The Marxist impact in the Common Man’s Charter

Up until today Milton Obote´s Common Man’s Charter is seen as one of the most important documents, if not the most important document, of socialism in Uganda. The background influences leading to this document are disputed. Yoga Adhola tries to set Obote in one line with European social-democracy for example¹. But the Common Man’s Charter´s content goes far beyond European social-democracy. In the following I will describe the Marxist impact that the Common Man’s Charter had – if directly or indirectly.

Its Goals and Values

The Common Man’s Charter states in Point 4:

“We reject, both in theory and in practice, that Uganda as a whole or any part of it should be the domain of any person, of feudalism, of Capitalism, of vested interests of one kind or another, of foreign influence or of foreigners. We further reject exploitation of material and human resources for the benefit of a few.”²

It is obvious that the socialist countries combated feudalism and capitalism. Mao for example characterized the Chinese Revolution in 1948 as the following: “The Chinese revolution at the present stage is in its character a revolution against imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat-capitalism waged by the broad masses of the people under the leadership of the proletariat.”³ Except for the explicit mentioning of the proletariat it is the same content.

In Point 6.IV the Charter states:

“To fight relentlessly against Poverty, Ignorance, Disease, Colonialism, Neo-Colonialism, Imperialism and Apartheid;”

Obote would later call poverty, ignorance and disease the “three main opponents”⁴, though he was not the first one to do so⁵. These points mentioned above are in full compliance with Marxist theory. Would it be a far stretch to claim that Obote took the Marxist countries like the USSR as a role model on that? Probably not.

Another important take is the clear rejection of pre-colonial Ugandan traditions in Point 19:

“We do not consider that all aspects of the African traditional life are acceptable as socialistic now.”

Of course he did not reject all the traditions. But as we could see in his abolishing of kingdoms in 1966 (which is mentioned in Point 9), he mainly meant the feudal remnants. For sure also superstition and other backward traditions were meant too. Unlike Nyerere, who idealized the pre-colonial African society⁶. Obote looked forward, which could be especially seen in his focus on industrialization rather than first of all agriculture, as in Tanzania. This shows well that Obote was not a big admirer of Ujamaa.

Below Point 9 the Charter states clearly:

“The Move to the Left is the creation of a new political culture and a new way of life, whereby the people of Uganda as a whole – their welfare and their voice in the National Government and in other local authorities – are paramount. It is, therefore, both anti-feudalism and anti-capitalism.”

To eradicate the backward elements in the national culture and promote the progressive elements is what the Marxist socialist countries also did. The cultural revolution was not only executed in China, where it was pursued in a harsh way to sweep away the feudal influence of Confucianism, but in more moderate ways also in the other socialist countries.

Also the Common Man’s Charter talks about Uganda´s “contribution to the African revolution” (Point 15). It is obvious that this is a mixture of pan-African and internationalist views. Proletarian internationalism is a well-known principle of solidarity between the working people of all countries around the world, to unite in one big global struggle for socialism.

Its Economics

Economically, Obote´s demands came pretty close to those of the Marxist socialist countries. The USSR in its 1936 Constitution⁷ had the state and cooperative property as two forms of socialist property (Article 5) and the planned economy (Article 11) laid down into it. Obote had very similar goals.

Point 34 of the Charter states:

“In our Move to the Left Strategy, we affirm that the guiding economic principle will be that the means of production and distribution must be in the hands of the people as a whole. The fulfilment of this principle may involve nationalisation of enterprises privately owned.”

So the state enterprises as conditions for the economic part of socialism were fulfilled. Also the cooperative sector existed together with the state sector in Uganda. Point 28 of the Charter states:

“It has therefore been the policy of the Party to diversify the economy to make it less dependent of foreign trade, to promote the participation of citizens in all sectors of the economy, and the Move to the Left is intended to intensify these efforts through collective ownership, viz. Co-operatives and state enterprises.”

The parallel to the Soviet Constitution is very unlikely a coincidence, especially when comparing the use of terminology. So the state and cooperative ownership were regarded as socialist forms of ownership in Uganda.

On economic planning the Common Man’s Charter includes a brief note in Point 6.V:

“To plan Uganda’s Economic Development in such a way that the Government, through Parastatal Bodies, the Co-operative Movements, Private Companies, Individuals in Industry, Commerce and Agriculture, will effectively contribute to increased production to raise the standard of living in the Country;”

It might be a bit of a stretch to assume that with this remark Obote would have meant the exact same planning mechanism as in the Marxist socialist countries. However, it is not a stretch to say that he was inspired by them nevertheless.

Final Remarks

Is Obote’s Common Man’s Charter a fully Marxist program? No, but it mostly is. When the role of the working class would be more drafted into it, then it could be called a Marxist program overall. The leading role of the UPC as a party is not so explicitly mentioned except for the economic part (Point 35), but always implied. It is clear that Obote claimed some vanguard role for the UPC, though not openly stated. In 2003 Obote wrote in a paper: “The UPC was a vanguard Party in the struggle for Uganda’s Independence.”⁸ It is obvious that Obote saw the UPC as a vanguard party, which was a usual claim by Marxist parties. It is also not too much of a stretch to call the UPC a party of workers and peasants, Obote himself openly said that it is⁹. The Common Man’s Charter nowhere mentions the working class directly, but it is obvious that the “common man” is to be a worker, especially when Point 40 states:

“The adoption of the Charter provides an opportunity to the Common Man for the realisation of the full fruits of his labour and of social justice.”

It is unknown to me how much Obote was into Marxist theory, but it is clear that he learned a lot from it for his own practice. We can advance for the future by taking the Common Man’s Charter as a basis.