The Black Jacobins: Toussaint L’Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution

“Indulgence had the white colonial in its grip from childhood. ‘I want an egg,’ said a colonial child. ‘There are none.’ ‘Then I want two.’ This notorious anecdote was characteristic. To the unhealthiness of the climate and the indulgence of every wish were added the open licentiousness and habitual ferocity of his parents, the degradation of human life which surrounded the child on every side.” 

For any political system to survive, it must replicate itself across generations. For the colonists, this meant raising children within a system of privilege. The sense of entitlement developed as youth would then drive their decisions as adults.

“This was the type for whom race prejudice was more important that even the possession of slaves, of which they held few. The distinction between a white man and a man of colour was for them fundamental. It was their all. In defence of it they would bring down the whole of their world.”

Speaking of middle-class Whites in San Domingo, James shows how they took advantage of the system of slavery to establish superiority over Blacks based on skin color alone. Racial prejudice became so fundamental to their world view, and to their enjoyment of status, that they would fight and die to sustain it. With such a deep commitment to slavery, armed conflict with the revolutionaries became inevitable.

“There was only one hope for the bureaucrats—the Mulattoes, and the Governor instructed the commandants of the districts to adopt a new attitude towards them. ‘It has become more necessary than ever not to give them any cause for offence, to encourage them and to treat them as friends and whites.’ The retreat of race prejudice had begun. Sad though it may be, that is the way that humanity progresses. The anniversary orators and the historians supply the prose-poetry and the flowers.”

In this quote, James recognizes that the now-disgraced officials of the prior regime formed alliances with the Mulattoes out of desperation, not generosity. James suggests that economic and political expediency, more than abstract ideals, drive progress toward dismantling racism. This proves to be the case throughout James’s account of the revolution.

“Rejected in France, humiliated at home, the Mulattoes organized a revolt. It was the quarrel between bourgeoisie and monarchy that brought the Paris masses on the political stage. It was the quarrel between whites and Mulattoes that woke the sleeping slaves.” 

Denied their rights at home and abroad, San Domingo’s mixed-race population turned to the only other source available to them: the populace of San Domingo. The power of the masses, when roused, to effect change is a key theme of James’s work. Throughout, Toussaint’s success varies with his ability to incite laborers to join the cause.

“Every Mulatto whose parents were both free should have the vote. There were only 400 of these but it seemed a way out. The compromise proposal was carried by an overwhelming majority and the spectators cheered a hard-won victory, small in itself but of far-reaching implications. For once a single coloured man had got his rights, the victory of the rest was only a matter of work and time.” 

Achieving liberty for the Blacks and Mulattoes of San Domingo was a progressive process, with many setbacks along the way. With this early victory, James sees a sign of things to come. Any attempt to achieve equality must include all persons, and partial success would only reveal remaining prejudices and hypocrisies more clearly.

“And yet they were surprisingly moderate, then and afterwards, far more humane than their masters had been or would ever be to them. They did not maintain this revengeful spirit for long. The cruelties of property and privilege are always more ferocious than the revenges of property and oppression. For the one aims at perpetuating resented injustice, the other is merely a momentary passion soon appeased.” 

James draws a moral distinction between the colonists, who sustained an unjust system for decades and would have done so indefinitely, and the rebelling slaves, who lashed out in a moment of anger. The colonists, over the years, normalized cruelty, while the slaves’ sensitivity was sharpened by experience. For them, defeating the Whites was a means to a higher end: the achievement of freedom.

“Toussaint had plenary powers, and in a vain attempt to break down the pride of the colonists he secretly reduced the number to be freed from 400 to 60. The colonists would not hear of it. Then and only then did Toussaint come to an unalterable decision from which he never wavered and for which he died. Complete liberty for all, to be attained and held by their own strength.” 

The beginning and endpoints of Toussaint’s military career were marked by indecision, first at whether to join the revolution and later concerning whether to declare independence from France. For the bulk of his time as a commander, however, he acted decisively. James traces the beginning of Toussaint’s resolve to this moment when he was snubbed by the Whites with whom he was supposed to negotiate. Complete devotion to the ideal of liberty dictated his actions from then on.

“If they had [passed the decree for Mulattoes’ rights] a year before, at the outbreak of the slave revolution, they would have been able to master it before it spread. Why didn’t they? Race prejudice? Nonsense. […] Those in power never give way, and admit defeat only to plot and scheme to regain their lost power and privilege. Had the monarchists been white, the bourgeoisie brown, and the masses of France black, the French Revolution would have gone down in history as a race war. But although they were all white in France they fought just the same.”

James argues that, although the San Domingo revolution is sometimes characterized as a racially motivated war, it was just as much of an economic and political struggle as the French Revolution, in which there was no difference in race between oppressors and oppressed. James’s belief in the primacy of economics relates to his socialist views, which can be traced to Karl Marx. Marx’s Communist Manifesto identifies the struggle between classes as central to all human history.

“French republic, British constitutional monarchy, Spanish autocracy, though one might smile and another frown according to the exigencies of the moment, none troubled to disguise that in the last analysis the Negro could expect either the overseer’s whip or the bayonet.” 

At various times, Toussaint and his men formed alliances or agreements with France, England, and Spain, each of which tried to win the Blacks’ favor to turn them against the other European powers. Though Toussaint sometimes went along with their plans when it served his interest, he recognized early on that the European colonists were only interested in profit, which they hoped to maximize by restoring slavery. His delay in recognizing that France was no different from the others contributed to his eventual downfall.

“A rare exaltation of sacrifice and devotion moved through revolutionary France and Paris. As in Russia under Lenin and Trotsky, the people were told honestly of victory or of defeat, errors were openly acknowledged, and where to this day reaction can only see a few thousand people who fell under the guillotine, Paris between March 1793 and July 1794 was one of the supreme epochs of political history. Never until 1917 were masses ever to have such powerful influence—for it was no more than influence—upon any government.”

James extols the liberal leaders of this brief period for their unflinching commitment to the ideals of the revolution and their responsiveness to the needs of the lower classes. Though this period was marked by some executions, James points to social reforms, including the abolition of slavery in San Domingo, as signs that they were ahead of their time. From the perspective of the slaves in San Domingo, no administration went further to secure their well-being. 

“Noble and generous working-people of France and those millions of honest English Nonconformists who listened to their clergymen and gave strength to the English movement for the abolition of slavery! These are the people whom the sons of Africa and the lovers of humanity will remember with gratitude and affection, not the perorating Liberals in France nor the ‘philanthropy plus five per cent’ hypocrites in the British Houses of Parliament.” 

James emphasizes that the Black slaves’ greatest political benefactors in Europe were not the outspoken politicians, whose support was always conditional, but the everyday people who contributed to grassroots efforts toward reform. They were the ones who, whether by voting, protesting, fighting, or otherwise, spread the ideals of the revolution until those in power were forced to accept them. The British philanthropists mentioned in the quote devised a system of investing in good causes to receive a modest rate of return.

“That was the style, the accent of Toussaint and his men. The British and the Spaniards could not defeat it. All they could offer was money, and there are periods in human history when money is not enough.” 

Toussaint garnered support by speaking of ideals like liberty and loyalty in an elevated tone. Europeans preferred to rely on financial transactions to win support. To the Blacks of San Domingo, Toussaint’s promises of freedom proved far more attractive than the European payouts. They were willing to fight for freedom at any price.

“Toussaint made himself into a whole cabinet like a fascist dictator, except that he actually did the work.” 

Some have criticized Toussaint for taking control of the government himself. James argues that, unlike most dictators, Toussaint worked hard to meet the needs of his people. James also suggests that Toussaint’s strong-arm style of leadership was precisely what the colony needed to maintain order despite the war’s chaos.

“To all the blacks, revolutionary France, which had decreed equality and the abolition of slavery, was a beacon among the nations. […] Toussaint, looking always to the development of the blacks as a people, did not want to break with France, its language and tradition and customs, to join the slave-holding British. He would be faithful to France as long as France was faithful to the blacks.” 

The Black slave rebellion was much more successful at fighting off British and Spanish forces than at expelling the French from the island. This was due at least in part to the desire to maintain ties with France in some form for as long as possible, a desire that Bonaparte exploited. In this respect, generals like Dessalines, who felt no particular loyalty to France, were better equipped to finish the fight for independence than was Toussaint.

“San Domingo was not the first place where European invaders had met fever. It was the decree of abolition, the bravery of the blacks, and the ability of their leaders, that had done it. The great gesture of the French working people towards the black slaves, against their own white ruling class, had helped to save their revolution from reactionary Europe.” 

James pushes back against contemporary reports (mostly written by the British) that, but for the fever, British forces would have overwhelmed the slave rebellion. Such thinking reflects the condescending attitude of the colonists and ignores the vital contributions of the actors identified in the quote. This same tendency to underestimate the Blacks would eventually lead Bonaparte to dispatch a doomed expedition to recover the island, despite the warnings of those familiar with the situation in San Domingo.

“His error was his neglect of his own people. They did not understand what he was doing or where he was going. He took no trouble to explain. […] Toussaint, shut up within himself, immersed in diplomacy, went his tortuous way, overconfident that he had only to speak and the masses would follow.” 

To an extent, James depicts Toussaint as a tragic hero. His fatal flaw is his unwillingness to explain himself. This omission lost him the support of the lower classes, without which he had no hope of overthrowing the established powers. The tragedy is that Toussaint continued to act in the best interest of the general populace, even when that same populace failed to understand his reasoning. 

“But from the simplest black laborer to the French generals and the best educated and most travelled and experienced of the local whites, all recognised that both in his work and personal idiosyncrasies he was the first man in San Domingo, and such a man as would have been in the first rank in any sphere.” 

Toussaint won praise from not only his followers but also his adversaries. Though he had clear allegiances and political leanings, his dignified demeanor and generosity towards all classes and races made him an able diplomat and mediator. The fact that Toussaint accomplished so much with a relatively meager education (compared to most Europeans) speaks to his innate drive and ability.

“But for the revolution, this extraordinary man and his band of gifted associates would have lived their lives as slaves, serving the commonplace creatures who owned them, standing barefooted and in rags to watch inflated little governors and mediocre officials from Europe pass by, as many a talented African stands in Africa to-day.” 

Here, James contemplates how different life would be if slavery had continued uninterrupted. He draws a parallel between pre-revolution San Domingo and conditions in Africa in 1938, the date of the book’s publication. Not until the 1950s and 1960s would most of the remaining colonies in Africa declare independence. The comparison suggests James’s sympathy for concepts such as Pan-Africanism and Negritude, which he addresses in the book’s Appendix.

“It is Toussaint’s supreme merit that while he saw European civilisation as a valuable and necessary thing, and strove to lay its foundations among his people, he never had the illusion that it conferred any moral superiority. He knew French, British, and Spanish imperialists for the insatiable gangsters that they were, that there is no oath too sacred for them to break, no crime, deception, treachery, cruelty, destruction of human life and property which they would not commit against those who could not defend themselves.” 

While recognizing the intellectual advantages of European civilization, James is also quick to point out the flaws and hypocrisies of the European colonists. His characterization of them as “insatiable gangsters” suggests their violence, greed, and complicated hierarchies of authority. Their tendency to commit crimes against the defenseless speaks to their opportunistic outlook.

“Toussaint, as his power grew, […] ignored the black labourers, bewildered them at the very moment that he needed them most, and to bewilder the masses is to strike the deadliest of all blows at the revolution.” 

Reserved by nature, Toussaint was accustomed to giving orders and having them obeyed, much as they had been on the plantation where he worked as a steward. As a general, simply giving orders without explaining his reasoning backfired, leaving his would-be followers confused and hurt. Some found his conciliatory policies towards the Whites particularly troubling. With reduced public support, Toussaint and his forces remained vulnerable to plots and intrigues by the French.

“It was too late. Events were to show that if he had but mobilised the masses before and purged his army, the French attack would have been crippled at the start. His desire to avoid destruction was the very thing that caused it. It is the recurring error of moderates when face to face with a revolutionary struggle.” 

Ever the diplomat, Toussaint failed to prepare his generals with clear combat directions prior to the arrival of the French. As a result, several cities were lost, and some of his commanders even joined the French. James presents his error as an example of the dangers of moderation when revolutionary change is needed.

“But neither Dessalines’ army nor his ferocity won the victory. It was the people. They burned San Domingo flat so that at the end of the war it was a charred desert. Why do you burn everything? asked a French officer of a prisoner. We have a right to burn what we cultivate because a man has a right to dispose of his own labour, was the reply of this unknown anarchist.” 

Though Dessalines clearly played an important role in the outcome of the war, James reminds us that he could not have enjoyed any success without mass support, including that of the thousands who made San Domingo virtually uninhabitable for the French. This quote also illustrates why sabotage became a defining feature of the resistance: It demonstrated to the Whites that their property was not really theirs at all.

“The massacre of the whites was a tragedy; not for the whites. […] The tragedy was for the blacks and the Mulattoes. It was not a policy but revenge, and revenge has no place in politics.” 

James argues that, by killing the Whites after the war was over, Dessalines went one step too far. The goal of the war was always freedom, and once that was achieved, there was no legitimate reason to continue fighting. His actions also stand as one more example of exploitative colonialism, as he carried out the massacre under the influence of British officials, who threatened to withhold trade.