The perspective of oppressed people as the basis of our understanding of society
‘De Kom showed, like no one else before him, how our understanding of society and history depends on the position that we take’, writes Guno Jones in ‘Antonlogie: verhalen over het gedachtegoed van Anton de Kom [trans: Antonlogy: stories about the ideology of Anton de Kom]’. The fact that Anton de Kom took on the position of the oppressed was not only innovative, but also extremely risky, says Jones. Upon his arrival in Suriname in 1933, De Kom was already being monitored by the secret service. “He drew attention to the oppression and exploitation of the colonised population and by doing so made himself highly unpopular. He also set up a social consultancy, advising workers of their rights. He was seen as a major threat by the colonial authorities. Even into the 1960s, it was considered better not to associate with Anton de Kom because it was too dangerous. This was in the context of the cold war, where an association with communist ideology could have adverse effects on people's position in the Netherlands and Suriname.”
Guno Jones explains further, “In addition, you had several prominent academics that said, ‘what he writes is far too radical’. It is important to realise that our understanding of reality is not neutral or objective. What you learn about reality depends on the position from which you look at that reality. Are you in a privileged position in society? Then you would not have encountered what Anton de Kom revealed.”
Modern citizenship is intertwined with slavery and racism
Jones' reflection on We slaves of Suriname shows that the meaning of citizenship also varies depending on people's social standing. He explains, “Part of modern citizenship was property rights. In the colonial context, this enabled the buying and selling of enslaved bodies. Property rights, therefore, fulfilled a violent function and were so sacred that even when sovereignty was taken over from the British to the Dutch, they retained ownership of the bodies of the colonised. That was placed above all else and was part of a wider colonial pattern.”
“In the colonial setting, a sharp distinction emerged between bodies with rights (Europeans), who were considered persons and citizens with associated property rights, and enslaved bodies without those rights, who were brought to the colonial territory from other parts of the world, were sold and could be resold". Anton de Kom points out how this racial divide was fundamental to the slavery system. For metropolitan areas in the Netherlands, the oppression of colonised people meant prosperity and growth.
Injustice does not end after the abolition of slavery
Moreover, De Kom describes in detail how exploitation continued even after the abolition of slavery in 1863. “It was formal freedom without substance”, explains Guno Jones. “Nothing was done to provide compensation and nothing was done to alleviate suffering. In no way did the colonial government create the conditions under which formerly enslaved people could become truly equal citizens. The plantation economy was perpetuated through the use of contract labour, by bringing in people from Suriname, Indonesia, India and China”, says the anthropologist. That too was an exploitative system. “The coolie ordinance was passed in the Dutch parliament in 1880, which meant that workers were bound to their labour contracts under criminal provisions, known as the poenal sanction. Under the poenal sanction, heavy penalties and fines could be imposed on contract workers, allowing workers to be maximally exploited. This led to the creation of a forced labour system.” Jones continues, “De Kom himself also mentions that the methods of the slave driver seemed to have been revived in this new phase of the racial-capitalist order.”
“When De Kom visited Suriname in 1933, he brought all the oppressed people together, creating a grassroots movement. He was imprisoned and eventually exiled to the Netherlands.” In Antonlogie, Guno Jones writes extensively about how Anton de Kom then fought against new forms of injustice in the Netherlands. His opposition to colonialism, racism and exploitation receives a new impetus in anti-fascism.
Putting our knowledge of the past to use in the present
According to Jones, Anton de Kom was ahead of his time and we can draw inspiration from his work and life today. “My own view is that any kind of knowledge that is acquired about the past can be put to use in the present”, he argues. He goes on to say, “It is very important to use his thinking as an instrument or source of inspiration to reflect on contemporary forms of inequality.”
“Anton de Kom actually spent his whole life contemplating ongoing injustice. In Suriname, he fought against the injustice he encountered there, but once he was back in the Netherlands he realised that this context required that he turn his attention to the fate of persecuted Jewish people in the Netherlands. In keeping with his approach, one should always consider who in a specific society is actually oppressed, who is still deprived of their rights. This analysis must continually to be made.”
Impact of historical slavery on contemporary racial injustice in the Netherlands
Guno Jones explains how historical slavery continues to affect institutional and systemic racism that plays out today: "Systemic racism is about how racism is entwined in systems. It is a very complex subject. Some current examples are the Dutch childcare benefits scandal, the use of technology, as well as migration politics and Islamophobia.”
How can we examine the continued impact? “You have to start with actual cases”, says the anthropologist. “On the basis of these cases and people’s expertise about them, you can start reflecting on the contours of how colonialism and slavery continue to impact society. For example, a dermatologist pointed out how the dermatology books focused exclusively on white skin, so skin diseases related to darker skin were not recognised. This particular example illustrates the importance of examining in a variety of fields and disciplines who is the implicit norm, and who is not, and the implications that this can have”.
He goes on to state, “Another aspect could be the impact in the form of discrimination in the labour market—which has already been the subject of a lot of research—or in the form of some traditions such as those related to the anti-Black Pete activism. This is how we can proceed in each area. You let people discuss and review existing literature to determine what it means for the further research agenda.”
