Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T07:31:18.017Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Challenging Colonial Forced Labor? Resistance, Resilience, and Power in Senegal (1920s–1940s)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 May 2018

Romain Tiquet
Romain Tiquet*
Affiliation:
Geneva University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Based on the combination of colonial archives and the analysis of several complaints published in Senegalese newspapers, this article sheds light on the daily compulsory reality experienced by local populations with regards to forced labor in colonial Senegal (1920s–1940s). In contrast to analyses approaching forced labor systems through the study of colonial bureaucratic routines, this article studies the reactions of local populations and the consequences for colonial labor policies. I introduce the notion of resilience in order to overcome the pitfalls of the resistance paradigm and bring new insight into attitudes of distance, refusal, and adaptation used by local populations as methods to “absorb the shock” of everyday colonial coercion. More broadly, this analysis leads us to interrogate the limits and fragility of the colonial enterprise, recalling that the colonial state was not an almighty administration and that it was, above all, based on abiding adaptations and empirical decisions.

Type
Articles
Information
International Labor and Working-Class History , Volume 93: Workers and Right-Wing Politics , Spring 2018 , pp. 135 - 150
Copyright
Copyright © International Labor and Working-Class History, Inc. 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Many thanks to Alexander Keese and the anonymous reviewers for their supportive criticism of the first draft. Research for this article was supported by ERC Starting Grant no. 240898, under the Framework Programme 7 (FP7) of the European Commission.

References

NOTES

2. Sénégal, Rapports politiques mensuels, May 1927, 2 G 27/18, Archives nationales du Sénégal, Fonds du Gouvernement général d'Afrique occidentale française (hereafter cited as ANS GGAOF).

3. Art. 2, paragraph 1, ILO Convention no. 29.

4. The “mise en valeur des colonies” was a political and economic plan launched in 1923 by Albert Sarrault, French minister of colonies. It was the basis of economic colonization, suggesting the use of a local workforce to “develop” the colonial territories. Sarrault, Albert, La Mise en valeur des colonies françaises (Paris, 1923), 675Google Scholar. See also Andrew, Christopher Maurice and Kanya-Forstner, Alexander Sydney, “France, Africa, and the First World War,” The Journal of African History 19 (1978): 11–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5. Decree of August 12, 1937, Journal officiel de l'AOF, October 23, 1937.

6. Fall, Babacar, “Manifestations of Forced Labor in Senegal: As Exemplified by the Société des Salins du Sine-Saloum Kaolack 1943–1956,” in Forced Labour and Migration: Patterns of Movement within Africa, eds. Zegeye, Abebe and Shubi, Shubi Ishemo (London, 1989), 269–88Google Scholar. See also for French and British Central Africa, Keese, Alexander, “Slow Abolition within the Colonial Mind: British and French Debates about ‘Vagrancy,’ ‘African Laziness,’ and Forced Labour in West Central and South Central Africa, 1945–1965,” International Review of Social History 59 (3) (2014): 377–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7. Fall, Babacar, Le travail forcé en Afrique-Occidentale française: 1900–1946 (Paris, 1993), 346Google Scholar.

8. Asiwaju, Anthony Ijaola, “Migrations as Revolt: The Example of the Ivory Coast and the Upper Volta before 1945,” Journal of African History 17 (1976): 577–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Touré, Oussouby, “Le refus du travail forcé au Sénégal oriental,” Cahiers d’études africaines 24 (1984): 25–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Henriet, Benoît, “‘Elusive Natives’: Escaping Colonial Control in the Leverville Oil Palm Concession, Belgian Congo, 1923–1941,” Canadian Journal of African Studies 49 (2) (2015): 339–61Google Scholar; Rodet, Marie, “Forced Labor, Resistance and Masculinities in Kayes, French Sudan (1919–1946),” Special issue “African Labor Histories,” International Labor and Working-Class History 86 (2014): 107–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9. See in particular Iba Der Thiam, “L’évolution politique et syndicale du Sénégal colonial de 1840 à 1936” (PhD diss., Université Panthéon-Sorbonne, 1983), 4462; Cooper, Frederick, Decolonization and African Society: The Labor Question in French and British Africa (Cambridge, 1996), 677CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Guèye, Omar, Sénégal: histoire du mouvement syndical. La marche vers le Code du travail (Paris, 2011), 389Google Scholar.

10. The publication of Martin Thomas gives an eloquent analysis of the link between the colonial order, the political economy, and the repression of labor protests in colonial empires. Thomas, Martin, Violence and Colonial Order: Police, Workers and Protest in the European Colonial Empires, 1918–1940 (Cambridge, 2012), 541CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11. Ortner, Sherry B., “Resistance and the Problem of Ethnographic Refusal,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 37 (1995): 175CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12. Fall, Babacar and Mbodj, Mamadou, “Forced Labor and Migration in Senegal,” in Forced Labour and Migration: Patterns of Movement within Africa, eds. Zegeye, Abebe and Ishemo, Shubi (London, 1989), 255–68Google Scholar; Conklin, Alice L., A Mission to Civilize: The Republican Idea of Empire in France and West Africa, 1895–1930 (Standford, 1997), 212–45Google Scholar; Seibert, Julia, “More Continuity than Change? New Forms of Unfree Labor in the Belgian Congo, 1908–1930,” Studies in Global Social History 7 (2011): 369–86Google Scholar.

13. Conférence de Brazzaville, Rapport établi par le Gouverneur de la Côte d'Ivoire Latrille sur le régime du travail indigène, 1944, box 2201, folder 4, Archives Nationales d'Outre-Mer, Affaires Politiques (hereafter cited as ANOM AP).

14. This Foucaldian concept has to be understood as including the practices and strategies (mentalities, rationalities and techniques) through which populations are governed. Foucault, Michel, Sécurité, territoire, population: cours au Collège de France (1977–1978) (Paris, 2004), 435Google Scholar. For a critical analysis of the term governmentality in the field of colonial studies, see Cooper, Frederick, Colonialism in Question: Theory, Knowledge, History (Berkeley, 2005), 48CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15. For instance, in AOF, enslavement was condemned “in the name of a universal definition of free labor […].” Cooper, Frederick and Stoler, Ann Laura, “Introduction Tensions of Empire: Colonial Control and Visions of Rule,” American Ethnologist 16 (1989): 609–621Google Scholar.

16. Memmi, Albert, Portrait du colonisé: précédé de Portrait du colonisateur (Paris, 2002), 99Google Scholar.

17. To have more detailed elements on the frictions between a “colonial” and an “African” representation of work, see Diop, Alioune, Le Travail en Afrique Noire (Paris, 1952), 96–100Google Scholar; d'Almeida-Topor, Hélène, Lakroum, Monique, and Spittler, Gerd, Le travail en Afrique noire: représentations et pratiques à l’époque contemporaine (Paris, 2003), 355Google Scholar. For the Senegalese context, Babacar Fall has tried to analyze the institution of work within the pre-colonial context, by looking at agro-pastoral societies experiencing integration into the system of global capitalism. Fall, Babacar, Sénégal: le Travail au XXème siècle (Paris, 2011), 14–25Google Scholar.

18. Bourdieu, Pierre, Algérie 60: structures économiques et structures temporelles (Paris, 1977), 11–18Google Scholar. Although this approach is enlightening, the main pitfall of Bourdieu's research is the lack of a role for agency of actors.

19. Mann, Gregory, “What was the Indigénat? The ‘Empire of Law’ in French West Africa,” Journal of African History 50 (2009): 331–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20. Decree of October 22, 1925, on regulation of indigenous labor in French West Africa, K 249(26), ANS GGAOF; Decree of August 21, 1930, on regulation of mandatory labor within the colonial context (implemented in FWA in February 18, 1933), K 152(26), ANS GGAOF.

21. Cooper, Decolonization and African Society, 30.

22. For an in-depth analysis of the general discussions at the conference and the peculiar French position, Maul, Daniel Roger, “The International Labour Organization and the Struggle against Forced Labour from 1919 to the Present,” Labor History 48 (4) (2007): 477–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23. For a specific analysis on this form of labor in AOF see Bernard-Duquenet, Nicole, “Le Front populaire et le problème des prestations en AOF,” Cahiers d’études africaines 16 (1976): 159–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24. Catherine Mornane Bogosian, “Forced labor, resistance and memory: the deuxieme portion in the French Soudan, 1926–1950” (Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsyvania, 2002), 273.

25. Bâ, Babacar, “La prison coloniale au Sénégal, 1790–1960: Carcéral de conquête et défiances locales,” French Colonial History 8 (2007): 81–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26. See the case of penal camps in Senegal, which were moved from one construction site to another whenever a large number of workers was necessary. Sene, Ibra, “Colonisation française et main-d'oeuvre carcérale au Senegal: De l'emploi des détenus des camps pénaux sur les chantiers des travaux routiers (1927–1940),” French Colonial History 5 (2004): 153–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27. In reference to military conscription which was sometimes called “blood tax”. Echenberg, Myron J., “Paying the Blood Tax: Military Conscription in French West Africa, 1914–1929,” Canadian Journal of African Studies 9 (1975): 171–92Google Scholar.

28. Circulaire générale sur le régime des prestations, Dakar, October 12, 1930, K186(26); ANS GGAOF.

29. Lettre du gouverneur général De Coppet à M. le ministre des colonies Moutet, Dakar, January 25, 1937; K8(1), ANS GGAOF.

30. Conseil Colonial du Sénégal, November 1936, 61.

31. Zucarelli, François, “De la chefferie traditionnelle au canton: évolution du canton colonial au Sénégal—1855–1960,” Cahiers d’études africaines 13 (1973): 213–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32. Méker, Maurice and Sylla, Almany, Le Temps colonial: itinéraire africain d'un naïf, du colonialisme à la coopération, 1931–1960 (Dakar, 1980), 68Google Scholar.

33. The use of borders to escape the constraints was often called “teeter-totter strategy” (politique de la bascule) by colonial authorities. Séverine Awenengo Dalberto, “Les Joola, la Casamance et l’État (1890–2004): l'identisation joola au Sénégal” (Ph.D. diss., Université Panthéon-Sorbonne, 2005), 104.

34. Jean, Boulègue, Les royaumes wolof dans l'espace sénégambien, XIIIe-XVIIIe siècle (Paris, 2013), 503Google Scholar.

35. Zucarelli, “De la chefferie,” 214.

36. Awenengo Dalberto, “Les Joola, la Casamance et l’État,” 53.

37. Ibid., 94.

38. Ibid.

39. Thiam, “L’évolution politique et syndicale du Sénégal,” 2526.

40. Colonial archives and interviews conducted in Senegal show clear evidence of the use of children and women for road labor. See, for instance, Enquête sur gestion financière dans le cercle de Sédhiou, 1937, 11 D1/237, ANS GGAOF; Interview with Mamadou Badji, February 26, 2013.

41. For a review of contributions to this field, see Cooper, Frederick, “Conflict and Connection: Rethinking Colonial African History,” The American Historical Review 99 (1994): 1516–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Allina-Pisano, Eric, “Resistance and the Social History of Africa,” Journal of Social History 37 (2003): 187–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Walraven, Klaas van and Abbink, Jon, “Rethinking Resistance in African History: An Introduction,” in Rethinking Resistance: Revolt and Violence in African History, eds. Abbink, Jon et al. (Leiden, 2003), 1–40Google Scholar; Tiquet, Romain, “Migrations protestataires et résistance au travail forcé en AOF, 1900–1946,” Hommes et migrations 1307 (2014): 166–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

42. Everyday resistance is often interchanged with hidden resistance as the majority of these reactions were evading the colonial records. Allen Isaacman criticized the use of the word “hidden” as an elitist and colonial category since calling “these actions hidden is to view them from the top down. Peasants who engaged in such protests understood the risk and benefit of their actions.” Isaacman, Allen, “Peasants and Rural Social Protest in Africa,” African Studies Review 33 (1990): 31CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43. Scott, James C., Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance (New Haven, 1985), 389Google Scholar.

44. Rodet, Marie, “C'est le regard qui fait l'histoire; Comment utiliser des archives coloniales qui nous renseignent malgré elles sur l'histoire des femmes africaines (archives),” Terrains & travaux 1 (2006): 20Google Scholar.

45. Oussouby Touré stressed that the first flights of villagers from requisition in Casamance into Gambia occurred in 1908. Oussouby Touré, “Mouvements de populations et projets de développement des économies rurales de la Haute-Gambie: Etude de la région du Wuuli” (Ph.D. diss., Paris 7, 1983), 171.

46. Journal du poste de Ziguinchor, tour of March 8, 1935, 11 D1/352, ANS GGAOF.

47. “Migration as protest proved far less costly to Africans and had much the same effect on the colonial authorities as did the other more militant forms of protest.” Asiwaju, “Migrations,” 593–94.

48. Journal du poste de Ziguinchor, tour of February 27, 1935, 11 D1/352, ANS GGAOF.

49. Journal du poste de Ziguinchor, tour of March 10, 1935, 11 D1/352, ANS GGAOF.

50. Journal du poste de Ziguinchor, tour of September 9, 1935, 11 D1/352, ANS GGAOF.

51. Scott, James C., “Everyday Forms of Resistance,” The Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies 4 (1989): 49CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

52. Hobsbawn, Eric J., “Peasants and Politics,” Journal of Peasant Studies 1 (1973): 13Google Scholar.

53. In particular Isaacman, “Peasants,” 32–37; Scott, “Everyday Forms,” 50–53.

54. For an interpretative and critical analysis of the binary of domination and resistance, Cooper, “Conflict and Connection,” 1518–19; Spivak, Gayatri C., “Can the Subaltern Speak?” in Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, eds. Nelson, Cary and Grossberg, Lawrence (Chicago, 1988), 271–316Google Scholar.

55. For a detailed overview of the debates on the definition of resistance, Scott, James C., “Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance,” Journal of Peasant Studies 13 (1986): 5–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56. The term was employed by the administrator. The word flight already gives an interpretation of the event, as in comparison with migration or moving.

57. Rapport de tournée sur exode de population, April 1934, 13 G 22, ANS GGAOF.

58. Ibid.

59. Courrier confidentiel de l'administrateur du cercle de Kolda à l'administrateur supérieur de la Casamance, July 5, 1934, 13 G 22, ANS GGAOF.

60. Ibid.

61. Isaacman, “Peasants,” 33.

62. The use of resilience is inspired by an article of Denis Peschanski, a specialist in the history of France during the Second World War. He used it as an intermediate concept to characterize behaviors which belong neither to French Resistance nor to collaboration under Vichy Regime. Peschanski, Denis, “Résistance, résilience et opinion dans la France des années noires,” Psychiatrie française 36 (2006): 194–210Google Scholar.

63. Journal du poste de Ziguinchor, tour of February 27, 1935, 11 D1/352, ANS GGAOF.

64. For an inspiring article on the application of Foucault's theory of power in Africa, see Bayart, Jean-François, “Foucault au Congo,” in Penser avec Michel Foucault: théorie critique et pratiques politiques, ed. Granjon, Marie-Christine (Paris, 2005), 183–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

65. Foucault, Michel, The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge, Volume 1 (London, 1998), 93Google Scholar.

66. Since the Law on freedom of speech of July 1881, extended in colonial territories.

67. For an analysis of the development of the press in Senegal and the rise of a “public opinion” see Barry, Moustapha, Histoire des médias au Sénégal. De la colonisation à nos jours (Paris, 2013), 351Google Scholar.

68. Barry, Histoire des médias au Sénégal, 151.

69. Henri Bellamy, “Après le vote sur le travail forcé: les colonies sont-elles faites pour les Colons ou pour les indigènes?” Le périscope africain, August 23, 1930.

70. During the discussions regarding forced labor at the ILO convention, Diagne defended with a special fervor the upholding of mandatory forms of labor in the French empire. By ratifying the Convention in 1937, the Popular Front imposed a posthumous repudiation of Blaise Diagne's legacy. For more details, Person, Yves, “Le Front populaire au Sénégal (mai 1936–octobre 1938),” Le mouvement social 107 (1979): 77–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

71. Anonymous, “La parole agréée,” Le périscope africain, August 28, 1930.

72. Jean Fremigacci analyses quite eloquently the reappropriation of the vocabulary of Ancien Regime by the first generation of colonial officials in Madagascar. Fremigacci, Jean, “L'administration coloniale: les aspects oppressifs,” Omaly Sy Anio 7–8 (1978): 10–12Google Scholar. See also Bâ, Amadou Hampaté, Mémoires; l'enfant peul; oui, mon commandant (Arles, 2000), 519Google Scholar.

73. Anonymous, “Les Chefs indigènes”, Le périscope africain, March 7, 1931.

74. According to the “custom,” the chiefs could take a certain percentage of the crop and employ villagers to do involuntary work on their own fields for a certain amount of days. Zuccarelli, “De la chefferie,” 227–28.

75. Boniface, “Travail forcé (suite),” Le périscope africain, September 20, 1930.

76. Ibid.

77. Lettre de l'inspecteur des affaires administratives de la Rocca au gouverneur de la colonie du Sénégal, Inspection de la société de prévoyance du Sine-Saloum, November 13, 1934, ANS GGAOF, 13 G 6.

78. Lettre du directeur des affaires politiques et administratives au gouverneur général, Demande de retrait de distinction honorifique à un chef de canton, May 4, 1938, ANS GGAOF, 13 G 6.

79. L'action sénégalaise, 1931–1934.

80. Anonymous, “Echos,” L'action sénégalaise, October 7, 1931.

81. Ibid., December 6, 1931.

82. Question adressée à l'Assemblée nationale par le député Ramette au ministre des colonies à propos du chef de canton de Dimar, November 18, 1935, box 599, folder 6, ANOM AP.

83. Barry, Histoire des médias au Sénégal, 151.

84. Fremigacci goes even further in his critical analysis of the colonial administration in Madagascar, describing the connivance amongst colonizers and colonized as a “reign of bluff.” Fremigacci, Jean, “Le colonisé, une création du colonisateur,” Omaly Sy Anio 5–6 (1977): 231Google Scholar.

85. Wachtel, Nathan, La vision des vaincus: les Indiens du Pérou devant la conquête espagnole, 1530–1570 (Paris, 1971), 399Google Scholar.