must unite or sell themselves out to imperialist and colonialist exploiters for a mess of pottage, or disintegrate individually." p. 35


"Our armed struggle for freedom is neither moral nor immoral, it is a scientific historically-determined necessity." p. 19

and I believe he would conclude with this simple straightforward statement:

"The new phase of the armed revolutionary struggle in Africa embraces the entire continent.  It is essential that we know what we fight, and why we fight.  Imperialism and neo-colonialism must be broken down into their component parts so that we can clearly see them  We must know their world  strategy." p. 1

So, let us embrace Nkrumah's extraordinary grasp of the science of human liberation and answer our own call to fulfill our common and individual destinies It must be done and as David Walker said it is better to fall fighting the enemy than like some penned animal a mere object for the use and abuse of our satanic tormentors. If some of us do fall in the struggle, then we would have attained a noble transition -- if we do not perish in the effort, then we would live to see our people "make it to the promise land" if I may paraphrase the martyred Dr. King. Whatever does happen to us as individuals -- we are certain of one thing:  the people as a whole will win this war and our tormentors will finally be brought to justice and suffer the fate that they deserve for their long history of inhuman, amoral crimes.  For their crimes against the African people; for their crimes against humanity itself.

Just remember every oppressed and exploited people across the world is fighting the same, the very same enemy, so, in reality, the odds are dramatically in our favor.  All we need to do is act and think in a scientific and principled manner.

UNITED STATES of AFRIKA

In his ground breaking book on neo-colonialism President Nkrumah wrote,

"The foreign firms who exploit our resources long ago saw the strength to be gained from acting on a Pan-African scale. By means of interlocking directorships, cross-shareholdings and other devices, groups of apparently different companies have formed, in fact, one enormous capitalist monopoly. The only effective way to challenge this economic empire and to recover possession of our heritage, is for us also to act on a Pan-African basis, through a Union Government."

"No one would suggest that if all the peoples of Africa combined to establish their unity their decision could be revoked by the forces of neo-colonialism On the contrary, faced with a new situation, those who practice neo-colonialism would adjust themselves to this new balance of world forces in exactly the same way as the capitalist world has in the past adjusted itself to any other change in the balance of power."

"Neo-colonialism The Last Stage of Imperialism", Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, p. 259

Anyone with even the most cursory knowledge of the current state of Africa and her role in the world political - economic system knows that the conditions he described at the time of the writing of this book has not altered in any consequential sense. Indeed in some sense the enemy is stronger.

But in other ways, we are closer to Union Government than we were in that period, as now no large group of African states dares to outright oppose the call for Union Government.

Dr. Nkrumah prescience shines today as it did several decades ago. With the passing years and the continued deterioration of the quality of African life, the need for Union Government is as pronounced as it was in 1965 when he wrote these words. All we need now is the requisite form of organization(s) to make Union Government real.

In January 1963 President Nkrumah wrote a letter to the presidents of independent states, proposing the Union of African States. (In May of that year the African leadership created the Organization of African Unity (OAU)). He postulated that the economic and social well being of Africa depended upon our ability to create a Pan-African Political union. President Nkrumah proposed these fundamental points:

1. Common foreign policy and diplomacy... we need a process of political socialization that would "enable us to speak with one voice" in the fora of the world
2. Common continental planning for economic and industrial development...."building up a common market of a united Africa" that would bring about the material conditions we need to improve our collective quality of life in the global economy
3. Common currency a monetary zone and a central bank of issue...that we "need to orientate the economy of Africa and place it beyond the reach of foreign control" to be able to implement our social economy
4. Common defense system..."one over-all (land, sea and air) Defense Command for Africa" is needed to defend the social economy we create

To implement the above proposal, a Central Political Organization with its own constitution would have to be drawn up as a matter of urgency. It is suggested that this Union of African States should consist of an Upper House and Lower House...The overriding concern of the Union of African States would be to give political direction in regard to the implementation of the proposals mentioned above.

All of these depend upon the qualification of the human factors. That is the key the political and social psychological state of the African individual must develop along dialectical lines oriented to retrieving the positive values of collective African culture.