Printer Friendly

'A man of the world'. Encounters and articulations of anti-imperialism as cosmopolitanism.

   For the first time he [Josiah T. Gumede] stood as an equal among
   people of all races, all colours and various beliefs, united in
   brotherhood with the purpose of putting an end to the contemptible
   system of colonialism. [...] overwhelmed by this experience that
   his eyes were filled with tears: 'I am so happy!' he stammered. (1)

At a political rally in Cape Town in 1923, the South African Josiah T. Gumede (1867-1947) declared to the crowd that he saw himself as 'a man of the world'. In January 1927, Gumede embarked upon a longer journey as a representative of the African National Congress (ANC), departing from Cape Town and traveling in the company of Jimmy La Guma, a communist and member of the ANC, and Daniel Colraine of the South African Trade Union Congress. Their destination was one of the 'hearts of imperialism' in Europe, Brussels, to attend the 'First Congress against Imperialism and Colonialism' February, 1927, where they witnessed the inauguration of the League against Imperialism and for National Independence (LAI, 1927-1937).

After the congress Gumede and La Guma continued their journey to Berlin and attended a private party in the home of the German Communist, Willi Munzenberg (1889-1940). Munzenberg was a Reichstag deputy but more importantly he was the General Secretary of the proletarian mass organisation International Workers' Aid (IWA, 1921-1935). Munzenberg had a central role in preparing the Brussels Congress, and as the congress turned into a euphoric demonstration against colo nialism and imperialism, he invited a number of delegates to Berlin for further meetings and negotiations. The ambiance of the party is conveyed Margarete Buber-Neumanns autobiography Von Potsdam Nach Moskau (1957), which describes how Gumede met and shared experiences with 'a crowd of multi-coloured races: Negroes, Chinese and Mohammedans [...] all glowing nationalists'. Eight months later, in October, Gumede and La Guma found themselves in Moscow partaking in the celebrations of the tenth Anniversary of the Russian Revolution and, after returning to South Africa shortly afterwards, Gumede was convinced that he had seen 'the new Jerusalem'. (2)

The pacifist socialist Reginald Orlando Bridgeman (1884-1968) had also made his way from London to Brussels. Bridgeman proudly defended the colonial struggle against oppression and had a longstanding commitment to raising awareness in Britain about the horrors of colonialism and imperialism. After the first day of the Brussels Congress, Bridgeman left with the impression that what was 'lacking in orderly arrangement' was 'made up for in enthusiasm'.

Born into a distinguished family and educated at Harrow, Bridgeman went into diplomatic service and was stationed in Madrid and Paris. At the Versailles Peace Conference in 1919, Bridgeman acted as Private Secretary to the British ambassador Lord Derby and, in 1920, was appointed as Counsellor to the British Legation in Teheran. Bridgeman visited India, Muscat, Bahrain, Kuwait and Iraq on his way to Persia. The experience of travel and residence in Teheran turned Bridgeman -according to John Saville's short biographical sketch--from a professional diplomat into a professional anti-imperialist after having witnessed, first, the poverty and societal crisis in central Europe after the Great War, and second, the political chaos in Teheran. (3)

It is through the global travels of individuals such as these--individuals that identified themselves as anti-imperialists--that a narrative emerges which discloses how the practice of and belief in anti-imperialism contributed to shaping understandings of the world. The aim of this text is to introduce and analyse the patterns and behaviour of antiimperialist activists during the interwar years. Central to mapping these encounters is disclosing cross-cultural exchanges between peoples and ideas made possible through the travels that some of these individuals undertook. This form of anti-imperial practice created relationships and an understanding of the world, a framework that builds upon Dirk Hoerder's conception on how the travels of intellectual and 'intercultural migrants' from the colonies in the 1920s and 1930s 'formed worldviews and militancy by a fusion of their own colonised culture with Western coloniser cultures'. To broaden Hoerder's observation of travels, this must also include imperial critics of Empire born and raised in the so-called 'imperialist centres' in Europe. Bridgemans life and career is a typical example of this. Travels and intellectual exchanges between individuals are central here, and through the methodological concept of collective biography or prosopography, this text aims at tracing migratory patterns of particular persons that nourished and developed criticism of imperialism between the wars. (4) The practice of travel in the interwar years facilitated the development of a functional anti-imperialism that turned cosmopolitanism into an expression forged in the vein of political resistance. Well-known and lesser known anti-imperial organisations and associations provide contextual frameworks, yet the focus is on the antiimperialist histories of particular individuals. A majority of these people either had a relationship, intimate or fleeting, with the international communist movement, prominently represented in the channels and contacts of the Communist International (Comintern, 1919-1943) or national communist parties.

National identity was only a part of the means to identify and categorise the origins of individuals, however, other factors were equally or even more important. The personal files of cadres and others connected to the Comintern, filed in the Comintern Archive in Moscow, illustrate this. These documents disclose some of the complexities, opportunities, and hardships experienced by these sojourners of communism and anti-imperialism. These files were created for the purpose of having access to 'background' material on people that the Comintern considered interesting from a political and functional perspective, or were perceived as a threat. (5) The case of the Japanese communist and national revolutionary Teido Kunizaki (1894--unknown) is illustrative of the above. Kunizaki had his social background identified by the Comintern's Cadre Department in Moscow as 'bourgeois' and nationality as Japanese. Yet the Comintern wanted to fully understand Kunizaki's journey to communism by compiling detailed surveys of his political affiliations and travels. According to a second biographical note, Kunizaki had been active in 'workers' and peasants movement' in Japan in 1924 and, in 1926, he left Tokyo for university studies in Berlin, and in 1928, formed the 'Japanese Language Group of the KPD (German Communist Party)' and worked as a functionary at the LAI's International Secretariat.

In 1932, Berlin's political police authorities refused to renew Kunizaki's residence permit, and in September, he travelled together with his German wife, Frieda Redlich, to Moscow only to find himself in limbo after the International Control Commission (the Comintern's cadre department and internal repressive organ; ICC) refused to transfer his KPD membership to the Soviet Communist Party because of his 'bourgeois background'. (6) This unfortunately determined the outcome of Kunizaki's life. After trying to adapt to a life in the 'Red capital' with Redlich, Kunizaki was caught up in the maelstrom of Stalinist parochial paranoia and the relentless fear of 'the enemy' in the 1930s. (7) In 1937, as the Great Terror gained momentum in the Soviet Union, the two of them lived an isolated life, and the last entry in Kunizaki's personal file in the Comintern Archive depicts the desolate and absurd situation. A report authored by the Hungarian emigre and communist Max Leitner on 4 August 1937, and addressed to the ICC, tells us how he had met Redlich on 1 August at the 'Cultural Centre in the Park of Culture [today more known as Gorky Park]'. The celebration of the Anti-War Day' was in full swing, and the two of them drifted into a discussion about Redlich's marriage with Kunizaki and how he 'wanted to return to Japan' despite being 'a political refugee' who faced 'severe persecution' if he returned to Japan. However, the only thing Leitner was interested in knowing was if Kunizaki had been or currently had any contact with Japanese diplomats, and if so, Leitner made the case that he was a plausible spy for 'Japanese imperialists'. Leitner left the question open, however, and the last sentence in the report tells that when Kunizaki 'came about, the conversation was interrupted'. (8) There is no trace of Kunizaki after Leitner's report.

By analysing and focusing on the travel patterns of individuals as the case above, this makes it possible tracing exchanges of ideas that enhanced how and when anti-imperialism was enacted as a practice. This constitutes a source for interpreting this practice as cosmopolitan, and if we choose to view anti-imperialists' as people who through their travels became aware of the world as a complex system, did this practice shape their lives? This is a question that consists of further intricate dimensions. As a point of departure, it is through the different political and social contexts of the interwar years that we can approach the question of anti-imperialism as an articulation of cosmopolitanism, or if the two even are equal modes of expressions. To do so, this text article to methodically examine the travels and anti-imperial histories of activists, and how this practice contributed to shaping an alternate understanding of the world.

Anti-Imperialist and Cosmopolitan Travels Between the Wars and Beyond

Historically, colonialism and imperialism have represented different forms of oppression and subjugation. As empire refers to the 'rule of by a particular group in a political centre', this does not by itself signify imperialism, which, according to Robert J. C. Young, 'constituted a global political system' motivated by finance and ideology controlled 'from the centre as a policy of state' to fulfil the 'grandiose projects of power'. (9) Taking this fundamental definition of imperialism as a point of departure, and by locating it in the political context of the interwar years, resistance to structural and hegemonic imperialism, characterised by the global stretch of European Empires, identifies anti-imperialism as a concept and practice enacted by individuals, associations, and organisations. Cemil Aydin's study of anti-Western politics locates how interwar anti-imperialism emerged as a counter narrative to Western imperialism, made possible of the ambivalent vision of global society among the victorious nations in the reconstruction of the world after the Great War. This involved, above all, the fallacy that the League of Nations could fulfil the obligations of securing a righteous peace, and President Woodrow Wilson's failure to allow in practice colonial demands of national independence based on the principle of national self-determination. The end of the Great War and the results of the Versailles Peace Conference in 1919, did not see the creation of a stable global community, rather, it can be seen as the 'triumph of nationalism', Aydin states. (10) This was not only the nationalism of Empires, but of nationalism as a driving political force for colonial liberation movements and their leaders. Antiimperialists were not willing to abide to the Wilsonian vision in 1919 of colonial liberation as a gradual 'careful and orderly' process of liberal reform. Hence, colonial nationalists embraced anti-imperialism as a state of mind in order to methodically advance their claims, and, to reframe their understanding of the world after 1919. Colonial disorder in China, Korea, India, and Egypt were explicit expressions of this anti-imperial disillusion, where, as in the last case, the effective repression by British colonial authorities of Sad Zaghlul, the leader of the Egyptian nationalist party Wafd, only strengthened and radicalised the nationalist agenda. (11) Several dimensions contributed to the radicalisation of anti-imperialist practice. If we take the Indian nationalist Subhas Chandra Bose's reflection on the 'powerful nationalist movement', which, as he experienced it in 1934, was grounded in an understanding that 'the people [in India] have for the first time in their history begun to feel that they have been conquered'. (12) With Bose's observation in mind a reasonable starting point for understanding the majority of verbalised anti-imperialist sentiment in the interwar years, as developed through contacts and travels, is that it resulted from the loss of confidence of the colonised in general, and anti-colonial activists in particularly in 'in their rulers' ability or desire to improve their lives'. (13) From this perspective, the transfer of the colonial struggle from the colonies to metropolitan centres' in Europe and the USA is a logical progression. The Indian communist Subodh Roy summarised the development of Indian resistance against the British Empire, with particular reference to its practice between the wars, concluding that '[F]reedom fighters in this country have set sail to foreign lands with the hope of getting a wide scope for their activities in collaboration with foreigners in matters of financial and technical assistance'. (14)

David Featherstone has proposed that cosmopolitanism can be used as a framework to interpret internationalism, including anti-imperialism and that doing so will offer a serious challenge to methodological nationalism. Further, this calls for featuring transnationalism as a central part of anti-imperialist behaviour and practices in the disclosing of why and how patterns operate, as Akira Iriye and Pierre-Yves Saunier suggest, 'over, across, through, beyond, above, under, or in-between polities and societies'. (15) By examining the histories of ideological development and radicalisation among anti-imperialist activists through such approaches, it is possible to distinguish the scope and extent of relations which either lasted for a brief or longer moment. This calls into question the linking together of people from the colonies with anti-imperial activists coming from an 'imperial' origin in Europe and the USA between the wars. Is this though enough to propose that there exist a tangible relation between anti-imperialism as cosmopolitanism?

Kwame Appiah writes that a cosmopolitan individual identifies him/ herself as 'a citizen of the world'. Yet at the same time he wonders how far we can take that idea. According to Appiah, taking 'two strands of cosmopolitanism' (universal and legitimate) as a starting point enables us to examine whether it helps to understand the actions and ideas, which, as argued here, can be seen through travels and connections. The notion of being 'a citizen of the world' needs to be, however, further discussed. According to Appiah, the universal claim is the belief that 'we have obligations to others' and how ties and responsibilities 'to others' go beyond kinship and friendship. This is connected to the idea that if someone sees himself/herself as a cosmopolitan one should also appreciate being a 'member of a global community of human beings', Gillian Brock states. The legitimate claim of cosmopolitanism presupposes that we are required to value 'not just human life but of particular human lives' and specific practices and beliefs, which are located in a setting that shape and determine our responsibilities. (16)

For anti-imperialist activists in the interwar years, travelling and arriving in new localities may have contributed in creating an identity of being a citizen of the world as much as it shaped and developed their political identity. However, this does not fully explicate the foundation of anti-imperialist travels as a cosmopolitan practice in the interwar years. From a different perspective, and in comparison to Appiah's understanding of the universal and legitimate claim, mobility is central to understand cosmopolitanism as a practice. According to political scientist Sidney B. Tarrow's study of 'the new transnational activism', we have to take into account cosmopolitanism either as rooted or rootless. Yet this poses a challenge as the latter is implicitly connected to the negative history of anti-Semitism as it was produced both in Nazi Germany and Stalin's Soviet Union. What Tarrow addresses is far from the anti-Semitic portrayal of cosmopolitanism, suggesting that rooted cosmopolitans are part of 'local settings' that draw on 'domestic resources', and is evident in a society that has become increasingly interconnected, characterised by its 'intertwined networks of a complex international society'. (17) Does this imply that travel is not a prerequisite for becoming 'a citizen of the world'? As we shall see, adversaries of imperialism in the interwar years could act both ways if we recognise the increasing access to travel and technological development, or follow the flow of information and ideas through the use of communications (telegraph and telephone) on a national, transnational and global level. Illustrative of this is the international travels of Indian poet and Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore, something which proved crucial in shaping his understanding of other countries and how he related this to India's complex and nuanced position in the world. Tagore's life was one of rooted cosmopolitanism and according to the Indian historian Ramachandra Guha this framework furthered his patriotic attitude without turning him into a nationalist. Yet in hindsight of the Great War experience, Tagore bitterly conceded in 1921: the 'West has misunderstood the East'. (18)

If we then look to the opposite conceptual understanding of world travellers as an expression of cosmopolitanism, Appiah states that such people take no claim in either collective or group rights, but abide to their own movements across and above state boundaries while asserting the 'protection of our individualities'. (19) This form of protection and legitimate claim of cosmopolitanism is further accentuated with the inclusion of race and colour in the equation, where 'colour' has been seen as a source of identification, and, was used as practice to advance the message of anti-imperialism as a strong political force. As Nico Slate has shown, particular emphasis should be placed on recognising how racial boundaries served as contact zones to facilitate contact and cultural crossings at the onset of the twentieth century. (20) The pitfalls of the relation between interwar anti-imperialism and communism, and its connection to race and colour, increasingly came under pressure when communist policy chose to focus on class rather on race. The outcome frequently ended with internal splits, public defamation and official schisms. The genealogy of the Trinidadian and prolific advocate of pan-africanism, the Trinidad born George Padmore (real name: Malcolm Ivan Meredith Nurse), is typical of this. (21) Thus, to constructively advance a methodological study of anti-imperialism as cosmopolitanism, we should first agree upon the premise that there exists no rigid distinction when it comes to grasping the ramifications of anti-imperialism as cosmopolitanism; only then can a plausible relationship between the two of them be discussed.

Bandung 1955

Different contexts and chronologies shed new light on the relation between anti-imperialism and cosmopolitanism. In the context of 20th century history of resistance, it is necessary to connect interwar anti-imperialism with the decolonisation of the postwar years; for example, the renowned rendezvous of decolonisation at the 'Afro-Asian Conference' in Bandung in April 1955. Bandung has been described as the originary moment of Jawaharlal Nehru's introduction of the concept of the Non-Aligned-Movement (NAM) and Third World opposition against the First and Second world. Yet the event's historical ties can be traced back to the movements of resistance against colonialism and imperialism in the interwar years. This was particularly concretised in Bandung because of the physical presence of individuals, who in 1955 appeared as prominent leaders, but in the interwar years struggled to put forward demands of national independence in spaces outside of the colonial world. In the opening statement at the Bandung conference of Indonesia's President, Achmed Sukarno, he recalled a valuable three decade long tie of resistance:
   Only a few decades ago it was frequently necessary to travel to
   other countries and even other continents before the spokespersons
   of our people could confer. I recall in this connection the
   Conference of the 'League Against Imperialism and Colonialism'
   which was held in Brussels almost thirty years ago. At that
   Conference many distinguished Delegates who are present here today
   met each other and found new strength in their fight for
   independence. (22)

The last sentence referred to, for example, the Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, who had attended the Brussels Congress as accredited delegate of Mahatma Gandhi's Indian National Congress (INC) in 1927. Nehru left the Brussels Congress with the impression that he had witnessed a massive demonstration against imperialism, deciding to travel in the company of his wife Kamala to Berlin. On location he observed how the mixture of radicalism in this 'colonial metropolis' stirred up passionate discussions among fellow Indian nationalists on how to oppose imperialism, debates that were profoundly influenced by socialism or communism. According to Nehru's biographer Sarvapelli Gopal, the Brussels Congress represented 'a turning-point' in the development of his political awareness and practical experience. (23) Brussels is a central moment for any historical narrative on interwar anti-imperialism, and as Tony Ballantyne and Antoinette Burton argues in their survey of global empires and transnational connections, stating that by 'thinking backward from Bandung' it is possible to trace 'the flow of people and policies' between imperial centres and colonies, this framework highlights obscure anti-imperial histories and often-neglected 'encounters'. (24)

Brussels 1927 and the League against Imperialism and for National Independence

174 delegates representing 134 organisations, associations and political parties participated at the Brussels Congress. The event was a cross-section of leftwing political, social and cultural movements that aimed to depict how the colonial and imperial world was united in a global protest against colonialism and imperialism. A deeper survey of the geographical representation discloses the international scope of the congress. Yet what must be emphasised is that despite the 'international' ambition, the congress was largely confined to a Eurocentric demonstration of resistance against colonialism and imperialism. The majority of the individuals present in Brussels lived in Europe, the minority travelled from the colonies. This can partly be explained in visa restrictions, for example, British colonial authorities had increased their monitoring of movements related to the congress prior to its opening. Another explanation was the lack of funds to sponsor travel arrangements from the colonies to Europe. Accommodation was another issue to solve. As Jimmy La Guma from South Africa arrived either in Brussels or Berlin in January, he had nowhere to live and Munzenberg had no clue whatsoever on what to do with him. (25)

Despite being a forceful demonstration against colonialism and imperialism, it was also, as Vijay Prashad writes, 'an unlikely place for the formation of the Third World'. Central to the successful outcome of the congress, according to Munzenberg, was the travels of anti-imperialists who brought with them intentions, memories and experiences. It is in this context that the Brussels Congress represents a fundamental source of inspiration for later political currents such as postwar movements of decolonisation, or the pan-africanist William Edward Burghardt Du Bois and Padmore's work in reviving the Pan-African congress in 1945, and the Nehruvian concept of NAM. (26)

Munzenberg was, however, caught off guard as the congress transcended into collective euphoria, and when 'important delegates from the colonial countries' approached him without uttering a 'single word of criticism' that the communists had acted in the background, he informed the Comintern about the success of the event. Further, Nehru asked Munzenberg if could help him arrange meetings with 'Russian Comrades', for example with the Georgian communist Vissarion Vissarionovich (Besso) Lominadze, the delegate of the Kommunisticheskii Internationasal Molodezhi (KIM; Communist Youth International). (27)

The congress 'Manifesto' explained the LAI's global ambitions, a document signed by Edo Fimmen, the Dutch trade unionist and secretary of the Amsterdam International, and the British socialist George Lansbury. Accordingly, the 'Manifesto' declared that the 'national liberation movement of the Asian, African and American peoples' was in scope and nature an 'organically connected [...] world phenomenon' in support of 'the oppressed and enslaved peoples'. (28) The LAI managed for a brief moment to gather well-known leaders of anti-imperialist movements, as it likewise showed that there existed space to establish a functional political platform. Anti-imperialist organisations and associations, representing for example North Africa, China, India, Indonesia, Equatorial Africa, Afro-America, and Latin America were in contact with the LAI hub in Berlin (the International Secretariat), an organisational body that facilitated the use of transnational networks set in motion after the Brussels Congress. However, a crucial fact and historical observation is relevant to make here about the LAI's legacy as a prelude to Bandung. As the LAI tried to pose and function as the hub of the anti-imperialist movement, having Berlin and Europe as its operative base, the history of the LAI must be seen from two perspectives. First, the LAI was a forerunner for political campaigns against imperialism and social oppression in the twentieth century, and second, the intimate relations to and with the Communist International ultimately defined the LAI's public relations and political nature. (29)

It is nevertheless important to remember that it was through the initiatives of organisations as the LAI that practices such as travel enabled exchanges, encounters and articulations of anti-imperialism. This was done by gathering anti-imperialist activists at different locations in the world, hence, cosmopolitanism should not only be seen as a practice, it became a virtue that defined political spaces and opportunities that radically questioned the existing world order between the wars.

Travel and Transnational Radical Anti-Imperialism as Cosmopolitanism

Sociologist Victor Roudometof's study of transnationalism and cosmopolitanism suggests that we could interpret individuals crossing imagined or real borders as 'people out of place'. (30) Yet, the exchanges of anti-imperial ideas and beliefs imply that we should and can perceive these individuals as people that had a place in the world based in their commitment and beliefs. The central role some individuals had in promoting and facilitating anti-imperialism as a practice is crucial here. For example, Munzenberg was from a political perspective 'a man of the world', however, for the Comintern, he was identified as a 'worker, member of the Sozialdemokratische Partei 1906, a member of Spartacus from the beginning' and travelled to the Soviet Union 'very often' between 1920 and 1936. Living in Berlin after the end of the Great War, however, in March 1933, Munzenberg escaped from Germany and crossed the German-French border, escaping in all haste to Paris. (31) Munzenberg's life should be examined through lenses of pacifism, socialism, and communism, ideologies that shaped his persona as he developed anti-movements (colonialism, imperialism, fascism) that contested the established world order. Munzenberg was though never an anti-imperialist traveller compared to some of his comrades. Yet the initiatives taken by him originated in novel anti-imperial contacts, for example, the process leading to the inauguration of the LAI in 1927 stimulated anti-imperial travels. Focus here is therefore on disclosing first, individuals engaged in anti-imperial travels, and second, what scope did the travels have and what did this procure for the ones performing these journeys? This builds upon the methodological assumption that travelling anti-imperialists left in its trail new relations and meetings, a practice that stimulated the transference of resistance against imperialism across borders and between individuals. Some of these anti-imperial travels unveil to us how networks of resistance were created, and, as we shall see, how encounters and articulations of anti-imperialism as cosmopolitanism turned into a mode and practice.

Interwar Anti-Imperialist Travels

In the 1920-30s, a majority of travelling anti-imperialists ended up, visited briefly, or passed through Europe, and while doing so, developed their critique of racism and imperialism. The destinations were usually metropolitan centres such as London, Paris, Berlin, Hamburg, or Amsterdam. According to Christina Horvath's study of the 'cosmopolitan city', this is a place that represents a 'space of encounter between cultures' as it provides with opportunities, contacts, and has a socialising function. (32) As we include a spatial understanding of the city as a place of interconnected anti-imperialism, this shows us how interwar anti-imperialism as a cosmopolitan practice shared similar distinctive features. If we look at Berlin in the 1920s, around 5,000 colonial residents represented some form of rooted cosmopolitanism for people that either visited or passed through the city, while Paris has been resembled in terms of a 'black colony' for black colonial organisations at the grassroots level. (33) A third example is Hamburg, a trading port that served as connective centres for interwar anti-imperialism. James W. Ford (1893--957), a communist from the USA and functionary in the Profintern (Red International of Labour Unions, RILU), who together with Padmore was the driving organisational force behind the official inauguration of the International Trade Union Committee of Negro Workers' (ITUCNW) in Hamburg on 7 July 1930, described the functions of travels and how this created moments of anti-imperial interconnectedness in a place as Hamburg:
   Negro seamen in their travels and experiences must establish
   contact and connection with the international revolutionary
   workers' movement [...] and in the same timer to bring the
   principles of the international revolutionary workers' movement to
   their brothers in Africa. (34)

Ford was no stranger to travel. In 1917, he had been conscripted in the American army and sent to France in 1918, a journey that influenced his future political career, according to the autobiographical account 'Life and Activities' in his personal file. The autobiography discloses Ford's travels to develop and promote anti-imperialism, with particular focus on the 'Negro question', describing how his journey to attend the Fourth Profintern Congress in Moscow 1928, was a pivotal moment for him. In Moscow, Ford received instructions to travel and visit France, Belgium and Germany in 1929 as representative of the Profintern's 'Negro Bureau', a journey that included a short return back to the USA to investigate the possibilities of organising the founding conference of the ITUCNW. In 1930, Ford returned to Hamburg to oversee the final preparations for the ITUCNW conference. Also, despite his frequent travels between Hamburg and Moscow, Ford made detours to Berlin and Geneva. In the latter case, Ford attended a conference on 'African child slavery' organised by the International Labour Organisation in 1931, observing how his travels in the USA and Europe in 1932 made it possible for him to meet and speak with individuals that shared a similar political interest. (35)

William Lorenzo Patterson (1891--1980) had a similar career as an anti-imperialist revolutionary. According to Patterson's 'strictly confidential' autobiography from 16 April 1932, he was born in San Francisco into a 'poverty stricken' family. The struggles of finding a job and education contributed in turning Patterson into a 'confirmed nationalist under oppression'. Part of this can be accredited to his travels. In 1919, he left the USA and 'worked' his way to England, 'determined to go to Liberia Africa', however, due to lack of money he failed to achieve any of this, and instead, was forced to return back to the USA. After joining the Workers American Party (forerunner of the Communist Party of the USA) in 1926, Patterson travelled to Moscow for studies at the Kommunisticheskii universitet trudiashchikhsia Vostoka (Communist University for Eastern Workers'; KUTV) in 1927. Whereas Ford had Germany (Berlin and Hamburg) as his focal point, Patterson was active in France as 'representative of the Comintern', assigned with the task from the ECCI Negro Bureau of the Comintern to 'strengthen the Negro work of our brother French Party [Communist Party of France]'. Patterson assisted Ford and Padmore in preparing the ITUCNW conference; for example, he travelled to London in the spring of 1930, wanting to secure permission from the municipal authorities to let the conference convene in the city. However, British authorities disapproved of the idea, something that forced the organizers in the last minute to relocate the conference to Hamburg. (36) Ford and Patterson's anti-imperial travels not only contributed in advancing their understanding of the world, it enhanced their understanding of different languages, for example, Russian, French, and German. They were though not alone in travelling the world in the interwar years.

The Russian communist Mikhail Borodin (1884--1949) was a traveller of the world before and after the Bolsheviks' seized power in Russia 1917. Borodin had lived in Sweden and the USA before returning to Soviet Russia in 1918, receiving a position at Narkomindel (Commissariat of Foreign Affairs), whereupon he left Moscow in 1919 with the role of acting as Soviet Russia's first emissary in the USA. Yet shortly after Borodin's arrival in the country, he was in Mexico to coordinate the establishment of the Communist Party of Mexico. In Mexico, Borodin met the Indian nationalist revolutionary Manabendra Nath Roy, who assisted Borodin's undertakings to organise the party, and, as can be found in the autobiographical account of another Indian nationalist revolutionary, Virendranath Chattophadyaya (Chatto, 1880--1937), was given a 'large sum of money' by Borodin, and as Chatto sarcastically noted, it was only when Roy arrived in Moscow in 1920, that he 'became a Communist'. (37)

For Borodin, however, the Mexican adventure did not last long. In January 1920, he returned to Europe, travelling to Madrid where he 'dropped a few lines' to an undisclosed recipient in Moscow to inform how he had 'seen and learned a good deal' that there existed potential of spreading communism as a global movement. (38) Borodin's role in advancing the Comintern's agenda of anti-imperialism cannot and should not be underestimated. First, he provided Roy with a passageway to travel and meet Lenin in Moscow, something that led, for a couple of years, to Roy being labelled as the leading expert on the colonial question and the Indian liberation struggle in the Comintern. This was despite Roy's open conflict with Lenin on India and the colonial question at the Second International Comintern congress in Moscow 1920. (39)

Roy's experience of the 'Red capital' proved to be a step that furthered his life as a fervent anti-imperialist 'in favour of India's right to self-determination'. (40) Despite the short period in Moscow, it was a formative period that shaped Roy's life. In 1920, he went from Moscow to Baku, Azerbaijan to participate at the 'First Congress of the Peoples of the East', an event that aimed at centralising the Asian 'fight against imperialist domination and capitalist exploitation'. However, the Comintern perceived the congress as a way of meeting Asian delegates and to win them over 'fully to communism'. The Baku congress is illustrative from the perspective that it shows us how travels and meetings facilitated the creation of anti-imperial spaces as a terrain of 'anti-imperial global critique'. (41)

Acting upon the instructions of Lenin and the Executive Committee of the Comintern (ECCI), Roy went to Berlin to consolidate Indian nationalist movement, and in 1924, the ECCI ordered Roy to proceed to Paris. In the Parisian 'colonial metropolis', Roy organised and led the International Colonial Bureau of the Comintern, which aimed at functioning as a coordinating body for the colonial work of the European communist parties. Yet by the end of 1924, every attempt to do so had collapsed due to internal struggles in the West European communist movement, and in January 1925, the French security service Surete had Roy deported from France. (42)

This did not end Roy's influence; on the contrary, instead the Paris debacle strengthened his position in the Comintern. From 1925 to 1927, Roy tried to control Munzenberg's organisational apparatus in Berlin, for example, by sending letters of warnings or instructions. A closer reading of these letters expose Roy's suspicious mind as he warned Munzenberg that in order to not frustrate 'the object of the League [LAI] [...] the work for the organisation of the League should be conducted with great prudence. It is necessary to act very carefully in establishing relations with the emigrant groups in Europe'. (43) The warning was aimed primarily at anti-imperial activists such as Chatto, who had lived in Berlin since 1921 after being deported from Sweden on effective orders from the police authorities in Stockholm. (44)

Chatto's life and career as a national revolutionary encapsulates what anti-imperialism as cosmopolitanism might constitute. Born in Haiderabad in India 1880 into a 'bourgeois' family, Chatto left the country in 1901 for academic studies in London. Fairly soon he became involved in 'anti-British' agitation holding a position as Secretary of the 'Swaraj Committee'. In 1909, Chatto resigned from the committee and joined the 'national Indian Terror-organisation the Maharshtra secret society'. Chatto's radicalisation contributed in forcing him to leave London in 1910, ending up Paris where he quickly resumed anti-British activities. This was only the beginning of Chatto's anti-imperial travels, a history given in great detail in Nirode K. Barooah's biography, yet the documents filed in Chatto's personal file disclose travelling across Europe increasingly radicalised his political views. Living in wartime Berlin and coordinating the activities of the European Central Committee of Indian Nationalists (the Berlin Committee), Chatto travelled to Stockholm in 1917, expecting to put the case of India's liberation to the leaders of the European socialist movement at the planned Stockholm Peace Conference. As the conference petered out because of internal squabbles between the leaders of the European socialist parties, Chatto drifted in a new direction as he met and made acquaintances with Russian Bolshevik emigres in Stockholm travelling en route to Russia. Thus, once the war was over the Bolsheviks seized power in Russia, the field was open for Chatto to travel to Moscow and establish contacts with leading Bolsheviks. This relationship to communism was decisive for his ability to live in Stockholm. After a short visit to Berlin in 1921, Swedish authorities did not allow Chatto to return to Stockholm, leaving him stranded in the capital of the Weimar republic. Though, as noted in one of the biographies on Chatto in his personal file, it was through the contacts with Borodin and Munzenberg that Chatto became a central actor in the European centre of the anti-imperialist movement in the 1920s, as he was appointed as International Secretary of the LAI from 1928 to 1931. (45)

The LAI was one of many contact zones for anti-imperial travels between the wars. Central for developing this was the Hungarian communist and IWA functionary Louis Gibarti (real name: Laszlo Dobos, 1895--1967), appointed in 1926 by Munzenberg as his right-hand-man in overseeing the preparations for the Brussels Congress. The assignment did not generally imply much travelling for Gibarti. However, in 1927, he did have to go back and forth between Berlin and Paris to control the LAI's progression. The regular travel consumed a big portion of the already minimal LAI budget, nonetheless. Gibarti's role is peculiar because he suddenly disappeared as LAI International Secretary in 1928, only to reappear in New York in 1929 as 'representative' of the LAI. (46) Gibarti certainly had a central role in organising patterns of rooted cosmopolitanism which his anti-imperial travelling turned into a reality. Typical of the above was the journey of William Pickens, member of the North American National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP), who in January 1927 visited Dresden, Brussels and Paris to deliver lectures on the 'Negro question'. On 13 January, Pickens participated at a public meeting at the 'Festsaal des Herrenhaus' in Berlin, organised by the LAI's forerunner, the League against Colonial Oppression (founded in Berlin on 10 February, 1926; LACO), where he delivered a speech in English on 'The Negro Problem in North America'. Gibarti had coordinated the preparations for the meeting, hoping that it would lead to Munzenberg meeting Pickens for a discussion. However, the meeting never took place because Pickens left Berlin for London on January 14. Later, however, Pickens told DuBois how he had met several likeminded people during his European journey. Even more, Pickens told about his engagement in spreading the word about the Brussels Congress, but due to unfortunate travel arrangements, he could not attend the event. Later in October 1927, the LAI wondered if Pickens wanted to do a lecturing tour in 'all the principal German cities, and Brussels, Paris and Geneva' on the 'Negro question'. Pickens notified the Board of Directors at the NAACP about the offer, and despite this being an 'attractive opportunity' he could not leave New York since the 'work does not permit it now'. (47)

The Chinese national revolutionary Hansin Liau (year and date unknown--1964) is a fascinating character from the perspective how anti-imperialism shaped the life for 'a man of the world'. In 1922, after participating in the foundation of the Communist Party of China, and as a member of the Chinese nationalist organisation the Kuomintang, Liau left China and travelled to Berlin in order enhance the spreading of Chinese nationalist propaganda across Europe. According to a short passim in Liau's personal file, from '1923 until 1928 [he was] a member of the KPD'. (48) The period represented a formative and decisive shift in his life.

Liau was connected to the Comintern's so-called economic institute the 'Varga Bureau' in Berlin (1925-1927), which was under the leadership of the Hungarian communist Jeno (Eugene) Varga and served the purpose of collecting information and intelligence about global economic questions and its community, material compiled into general reports and dispatched to Comintern headquarters in Moscow. The reports provided with different outlines and perceptions of the world, for example, the report ' Yemen between England and Italy stated that Yemen had been 'from time been an important factor in world trade'. (49) The 'Varga Buro' was dissolved in 1927, as Varga received instructions to return to Moscow, however, this left Liau without any further assignment. Yet this was only the beginning for Liau, who during the Brussels Congress made a passionate appearance as a devoted anti-imperialist, earning him the reputation both at Comintern headquarters in Moscow and among the European anti-imperialist community as a solid and reliable worker. Under Munzenberg's tutelage, at first, Liau was elected to lead the Chinese National Agency, a propaganda centre for Chinese propaganda in Berlin, but which in its purest essence was an operation entirely under the Comintern's control and directed from Moscow. Yet its official credo gave the impression that the agency was a new way to improve 'the telegraphic information service' on China in Europe. It functioned above all to link together the LAI's nerve centre in Berlin with Reginald Bridgeman in London, who after the Brussels Congress assumed respon sibility over the British LAI 'provisional committee'. Bridgeman thought Liau's telegrams--material initially authored by the Agitprop section at Comintern headquarters and sent from Moscow to Berlin--were useful in creating new 'bulletins and speeches' on China, but it was a costly undertaking. In August 1927, therefore, the Chinese National Agency was dissolved due to poor finances, and while its functions merged with the LAI, Liau was offered the position as functionary at the International Secretariat in Berlin. (50)

Liau's background as a trustworthy anti-imperial 'comrade' put him in contact with likeminded people from China travelling and visiting Europe. In January 1928, Liau instructed the Chinese Ch'ao-Ting Chi to leave Berlin for London to help the British LAI 'organise an extensive campaign for the defence and support of the Chinese revolution'. Chi was a law student at the University in Chicago, who on 15 October, 1927, had left the USA to pursue academic studies in Great Britain. Yet before the courses would begin, Chi intended to fulfil his obligation as representative of the Association for the Spreading of Sun-Yat-senism in America to spread his views during his 'few months [...] on the [European] continent'. Arriving in Berlin at the end of October, he quickly left the city together with other fellow Chinese to visit Moscow in connection with the tenth anniversary celebration of the Russian revolution. In Moscow, Liau must have established his relation with Chi, and upon returning to Berlin in December, the idea of sending Chi to London was connived. The outcome of Chi's journey turned, however, into nothing. But what happened? The following is disclosed from Chi's own account of the 'mission'. On January 11, he left Ostend by boat and made port in Dover. However, British authorities refused to let Chi leave the boat and enter the country. In his report on the failed mission, the narrative distinguishes a palpable relation between anti-imperialism as cosmopolitanism. Accordingly, Chi's discussion with the officer of the British port authorities made it evident that there was a problem after it became clear that his passport included a Russian visa after having visited Moscow as 'a spectator' for the 'Tenth Anniversary Celebrations' of the Bolsheviks' seizure of power. Chi's report ended with the conclusive remark made by the British authority officer, who told Chi that '[W]e do not want you in England, that's all'. (51)

Numerous anti-colonial activists, either known (Nehru for example) or previously unknown travelled the world in the interwar years. The travels of the Javanese communist and national revolutionary A. Semaoen (Semaun) further this understanding. As delegate of the Indonesian nationalist organisation Perhimpunan Indonesia at the Brussels Congress, he went to Moscow only to receive instructions from the Profintern to leave immediately for a journey to China, which would take Semaoen through Siberia to participate at 'the conference for the Asian labour unions [Pan-Pacific Labour Conference]' at Hankow in May. In March 1927, Semaoen left and arrived in Vladivostok, however, he sent a message back to Comintern headquarters that he refused continuing the journey until his wife (who was in Moscow) joined him. The outcome of this ordeal remains unknown. (52) A second example is a telegram on 4 October, 1927, from Manuel Gomez, an American communist and leading figure in coordinating the establishment and activities of the sympathising organisation All-America Anti-Imperialist League in 1925, to the American communist leader Jay Lovestone. According to Gomez, Lovestone had to assist the Filipino Anacleto Alminiana of the Philippine Association for Independence, who 'is ready to go' from the USA to attend the Tenth Anniversary celebration in Moscow, to secure funds since he had 'no money'. Thus, Lovestone had to send a wire to Munzenberg in Berlin to request for money to be at Alminianas disposal once he got to New York. (53) Narratives of this type are abundantly evident when the history of the Comintern's involvement in advancing the anti-imperialist movement between the wars is scrutinised. Transnational anti-imperialism developed a multitude of such situations and moments in the interwar years, scenarios that make it evident to interpret and understand the encounters and articulations of anti-imperialism as a cosmopolitan practice.

Cosmopolitanism as anti-imperialism? Methodological challenges and new perspectives

The aim here has not been to unfold and discuss the large scale of anti-imperial travels, neither has the intention been to give details of the causality with respect to the individuals discussed above. Rather, these examples are representative narratives of how anti-imperialism was a way for them to identify themselves as 'people of the world'. While some cases referred to nationality as a defining factor in positioning their acts of resistance against imperialism, others, for example the travels of Ford and Patterson focused essentially on advancing the question of 'Negro liberation', where the later was a global dilemma confined and defined both through national and international frameworks. This article has aimed to show how anti-imperialism through the travels of individuals was a cosmopolitan practice which, in some cases, contributed to changing their view of the world, or had a radicalising impact on their lives. While cosmopolitanism evokes discussions that emphasise 'concern for others', interwar anti-imperialism had as its primary motif to function as a harsh petitioner against the oppression of 'others'. It is through cosmopolitanism as a practice, if we refer to the journeys and meetings of anti-imperialists on different locations, this contributed first, in enhancing the plausible realities of decolonisation of the world in the post-war era, and second, it procured a legacy widely referred to and used in times of decolonisation. Anti-imperialism can therefore either be seen as rootless or rooted cosmopolitanism, however, at the same time, anti-imperialism is the expression of a radicalised understanding of the world.

Anti-imperial travels were a practice that corresponded to the building of cosmopolitan identities, that is, the understanding of being 'a man of the world' as Gumede words described at the outset of this article. However, the political practice of anti-imperialism also limited the scope of cosmopolitanism. A majority of the cases discussed above illustrate this conundrum; observe the outcome of Roy, Ford or Chatto's lives and travels as anti-imperialists. Answering the challenge of whether we can see anti-imperialism as cosmopolitanism, the central observation is that the travels resulted in encounters, exchanges and articulations of anti-imperial attitudes, which either strengthened or questioned what Appiah observed as the protection of ideas and the obligation humans has towards each other. The histories of anti-imperial travels have shown us how this corresponds to cosmopolitanism as a practice and understanding of the world, and how travels shaped the lives and attitudes of activists in their radical interpretation of the world in times of interwar colonialism and imperialism.


(1) Interview Otto Schudel [functionary at the LAI International Secretariat in Berlin, 1927-30], 'Paper on J.T. Gumede', in Sechaba, Lusaka, Zambia: African National Congress, 1982.

(2) Raymond van Diemel, 'I have seen the new Jerusalem: Revisiting and re-conceptualising Josiah T. Gumede and Jimmy La Guma's USSR visit of 1927, Internet: Gumede.html (accessed: 27.10.2014); Margarete Buber-Neumann, Von Potsdam Nach Moskau. Stationen eines Irrweges, Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1957, pp100-01.

(3) John Saville, 'Bridgeman, Reginald Francis Orlando', in Dictionary of Labour Biography Volume VII, Joyce M. Bellamy & John Saville (eds.), London, MacMillan, 1984, pp26-40.

(4) Dirk Hoerder, 'Migrations and Belongings', in A World Connecting 1870-1945, Emily S. Rosenberg (ed.), Cambridge: The Belknap Press, 2012, p573; Kevin Morgan, Gidon Cohen and Andrew Flinn (eds.), Agents of the Revolution, Oxford: Peter Lang, 2005, pp13-15.

(5) John Haynes, '170 000 Names for the INCOMKA Database of the Comintern Archives', in The International Newsletter of Communist Studies, Bernhard H. Bayerlein (ed.), Mannheim, 2003, pp360-75.

(6) Russian State Archives of Social and Political History (RGASPI, Moscow) 495/205/4516, 1, Teido Kunizaki (A. Kon), Kommission, Moskau, 25/7-1936.

(7) RGASPI 542/1/54, 72-3, Letter from Ludwig Magyar, Moscow, to Joseph Berger, Berlin, 27/4-1932; RGASPI 495/205/4516, 1, Biographie Teido Kunizaki (A. Kon), Kommission, Moskau, 25/7-1936; J. Arch Getty and Oleg V. Naumov, The Road to Terror. Stalin and the Self-Destruction of the Bolsheviks, 1932-1939, New Haven: Yale University Press (2010).

(8) RGASPI 495/205/4516, 21, (Kopie) Max Leitner, Moskau, to the International Control Commission, Moskau, 4/8-1937.

(9) Martin Evans, 'Colonial Fantasies Shattered', in The Oxford Handbook of Postwar European History, Dan Stone (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012, p481; Robert J. C. Young, Postcolonialism. A Historical Introduction, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2001, pp15-17.

(10) Cemil Aydin, The Politics of Anti-Westernism in Asia. Visions of World Order in Pan-Islamic and Pan-Asian Thought, New York: Columbia University Press, 2007, pp12, 127-8.

(11) Erez Manela, The Wilsonian Moment. Self-Determination and the International Origins of Anticolonial Nationalism, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007, pp24-5, 141.

(12) Subhas Chandra Bose, The Indian Struggle 1920-42, Sisir Kumar Bose and Sugata Bose (eds.), Netaji Research Bureau (Calcutta), New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1997, p2.

(13) David B. Abernethy, The Dynamics of Global Dominance. European Overseas Empires 1415-1980, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000, p104.

(14) Subodh Roy, 'Preface', in Communism in India, Cecil Kaye (ed.), Calcutta: Editions India, 1971, p121.

(15) David Featherstone, 'Black Internationalism, Subaltern Cosmopolitanism, and the Spatial Politics of Antifascism', in Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 103(6), Routledge, p1409; Akira Iriye and Pierre-Yves Saunier, 'Introduction. The Professor and the Madman', in The Palgrave Dictionary of Transnational History. From the mid-19th century to the present day, Palgrave Macmillan, 2009, pxviii.

(16) Kwame Anthony Appiah, Cosmopolitanism. Ethics in a World of Strangers, London: Penguin Books, 2007, xiii; Gillian Brock, 'Cosmopolitanism and the Struggle for Global Justice', in The Ashgate Research Companion to Cosmopolitanism, Maria Rovisco and Magdalena Nowicka (eds.), Surrey: Ashgate, 2011, pp179-80.

(17) Sidney B. Tarrow, The New Transnational Activism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005, pp35-56; Mimi Sheller, 'Cosmopolitanism and Mobilities', in Rovisco and Nowicka (eds.), 2011, p349.

(18) Rabindranath Tagore, 'The Problem with Non-Cooperation', in Ramachandra Guha (Hg.), Makers of Modern India, New Delhi: Penguin Books, 2010, p186-7, 203.

(19) Kwame A. Appiah, 'Grounding Human Rights', in Human Rights as Politics and Idolatry, Amy Gutmann (ed.), Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001, p111.

(20) Nico Slate, Coloured Cosmopolitanism. The Shared Struggle for Freedom in the United States and India, Cumberland: Harvard University Press, 2012, p65.

(21) For George Padmore's life and career as a communist in the 1920s-1930s, and his break with the Comintern and the Profintern, see Holger Weiss, Framing a Radical African Atlantic. African American Agency, West African Intellectuals and the International Trade Union Committee of Negro Workers, Leiden: Brill (2014).

(22) Vijay Prashad, The Darker Nations. A People's History of the Third World, New York: The New Press, 2007, ppxv-xix; George McTurnan Kahin (ed.), The Asian-African Conference: Bandung, Indonesia, April 1955, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1956, p40.

(23) Jawaharlal Nehru, An Autobiography with musings on recent events in India (first edition 1936), London: The Bodley Head, 1953, p161; Sarvepalli Gopal, Jawaharlal Nehru. A Biography Volume One 1889-1947, London: Jonathan Cape, 1975, p100.

(24) Tony Ballantyne and Antoinette Burton, 'Empires and the Reach of the Global', in A World Connecting 1870-1945, Emily S. Rosenberg (ed.), Cambridge: The Belknap Press, 2012, p391.

(25) RGASPI 538/2/40, 8, Telegram from Munzenberg, Berlin, to 'Anderson', Hotel Lux, Moskau, January 1927.

(26) Prashad 2007, pp16, 22; Alastair Bonnett, Left in the Past. Radicalism and the Politics of Nostalgia, New York: Continuum, 2010, p6-7, 116.

(27) RGASPI 542/1/7, 89, Letter from Munzenberg, Brussel, an EKKI Sekretariat, Moskau, 13/2-1927.

(28) Louis Gibarti (Hrsg.), 'Manifest', in Das Flammenzeichen vom Palais Egmont, Berlin: Neuer Deutscher Verlag, 1927, pp246-50.

(29) The LAI's history is analysed in Fredrik Petersson, 'We Are Neither Visionaries nor Utopian Dreamers'. Willi Munzenberg, the League against Imperialism, and the Comintern, 1925-1933, Abo: Abo Akademi University (doctoral dissertation, published by Lewiston: Queenston Press, vol.I-II, 2013).

(30) Victor Roudometof, 'Transnationalism, Cosmopolitanism and Glocalization', in Current Sociology, Vol.53, No.1, Sage Publications, 2004, p114.

(31) RGASPI 495/205/7000, 72, Munzenberg, Willi, Moskau, Marsch 1935; RGASPI 495/205/7000, 85, An den Verbindungsdienst des Sekretariats des EKKI, 'Ercoli' (Palmiro Togliatti), Moskau, 14/10-1936; RGASPI 542/1/58, 21, Letter from Munzenberg [unknown location] to 'Franz' [?], 3/3-1933.

(32) Christina Horvath, 'The Cosmopolitan City', in The Ashgate Research Companion to Cosmopolitanism, Maria Rovisco and Magdalena Nowicka (Hrsg.), Surrey: Ashgate, 2011, p87; Hoerder 2012, pp576-7.

(33) Babette Gross, Willi Munzenberg. Eine politische Biographie, Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1967, pp196-8; Jennifer Anne Boittin, Colonial Metropolis. The Urban Grounds of Anti-Imperialism and Feminism in Interwar Paris, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2010, p77.

(34) RGASPI 532/4/94, 24-39, Negro Seamen and the Revolutionary Movement in Africa--Some lessons from Chinese seamen (J.W. Ford, ITUCNW), in The Negro Worker Vol 1, No. 4-5 April-May 1931.

(35) RGASPI 495/261/6747, 62-65, Life and Activities, James William Ford, ITUCNW, 20/4-1932.

(36) RGASPI 495/261/3072, 99-104, (Strictly confidential) William Lorenzo Patterson, 16/4-1932.

(37) RGASPI 495/213/186, 215-228, Autobiography by Chatto, Moscow, to the ICC [International Control Commission], Moscow, 15/10-1931. Roy and Chatto developed an infected relationship in the 1920s, something which perhaps explains his rather cross description of Roy. For a concise, but detailed survey on Roy, see Hans Piazza, 'Manabendra Nath Roy', in Ketzer im Kommunismus. 23 biographische Essays, Theodor Bergmann/ Mario Kepler, VSA-Verlag, 2000, p200.

(38) RGASPI 497/2/1, 1-4, Report from M. Borodin, Madrid, to [?], Moskau, 4/1-1920. Borodin was sent by the Comintern to China later to coordinate the alliance between the Chinese nationalist Kuomintang and Chinese communists in the 1920s. This reached an abrupt end when the former violently purged the later in 1927, for Borodin and China 1927, see Branko Lazitch, Biographical Dictionary of the Comintern. New, Revised, and Expanded Edition, Stanford: Stanford University, 1986, p39; Alexander Pantsov, The Bolsheviks and the Chinese Revolution 1919-1927, Richmond: Curzon Press (2000).

(39) On Roy's role in developing the Indian communist movement, see Sobhanlal Datta Gupta, Comintern and the Destiny of Communism in India 1919-1943, Kolkata: Seribaan (2006).

(40) 'I Accuse'. From the Suppressed Statement of Manabendra Nath Roy on Trial for Treason before Sessions Court, Cawnpore, India. With an Introduction by Aswani Kurma Sharma, Roy Defense Committee of India, New York, 1932, pp3-4.

(41) Solmaz Rustamova-Tohidi, 'The First Congress of the Peoples of the East: Aims, Tasks, Results', in Centre and Periphery, Mikhail Narinsky and Jurgen Rojahn, Amsterdam: IISH, 1996, pp74-80; Ballantyne and Burton 2012, p423.

(42) Piazza 2000, p205; Mustafa Haikal, 'Das Internationale Kolonialburo der Komintern in Paris', in Jahrbuchfur Historische Kommunismusforschung, Bernhard Bayerlein (Hg.), Mannheim, 1993, pp126-30.

(43) RGASPI 542/1/3, 10-11, (Confidential) Letter from ECCI Secretariat/ Roy, Moscow, to Munzenberg, Berlin, 29/5-1926. The antagonism between the two of them continued over the years. In 1930, Roy resided in Berlin after having been expelled by the Comintern on charges of supporting German social democracy (Anhanger der Brandler-Organisation). While using Berlin as a temporary refuge to plan for his return to India, Roy established contacts among the Indian community in the city and completed the book Revolution and Counter-Revolution in China. Chatto experienced Roy's presence and activities as uncomfortable, urging Munzenberg to use his powerful position in order to mobilize a press campaign against Roy in the German communist press, which hopefully would expose Roy's 'adventures' in Berlin. Nothing came of this, and in November 1930, Roy travelled to India where he was arrested shortly after his arrival, see Petersson 2013, pp374-5.

(44) Stockholm City Archive, Carl Lindhagen collection, volume 131: Ligue contre l'Imperialisme, 1927--1932, Letter from V. Chattophadyaya, Berlin, to undisclosed recipient, Stockholm, 15/5-1921.

(45) Nirode K. Barooah, Chatto: The Life and Times of an Indian Anti-Imperialist in Europe, Oxford: Oxford University Press (2004); Petersson (2013); RGASPI 495/213/186, 7-8, Biographie: Virendranath Chattophadyaya, Moskau, 4/9-1936.

(46) RGASPI 495/205/6048, 1, Biographie, Louis (Luiz) Gibarti, undated; Petersson 2013, p.218.

(47) W. E. B. Du Bois Papers (MS 312), Letter from William Pickens to NAACP Board of Directors, 6/10-1927; Stiftung Archiv der Parteien und Massenorganisationen der DDR im Bundesarchiv, Lichterfelde, Berlin (SAPMO BA-ZPA) R 1507/115, Liga gegen koloniale Unterdruckung und Antikolonialer Kongress in Brussel, 28/3-1927; Petersson 2013, pp.124-5. Pickens travelled to Europe in the summer of 1929, where he, for example, attended the second LAI congress in Frankfurt am Main (21-27 July), see Petersson 2013, pp.332-4.

(48) RGASPI 495/225/1043, 38-39, Letter from Hansin Liau & Dora Dombrowski-Liau, Moskau, an die deutsche Vertretung bei EKKI, Moskau, 3/2-1936. Liau was married to the German communist Dora Dombrowski, who in 1928 left Berlin for Moscow together with him.

(49) RGASPI 504/1/55, 29-41, Report: 'Yemen zwischen England und Italien', Berlin, 19/2-1927.

(50) For Liau and the Chinese National Agency, see Petersson 2013, pp169-72.

(51) RGASPI 542/1/29, Page 6-7, Memorandum on my journey to England, author: Ch'ao-Ting Chi, Berlin, to H. Liau, International Secretariat LAI, Berlin, 14/1-1928.

(52) RGASPI 495/6/44, 22, Decision sent to the International Control Commission of the Comintern from the Small Commission, 13/5-1927.

(53) RGASPI 515/1/1067, 4, Telegraph from Manuel Gomez to Jay Lovestone, New York, 4/10-1927.

Fredrik Petersson
COPYRIGHT 2016 Lawrence & Wishart Ltd.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2016 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Petersson, Fredrik
Publication:Twentieth Century Communism
Article Type:Essay
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Feb 1, 2016
Previous Article:The struggle against Trotskyism in Norway, 1935-1937: a meeting of Soviet and local political culture.
Next Article:Solidarity: a new concept for transnational labour history?

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters