Table Of ContentJohns Hopkins Studies in Atlantic History and Culture Peasants and Capital
RicHARD PRICE, Series Editor
DOMINICA IN THE WORLD ECONOMY
RECENT AND RELATED SERIES TITI..ES
Main Currents in Caribbean Thought: The Historical Evolution of Caribbean
Society in Its Ideological Aspects, 1492-1900
Gordon K. Lewis
The Man-of-Words in the West Indies: Performance and the Emergence of
Creole Culture
Michel-Rolph Trouillot
Roger D. Abrahams
First-Time: The Historical Vision of an Afro-American People
Richard Price
Slave Populations of the British Caribbean, 1807-1834
B. W. Higman
Between Slavery and Free Labor: The Spanish-Speaking Caribbean in the
Nineteenth Century
edited by Manuel Moreno Fraginals, Frank Moya Pons, and Stanley Engerman
Caribbean Countours
edited by Sidney W. Mintz and Sally Price
Bondmen and Rebels: A Study of Master-Slave Relations in Antigua, with Implications
for Colonial British America
David Barry Gaspar
The Ambiguities of Dependence in South Africa: Class, Nationalism, and the
State in Twentieth-Century Natal
Shula Marks
Kingdom and Colony: Ireland in the Atlantic World, 1560-1800
Nicholas Canny
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY PRESS
Baltimore and London
This book has been brought to publication with the generous assistance of
the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.
for Jean-Philip
© 1988 The Johns Hopkins University Press
for Claude
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
The Johns Hopkins University Press, 701 West 40th Street, Baltimore, Maryland
21211
The Johns Hopkins Press Ltd., London
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American
National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Li-
brary Materials, ANSI 239.48-1984.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Trouillot, Michel-Rolph.
Peasants and capital: Dominica in the world economyjMichel-Rolph Trouillot.
p. cm.-(Johns Hopkins studies in Atlantic history and culture)
Based on the author's thesis (doctoral).
Bibliography: p.
Includes index.
ISBN 0-8018-3481-3 (alk. paper)
1. Peasantry-Dominica-History. 2. Capitalism-Dominica-History.
3. Dominica-Economic conditions. I. Title. II. Series.
87-20018
HD153l.D58T76 1988
CIP
305 .5'6 3-dcl9
Contents
List of Maps IX
List of Tables Xl
Preface and Acknowledgments Xlll
1. Peasants as Part-Economies
I. THE NATION
2. Space: A Patchwork of Enclaves 27
3. Time: An Island in the World Economy 51
4. The Evolution of the Peasant Labor Process:
The Past in the Present 66
5. Factions and Strategies 98
6. "I Can Always Eat My Fig" 120
II. THE WORLD
7. Working for Capital 141
8. The Making of a Transnational 164
III. THE VILLAGE
9. Wesley Ville La Soye 181
10. "Neither Here nor There": The Ethnography of Mediation 198
11. The Impact of the World: I :.~rd Cash and Small Change 231
12. Peasants, Part-Peasants, and Change: The Banana Children 267
13. Contemporary Peasantries: Illusions and Hard Choices 286
Notes 299
Bibliography 317
Index 339
·.'
\
Maps
2.1 A Nation of Enclaves 34
2.2 The West: From Scotts Head to the Layou River 35
2.3 The West: From Layou to Portsmouth 38
2.4 The North 40
2.5 The East: From Anse du Mai to Castle Bruce 43
2.6 The East: From Castle Bruce to Grand Bay 44
10.1 Central Wesley 202
10.2 Residential Wesley 206
10.3 Peasant Purchases of Plots from the Londonderry Estate, 1915 212
10.4 The Greater Wesley Area 216
Tables
2.1 Population Trends by Parish, 1970-1980 36
3.1 Coffee Export Quantities, 1833-1896 55
3.2 Estimated Distribution of Slaves by Type of Activity in
1810, 1820, and 1830 55
3.3 Quantities of Sugar Exports in 1852, 1862, and 1866 57
3.4 Export of Sugar and Sugar Byproducts, 1870-1874
3.5 Sugar Exports, 1883-1896 58
3.6 Value in Percentage of Major Export Commodities to Total
Exports, 1882-1896 59
3.7 Quantities of Cocoa Exports, 1838-1896 61
3.8 Early Exports of Lime juice 61
3.9 Value in Percentage of Lime Products to Total Exports,
1900-1924 63
3.10 Main Export Values, 1950-1963 64
4.1 Historical Configurations of the Peasant Labor Process 68
4.2 Distribution of the July-November Decrease according
to Crops Cultivated 79
4.3 Distribution of the July-November Decrease according to
Size of Labor Force before Emancipation 79
4.4 Distribution of the July-November Decrease according
to Labor Conditions 81
4.5 Crops and Labor Conditions in November 1838 81
4.6 Estates with Extreme Losses 82
4.7 Estates Gaining Laborer 83
8.1 Geest Industries: Capital and Profits after Taxation,
1972-1980 169
8.2 Geest Holdings Limited: Main Subsidiaries for the years
1972-1973 and 1980 173
8.3 Major Branches and Activities of Geest Holdings 174
Tables
XII
8.4 Geest Holdings Limited: Profits (or Losses) by
174
Sector or Activity, 1976-1980
187 Preface and Acknowledgments
9.1 Slave Owning in Saint Andrew South in 1821
9.2 Population and Houses of the Saint Andrew
191
South Estates, 1891
Acreage and Lime Production of the Estates in Saint
9.3
194
Andrew South, 1916
11.1 District 17, Wesley Area: General Outlook on Banana
242
Production and Income; 1976-1980 THIS BOOK is about the cultivators of the Caribbean island of Dominica, the
244
11.2 Average Banana Income of Wesley Growers struggles that fashioned their past and the problems now shaping their fu
245
11.3 Producer/Consumer Ratio in a Type One Household ture. There are many reasons for telling this story, the most important one
248
11.4 Producer/Consumer Ratio in a Type Three Household being the near total neglect of Dominica by social scientists. Dominica is so
11.5 Banana Incomes of Three Yeomen, 1976-1979 250 unknown to the rest of the world that academics, journalists, or even diplo
mats confuse it with the Dominican Republic. This book is the first scholarly
11.6 Population of 207 Households according to Gender of
257 study to deal with the entire Dominican nation, past and present. Conse
Head of Household
quently, its findings are important. I hope that they will help break the silence
that surrounds Dominica in particular and the Windward Islands in general.
This, indeed, is very much a Caribbean story. The Dominican experience
remains unique, but it bears strong similarities to that of many neighboring
territories of the Antilles and the Circum-Caribbean. The rise of post
plantation peasantries in that part of the world represents a sociohistorical
phenomenon to which Western scholarship has not yet done full justice. This
book tries to fill part of the lacuna. The relevance of this story goes far beyond
the boundaries of the Caribbean itself, as I show in the first chapter.
This book resulted from a doctoral dissertation; in the process from pro
posal to thesis, and from thesis to this manuscript, I accumulated debts to
many people and institutions. The Program in Atlantic History and Culture of
the Johns Hopkins University funded my first summer fieldwork in Domin
ica, in June-August 1979. The longer fieldwork in Dominica (December
1980-December 1981) was assisted by grants both from the Inter-American
Foundation and the Joint Committee on Latin America and the Caribbean of
the Social Science Research Council associated with the American Council of
Learned Societies, with funds provided by the Ford Foundation, the Mellon
Foundation, and theN ational Endowment for the Humanities. The fieldwork
in England (January-May 1982) was assisted by a grant from the Inter
American Foundation. I wish to extend personal regards to Elizabeth Veatch,
of the Inter-American Foundation: she was a most helpful fellowship officer.
The Department of Extra-Mural Studies of the University of the West Indies,
and its director, Professor Rex Nettleford, graciously extended institutional
affiliation for my 1980-81 stay in Dominica. The Duke University Research
Council provided support for the analysis of the data in chapter 8.
x1v Preface and Acknowledgments
Write-up support for different versions of the manuscript came mainly
from the Social Science Research Council, and the Department of Anthropol
ogy at Duke University. I did the final revisions during my residence at the
PEASANTS AND CAPITAL
National Humanities Center. I thank all three institutions, the Ford Founda
tion, which funded my fellowship at the National Humanities Center, and
Debbie Benton Moore who typed the final version.
Many individuals helped during a process that lasted seven years. I am
grateful to Hubert Charles, Roland Dejean, Edison C. James, Atherton Mar
tin, Michael Murphy, Cornelia Williams, and Bernard Wiltshire, all from
Dominica, for their assistance during my fieldwork. I also thank James Allis
ter, Walston Allister, Angus Allord,Jacob Bony, Kent Brown, Frank Dunstan,
Lincoln Robin, Andrew Shaw, and Kenneth Williams, all from Wesley. The
contributions of the late Ernestine Allister and those of Agnes Allister,
Roselyn Farrell, and Valda Hyppolite prevented some of the pitfalls of an
exclusively male perspective. Leslie Africa and Osborne Richards provided an
indigenous historical viewpoint that spanned four generations. Cecil Georges
and the late Fred Henry were valuable field assistants. Fred impressed me
with his knowledge of local and national history and prevented many errors of
interpretation. With his death, I lost one of my most respected critics.
The field conferences of the Inter-American Foundation and exchanges
with graduate students and faculty at the Johns Hopkins University and at
Duke University also informed this book. David William Cohen, Christopher
Chase-Dunn, Richard G. Fox, Ashraf Ghani, Sally Price, Carol A. Smith, Pa
tricia Torres, Ronald Walters, and Brackette Williams commented on parts of
the manuscript. Professor Martin Bronfenbrenner failed twice to convince me
that the analysis in part 2 could be couched in terms of traditional economics. I
thank him for trying so hard. Sidney W. Mintz and Richard Price, as teachers,
as colleagues, and as friends, deserve special thanks. Professor Mintz was a
demanding thesis director, yet one who allowed me to pursue my own intellec
tual development.
I saved for last the people about whom words will never be enough. Hen
derson Henry was a constant presence since 1979. This book is about his
people; it is also about him. As one of the "banana children" I describe in this
book, as a host, as a friend, he helped me find the difficult common ground
between indigenous perception and academic discourse. The ethnographic
chapters owe a lot to our long conversations in and out of the field. The entire
book benefited from his comments. Czerny Brasuell also read numerous ver
sions of the entire manuscript and kept me aware of the relevance of the issues
in human terms. I cannot adequately thank her for her encouragement. Fi
nally, Elizabeth Dunstan and her family allowed me to intrude into their lives:
they were understanding companions and useful informants; their friendship
remains priceless. My sons bore the burden of this book perhaps more than I
did; I dedicate it to them.
1
Peasants as Part-Economies
[Peasants] constitute part-societies with part-cultures.
-A. Kroeber, Anthropology
THE
WONDER ABOUT "peasants" is their continuing existence. So many
great minds have predicted their demise, so many revolutions promised their
eradication. Still, they endure, however changed, however misplaced. Some
social scientists, baffled by their incongruent presence, dismiss them with a
stroke of the pen: peasants exist only in our imagination. What then explains
the air of deja vu which strikes the visitor from one village to the next in so
many hills and valleys of at least three continents? One cannot reject the
possibility of an illusion; but, if so, how is that illusion maintained?
Within the dominant historical perception of the West, the word peasant
evokes a being of another age-indeed, one most typical of the Middle Ages
specimens of whom inexplicably survived the coming of civilization to the
most backward areas of Europe. For most Westerners, then, peasants are just
remnants of a premodern era. The presence of similar beings in Asia, Africa,
and Latin America is integrated in that linear vision by the implication that
these societies are still going through their equivalent of the "dark" ages.
To be sure, such linear vision is Eurocentric; yet ethnocentrism does not, by
itself, invalidate that, indeed, peasants and peasantries present a puzzle to the
modern world. The problem lies in the blatant contradiction between, on the
one hand, the similarities among so-called peasants of all ages-however
defined-and, on the other, the no less obvious trends of the world in which
we live. Forms of production and commerce, political machines, ways of
thinking and modes of daily behavior associated with capitalism over the past
century and a half have now reached most portions of the globe. Some ob
servers even suggest that this expansion is so systematic (despite the polariza
tion it fosters) that one should approach the world as a capitalist network of
dependencies, indeed, as a global system (Frank 1967; Wallerstein 1974). Such
a perspective facilitates a holistic vision of contemporary world trends, but it
also increases the immediate puzzle that the very existence of peasantries
constitute. Why are peasants surviving? Is it only because they "fit in" the
world? But if so, how? And if so, are all peasants integrated in their society and
2 Peasants as Part-Economies Peasants as Part-Economies 3
in the world at large in the exact same manner? Moreover, is it even legiti processes that we can momentarily suspend, as it were, to discover the mech
mate to talk about peasants on a world scale? Is the word anything but a anisms of their "becoming."3
descriptive category within a Euro-American folk view? Given the context in More recently, the debate over definitions of peasantries was rephrased in
which these questions emerged in the 1960s, and the rapidity with which they terms reminiscent of Wolfs ( 1955) initial question. Yet, in part because of the
succeeded themselves in the seventies, it is not surprising that earlier defini "discovery" in Western Europe, in the United States, and in India of Marx's
tions of peasantries-already questioned on their own terms-were chal Grundrisse (1973) and "Resultate" (Marx 1971, 1976), in part because of the
lenged anew. widespread impact of Althusser and his associates' Lire le Capital (Althusser
et al. 1973), that revival, in the seventies, was marked by an unnecessary in
transigence about terminology.4 The question as to what level of the socio
"Peasants" as a Category
economic structure best allows us to group peasantries was often answered a
Earlier definitional essays on the peasantry suffered from the superficial priori: either it is at the mode of production level, or it loses its significance.
treatment of peasants by Western social scientists in the formative years of Dogmatism and empiricism ultimately produced similar responses, equally
their respective disciplines (Mintz 1982). Out-of-context quotes of authorities avoiding some of the complexities of the peasant question.5
(Kroeber 1948; Marx [ 1852] 1974) inevitably led to false starts; descriptive
contrasts with "nonpeasants" led to imbroglios.1 Thus, cultural definitions
The Peasant Labor Process
were, early on, greatly criticized or qualified (Mintz 1953). Likewise, doubts
were raised about the validity of economic or political treatments based on One of the ironies of empiricism is no doubt the way in which it can mask the
Marx's historical study of France. In frustration, many writers dismissed the obvious. Many conceptualizations of the peasantry seem to have failed not so
validity of the conceptual search (Dalton 1971; Moore 1972; Leeds 1977). much because they missed one or another factor among a probable set of
Still, the search continues; and there is hardly a recent monograph dealing empirical features, but rather because of the authors' conviction that they had
with small-scale cultivators which does not add its share to the conceptual to build a composite image that would fully and equally mirror all past, pres
arsenal. For the sake of brevity, I note only four trends and their most impor ent, and future peasants, even if in so doing it would necessarily be equally
tant proponents. The first, which goes back to the Russian neopopulist Alex removed from millions of real people. The goal here is more modest, and the
ander Chayanov, views the idea of peasantry as fundamentally linked to a unit epistemological assumptions much different. A conceptualization does not
of production-consumption, the family farm, which is sole axis of a different require a typification, let alone a typology. If the object of study is active-and I
economic structure (Chayanov 1966; Kerblay 1967, 1971; Thorner 1971; Har assume that human beings are-we can identify it through its performance in
rison 1977). A second trend, best exemplified by the earlier work ofT. Shanin a manner akin to that of a physicist delineating a magnetic field or a biologist
(1971a, 1971b, 1972, 1973 ), tried rather to produce composite sketches of the isolating a virus (Bhaskar 1979). Such a strategy more easily brings out the
peasantry, aimed at formulating a cross-cultural typification. Third, recycling commonalities amid the field of differences that demarcate historical agents.
Kroeber's idea of the peasantry as part-culture, others-most often anthro Thus, on the one hand, we can agree with Mintz (1973 ), Bernstein (1977), or
pologists (e.g., Redfield 1956)-kept insisting on the originality of the peas Harriss (1982) that the word peasantry is used quite too often to imply a
antry as a distinct cultural tradition. I find the fourth trend most interesting homogenous people; but, on the other hand, we may not want to reject the
despite its lacunae.2 idea that there is indeed an amalgam of similarities that practical knowledge
As early as 1955, Eric Wolf proposed a reorientation of the theoretical or common sense registers inconsonantly.
search from analyses of contents to analyses of structures with the historically The suggestion here is that most of the people usually covered at the first
derived economic and sociopolitical relationships such structures included level of empirical categorization under the term peasant do indeed share a
(1955: 452,455 ). A little more than a decade later (1966), he underlined bril practice that remains their most obvious commonality; and that there is a
liantly the major empirical features to be accounted for by such a conceptuali working concept in the critical literature on political economy which could
zation. Unfortunately, Wolf did not combine his numerous breakthroughs; serve to isolate this practice. I try to elaborate on this concept, mindful that we
hence he avoided his most important (even though implicit) question: at what are moving away from an essential peasant "being," but getting closer to a set
level of the socioeconomic structure can we conceptualize peasantries? A of determinations of which that practice is the nexus, a sine qua non moment
more explicit approach would have made clear that we must start not with of their becoming.
glossarial definitions of the peasant "being," but with whatever process or The term labor process can first be grasped as a generalized notion that
4 Peasants as Part-Economies
Peasants as Part-Economies 5
encompasses all human activity destined to produce useful objects (use
can more easily study different degrees of engagement in that labor process
values). At such a level of generalization, the elementary factors of the labor
without having to shift definitions or build a never-ending list of universal
process are human activity, that is, work itself, the object on which that work subtypes. We can look at unfree people, migrants, wage earners, fishermen,
is performed, and the instruments used for this performance (Marx [1867] and so on, partly engaged in that process for however short a time and under
1967, 1: 178). "The labor process, resolved as above in its elementary factors different economic umbrellas or systems .
. . . is the necessary condition for effecting exchange of matter between Man Indeed, the major advantage of the concept of a peasant labor process set
and Nature; it is the everlasting Nature-imposed condition of human exis forth here consists in its being one with modest applications, one that, by
tence, and therefore is independent of every social phase of that existence, or definition, does not exhaust the conceptualization built around it, and neces
rather, is common to every phase of it" (Marx 1967, 183-84). sarily caBs attention to the larger socioeconomic and political networks in
But the universal necessity of organizing production only enhances the which are embedded the units it isolates. Yet, before giving full attention to
diversity of the actual practices which fulfill the universal need. If all human that embedding, we can already sketch some of the social tendencies the work
beings produce, they do not do so in the same manner, and the empirical arrangement itself is likely to nurture.
conditions under which they produce encapsulate as many labor processes as The fundamental feature of the peasant work process is the.overlap of the
we can distinguish specific types of work organization. Thus, we can speak of ',unit of production with a unit of consumption, an overlap that emphasizes the
different labor processes, not only because we can empirically determine the paramount importance of the domestic group for all people engaged in that
factors involved in the production of one individual item but also because we type of work. The priority of living labor over labor embodied in the tools also
can conceive of particular organizations of labor which recur with structural reinforces the already crucial role of the domestic group. Thus we can suggest
consistency. Often, indeed, the material and social conditions under which a tendency for all units engaged in that process to achieve, maintain, or restore
human labor is exerted are such that the processes they delineate constitute, a proper balance between the needs of the domestic group as a productive
through time, a social ensemble, regularly grouping specific laborers and team and its consumption needs. Types of peasant families likely vary, at least
means of work (Bettelheim 1976: 93-94). in part, according to the contextual modalities of achieving that balance (Wolf
Defined as such, a labor process implies specific instruments of work, regu 1966). Household composition often reflects a need for additional security by
larly deployed on a particular object, in a particular unit of production, with a taking the form of variably organized extended families (Shenton and Lenni
particular organization of the labor force, toward the production of particular han 1981).
products. We can apply the concept of different organizations of labor which The paramount importance of the domestic group as a productive and
historically reproduced themselves in different units of production, and iden consuming team and the preeminence of living labor over labor congealed or
tify, say, a manufactural labor process, a plantation labor process, or a peasant crystallized in technology suggest a complementary tendency to maintain and
labor process. Tentatively then, we can define a peasant labor process as an reinforce solidarity among the members. Conflicts do arise at times, threaten
institutionalized process through which a household performs agricultural ing the fragile balance between production and consumption. So do sudden
labor on a unit over which it exerts a form of control that excludes similar environmental changes, decisive in part because of the low input of technol
groups, with instruments of work which it also controls in an exclusive ogy. The inherent vulnerability of the production/ consumption unit thus calls
manner and which generally represent less of an input than the labor itself. for insurance that can be normative as well as economic. Kinship, alliance, and
The advantage of such a working definition is twofold. First, we isolate as patronage ties may, for instance, provide additional use-values or money
much as possible the specific combination of productive forces which charac when consumption levels cannot be maintained or extra labor when produc
terizes peasant units of production of different times and places. Second, and tion falls. But they may also act to reinforce the cohesion of the domestic
more important, we can also explore more systematically the various contexts group by providing forums in which internal conflicts can be aired and defused.
within which this arrangement occurs without making an ideal peasant unit Finally, a relatively firm set of rules and obligations and their continuous rein
of production the fundamental category of our analysis. We could, ideally, forcement are likely to reduce, if not the chance of conflict, at least the ways in
study this arrangement in terms of its own laws of motion; but in actual which particular conflicts can be solved.
historical analyses, we can also account for different social mixes. Indeed, we
A second general set of tendencies can be derived from the manifold im
can look at situations in which an independent peasant unit of production
portance of land in peasant activities. All human actions require portions of
does not exist as such but in which a peasant labor process occurs, say, on the the surface of the earth as their spatial base; what distinguishes the peasant
margins of a plantation. Since we have not idealized a type, or even a role, we labor process is, first, its agricultural character. That seems obvious; but it is
