Rural Society and Cotton in Colonial Zaire

Conclusion

Conclusion The foregoing chapters have examined the cotton labor process, the effect of commodity production on rural life, and the ways in which men and women coped with and struggled against forced cotton cultivation. The imposition of cotton cultivation in 1917 constituted a landmark in the history of Zairian rural communities because the expansion of cotton cultivation changed the countryside. The autonomy of cotton producers diminished; the rhythm of people's daily lives was altered; domestic obligations were disrupted; food production decreased; and intrahousehold and intracommunity relations were transformed. From 1920 on, the state granted multiyear concessions of up to 8,000 square kilometers to each of twelve cotton companies operating in the northern and southern regions of Zaire, which were divided into numerous cotton zones. Within these cotton zones, the number of peasants involved in cotton production rose from a few hundred in 1917 to 105,556 households by 1930. Ten years later 700,000 households were involved, and in 1959, as many as 874,000 households were growing cotton, producing as much as 177,000 tons of seed cotton. The colonial state and the cotton companies achieved this success by using force and the threat of force, as well as structural reforms, material incentives, and propaganda. While the former aimed at instilling fear from 1917 to 1936 in order to keep the cotton producers working even as they suffered losses, the latter sought to instill a new work ethic and values through festivals, fIlms, and plays. In addition, from 1937 to 1960, the state and cotton companies improved compensation for the producers, but never in proportion to the amount of their labor. Barter, low producer prices, failure to monitor the sales, scale rigging and other forms of cheating, cotton-grade manipulation, basket standard135 136 Conclusion ization, zoning regulations, and monopsony all kept the producers from accumulating wealth. The chiefs were the segment of the African population that benefIted from growing cotton. Although there were regional income variations among the chiefs, they all derived wealth from the appropriation of peasants ' labor for production on their cotton fIelds, production premiums offered by cotton companies, exemption from taxes, and the reinforcement of their power through the judiciary. Though they did not transform this wealth into capital, their accumulation created differentiation between chiefs and cotton producers. From the beginning of the cotton economy to the mid-1930s, taxation remained the principal expense for peasants. As a result, cotton production caused some degree intercommunity and intrahousehold inequality. Gross inequality appeared only in highly productive households that received prestige items, which went to men. From 1936 to 1959, as peasants' income increased, menwho controlled the levers of power within the households-diverted the cotton money to brideprice, as well as to gramophones, bicycles, and sewing machines. These items remained husbands' property; wives received only items for daily living such as clothes. This intrahousehold inequality generated tensions, which were increased by local courts which mediated the struggle of women for their rights. Legal negotiations changed women's perception of their role in the new economy and society. The main means of opposition to husbands included divorce and lawsuits, which husbands responded to with negotiations, beatings, repudiations, and the elaboration of stereotypes that presented women as the real enemies of the administration and cotton interests. Lawsuits against stingy husbands were the most effective weapons that wives used to restore their right to cash. Women could not entirely dismantle such exploitative relations, however, because their struggle against their husbands was channeled through local courts, which were colonial institutions of control. This led to only a partial victory and the struggle became a regulated process, ineffective against the whole system of colonial exploitation. The ultimate winners were the colonial administration and the cotton interests. Thus, social inequalities and social injustices inevitably resulted from cotton production . For the cotton companies, increased profIt-through increased production was the goal. The state imposed a patriarchal world view through the administrative category of the healthy adult male and intensifIed preexisting social differentiation in order to exploit all Africans. However, peasants were more adversely affected than chiefs, and women were more exploited than men. The measures taken to expand the cotton economy created a rigid Conclusion 137 gender inequality at the point of production. The labor of children decreased adult male workloads, but transport in rotation offered women only moral support and companionship in enduring the harshness of transporting cotton to...