And, inevitably, their societies and subcultures upon which the intelligentsia drew were steadily becoming less autochthonous.

[...] Most significant, however, were the attitudes colonial administrators developed toward the activities of the missions. The construction of Black Europeans was overly ambitious in their eyes. In 1938, Arthur Mayhew would advise an Oxford University summer session for colonial administrators that “Before the Great War education was undoubtedly too ‘literary. ’” And he then reported, with satisfaction, that “[f]rom 1925 onwards great emphasis was laid on vocational training.”14 Forty years later, Penelope Hetherington would penetrate Mayhew’s objections:

In the past missionaries had counted themselves successful if their work in the field of education had produced black Englishmen, Africans who seemed to have assimilated Western culture. But these missionary-educated Africans were anathema to many administrators and others. They were “cheeky” and demanded social equality and political rights.15

he was able to make this ferocious attack upon Western civilization because he knew it inside out…. He had spent some twenty years studying it

As it had been for Cesaire, so it was for all of them. They would all pass through the prepossessing claims of bourgeois ideology for Western cultural superiority with their only modestly disguised racialism. But eventually they would emerge convinced that a larger and different achievement was required. At first they would believe that the answer lay in the vision of class struggle, the war between brothers, as Julius Nyerere would later characterize Marxist socialist theory.31 That conception, too, would prove to be insufficient. As Cox would write in his own summary considerations of Marx and Engels, their conceptualization of capitalism was only a partial realization of the historical forces that had created the Black ideologues and that they sought to comprehend and defeat.32 Ineluctably, as we shall see, the events that did most to shape their era—the crises of world capitalism, the destructive dialectic of imperialism, and the historical and ideological revelations of the naivety of Western socialism—drove them into a deeper consciousness. Appropriately, what Padmore found it necessary to do in the mid-1930s, Wright in the early 1940s, and James at the end of that decade, was later echoed by Cesaire’s declaration in 1956:

What I demand of Marxism and Communism is that they serve the black peoples, not that the black peoples serve Marxism and Communism. Philosophies and movements must serve the people, not the people the doctrine and the movement…. A doctrine is of value only if it is conceived by us and for us, and revised through us…. We consider it our duty to make common cause with all who cherish truth and justice, in order to form organizations able to support effectively the black peoples in their present and future struggle—their struggle for justice, for culture, for dignity, for liberty…. Because of this, please accept my resignation from the Party.33