Tanzanian  socialism

Towards the 1970s, the government of Tanzania started developing a number of radical reforms aimed at introducing a special African form of socialism in the country. Tanzanian socialist development strategy was based on rural development, self-reliance and ujamaa values such as hard work. Tanzania’s head of state, Julius Nyerere, announced in 1973 that the entire peasant population should move into so-called ‘ujamaa’ villages by the end of 1976. The villagization process was initially undertaken as a voluntary development

project but the move into villages became obligatory after 1973. By 1980 around 90 percent of the population lived in villages. A framework of village government was fundamental to the formation of African socialism. Together with the ruling political party Tanganyika African National Union (TANU), Nyerere aimed at discovering an indigenous form of African socialism by referring with socialism to ujamaa, translated as

‘familyhood’. (Green 2010, 17.) Nyerere saw Tanzanian socialism as a pre-existing

“attitude of mind”:

“The same socialist attitude of mind which in the tribal days gave to every individual the security that comes of belonging to a widely extended family must be preserved within the still wider society of the nation…Our first step therefore must be to re-educate ourselves; to regain our former attitude of mind.” (cited in Green 2010, 31).

Nyerere considered that care for one another can only be guaranteed if people view each other as brothers and sisters or as members of the same family. Thus for Nyerere, socialist institutions are important but cannot attain socialism unless people in those institutions and organizations act in the spirit of brotherhood and care for one another. For him, socialism or Marxism legitimices class conflicts and therefore Ujamaa in terms of familyhood or brotherhood was uniquely opposed to both capitalism and scientific socialism. (Cornelli 2012, 24-25.) Although Nyerere and TANU based their theories on democracy and participation, they were predominantly authoritarian and the small civil society was gradually undermined. At the same time, as the government institutions politicized, the division between the party, state apparatuses and the government blurred. (Ewald 2013, 101.)

The concept of self-reliance was central to ujamaa ideology. It was formally expressed in the Arusha Declaration, TANU’s policy on Socialism and Self Reliance in 1967. As there were no indigenous social forms in place that corresponded to this ideology of collaboration such traditional forms had to be created by the state. By 1968 all major means of production were nationalized. As the state was in control of the economy and TANU acquired a leading role in the state, the same elite controlled both the state apparatus and the party. This emerged a growing class, the bureaucratic bourgeoisie that was interested in further expanding the state. Village became a category that was to be self-contained unit of production, consumption and governance. Nyerere saw village as the

engine of development. Although villagization in Tanzania had negative consequences for agricultural development and political repression it restructured governance successfully.

Villages were expected to take an active role in bringing about rural development. They were both agents and objects of governance with centrally appointed governors and officials of the ruling party. The structure of village governance with own governments, sub-committees under the authority of a charperson is still applied in a modified form in rural Tanzania. Even after the village enterprises and collectivism in large extent ceased, the positions of the chairperson and the leaders of 10-house blocks, balozis, continued as an essential part of the governance structure. (Green 2012, 23-24, Ewald 2013, 102.)

Although TANU created consensus across the institutional apparatus, its idea of development was centered on nationalism and modernization. Under the nationalist movement, and later the post-colonial state, cultural, ethnic and social minorities as well as certain ways of making a living were undermined. This meant that for instance many pastoralist groups such as the Maasai were pushed away from their lands by agriculturalists or due to enlargements of conservation areas, wildlife parks and state farms. Also the forced movement of pastoralists into the ujamaa villages further undermined their livelihood. The relationship between indigenous religions and nationalism has not been studied extensively but many religious practisioners did not take part in politics or considered TANU as a threat to their indigenous order. On the other hand, TANU politicians were described as showing embarrassment when discussing of indigenous leaders. (Havnevik & Aida 2010, 23.) Yet, by connecting traditional values and cultures of reciprocity and redistribution with the modernization approach, TANU managed to provide some cohesion and prevent strong opposition. (ibid., 24.)

Self-reliance was built on different requirements that were to bring about development to Tanzanians without risking their freedom and independence. This was based on requirements such as dependence on local workforce and resources; dependence on own land rather than private investments or loans to fight poverty. Therefore, the use of local resources and manpower, a proper understanding of money as not a source but an outcome of development, agriculture, hard work and intelligence were the cornerstones of development based on self-reliance. To reach these goals, the government launched also an education policy that changed schools into communities that ‘fostered the social goals of living together and working together for the common good’. (Cornelli 2012, 44, 50.) The

Arusha Declaration carried the idea that the rural people did not possess the capacity to promote self-reliance in practice but had to be taught its meaning. In this sense Nyerere promoted a hierarchical top down development approach although he actively combined it with the emphasis of equality. Yet, Nyerere represented a ‘father of the nation’ for Tanzania, whose philosophy was successfully translated into policies. The popularity of Nyerere was on some extent based on the fact that he was considered ‘clean’ from acquiring his wealth through corruptive acts. He thus created an important moral example for especially younger generations. Interestingly, following Nyerere’s death in 1999 and the decay of the moral example he had represented, corruption in high government circles seemed to increase from 2000 onwards. (Havnevik & Aida 2010, 19, 37.)

During the 1970s the statist model, the concentration of political, economic and social activity around the state, was well institutionalized. Civil society organizations such as trade unions, peasant organizations and women’s organizations were also incorporated into the system. As a result, people were comprehensively eliminated from controlling the government. Still, the ujamaa project gained support from the international aid community.

The emphasis of Nyerere’s policy on basic needs satisfaction was sympathized and supported by the donor community especially among the social democratic governments of Nordic countries. Having been oriented towards Western nations such as Britain, the US and Germany during its early independence, Tanzania’s foreign policy changed more critical towards the West under the rule of Nyerere. This was especially due to West’s negative stand on sanctions against apartheid in South Africa, motivation to preserve partnership with East Germany and receive development aid from China and other communist countries. (ibid., 41-42.) The socialist era lasted formally only from Arusha Declaration in 1967 to 1982 when the National Economic and Survival Programme (NESP) was formed. Yet, with the failure of the socialist model in the 1980s and exportation of neoliberalism in 1980s and 1990s there is a renewed interest to some of the objectives and strategies of African socialism in present Tanzania. (Ewald 2013, 96, 103.)