Abstract
This dissertation brings together Antonio Gramsci’s understanding of organic intellectuals with an account of Zimbabwe’s working class in the years 1995 to 2000, including the formation of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). It begins with an historicised exploration of Gramsci’s work on intellectuals, with interpretation of notes on specialised intellectuals (including lawyers and politicians) as well as organic intellectuals.
New evidence about the period is drawn mainly from interviews with key actors, including rank-and-file working-class leaders, the organic intellectuals. Building on Zimbabwe’s labour history, and in particular the suffering stemming from the government’s neo-liberal economic programme, these individuals are shown to have played a critical role. Specifically, they provided leadership for the mass strikes of 1996 and 1997 and the labour forums that arose, and they voiced a desire for a workers’ party.
However, a history based purely around organic intellectuals has limits, partly because it is necessary to explain divisions among them. In this case, the origins of divisions were sometimes hidden from scrutiny by workers. These included the formation of the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA) by Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), the German social democratic Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, and a few specialised intellectuals. In 1999, the ZCTU convened the National Working People’s Convention (NWPC), which included representatives from unions and other civil society organisations. Most of the organic intellectuals who were present thought this would lead to the formation of a workers’ party, but the convention’s agenda and final declaration were determined by forces around the NCA, who produced a call for a ‘movement’. This movement became the multi-class MDC, whose political direction was shaped by specialised intellectuals. As the 2000 general election approached, the MDC looked to local businesses, white farmers and international capital for support, and developed an economic policy endorsed by the World Bank. In less than two years, most of the organic intellectuals had, in practice, pursued a path away from backing a worker-led party to supporting the neo-liberal capitalism they had previously opposed.
The election results were close. The MDC’s support from white interests and its opposition to land reform lost it votes among peasants, allowing the governing party to win most rural constituencies and the election as a whole, with important consequences for events to follow. A workers’ party might have averted this outcome.
The originality of the dissertation lies not only in its reinterpretation of an important moment in Zimbabwe’s history, but also in its critique of oversimplified theorisations of organic intellectuals. In the real world, such workers are not merely individuals whose ideas are shaped by
iii
opposition to capitalist exploitation. They generally carry intellectual baggage (sometimes shaped by Stalinised Marxism, for instance); they include and follow union leaders who develop distinct material interests; they may be overly respectful of specialised intellectuals, they may look for shortcuts and settle for minimal improvements and, sometimes, set their sights on personal gain. In history’s unfolding, some organic intellectuals transition to become specialised intellectuals, a further loss to the working class.
While these were not scenarios envisaged by Gramsci, he did articulate the case for a modern Prince, a party that would unite organic intellectuals with revolutionary intellectuals capable of challenging the ideas and organisation of specialised intellectuals associated with social democracy and liberal capitalism. This account provides a glimpse of what was possible. The revolutionary International Socialist Organisation was influential in the mass strikes, and organic intellectuals ensured that its main leader, Munyaradzi Gwisai, was elected as an MP in 2000. The dissertation is a tribute to organic intellectuals, but it also makes a case for revolutionary intellectuals and the development of a modern Prince.