36.
37.
38.

 
  
 

39.

40.

4].

42.
43.
44.
45.

46.
47.
48.
49.

50.
L.
52.

 

Coulson, ‘Blood-sucking Contracts’, op. cit., p. 9. The information on
MECCO and the Kilimanjaro Hotel is taken from this source.

Ibid.

The information is taken from Coulson, ‘The Fertiliser Factory’,

In the German Fertilizer Factory Case, 35 houses at a cost of Shs. 127,000/-
each (including Shs. 27,000/— for furniture, car-sheds and external toilets)
had to be built for the expatriate staff. (The Government limit per house is
75,000/-). See The Standard 25 June 1971.

See the series of articles in The Standard June 23-28, 1971 and Ann Seidman,
Comparativé Development Strategies in East Africa (Nairobi: East African
Publishing House, 1972), pp. 121 ff.

See my paper ‘Tanzania: The Class Struggle Continues’, op. cit. and C.
Thomas, ‘The Transition to Socialism: Issues of economic strategy in Tan-
zania-type economies’, (University of Dar es Salaam, mimeo.)

In some over-simplified retorts of bourgeois scholars, it is often said that
‘socialists’ are arguing that public sector should not make any ‘profits’ or
generate surplus! Clearly these scholars are confusing the two concepts. The
profit criterion has three important characteristics which distinguish it from
planned surplus: (1) that it is a criterion for making micro-economic decisions
at project or enterprise level; (2) that it accrues to a particular class which
owns and controls the means of production and part of it is accumulated by
them in the form of capital; and (3) that it assumes an unplanned economy
based on capitalist relations of production.

In this respect planned surplus has nothing in common with profit. Firstly, the
very generation, accumulation and utilisation of the surplus is nationally plan-
ned taking into account various social and economic factors including the
stage of development of the productive forces and the social needs of the
society. Secondly, it accrues to and is accumulated by the state and thirdly, it
assumes public ownership of the means of production. Therefore surplus is
not merely another respectable name for profit.

Thoma, op. cit.

Jenga, (a journal of N.D.C.), (1971), p. 15.

Cf. Teresa Hayter, Aid as Imperialism (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1971).
For figures on African countries see G. Hughes, ‘Socialist Development in
Africa’, in Monthly Review, Vol. 22 (May 1970), pp. 23 ff.

‘Blood Sucking Contracts’, op. cit, p. 6.

Ibid., p. 10.

Foreign Investments in India, op. cit., p. 282.

‘International Corporations, Labour Aristocracies, and Economic Develop-
ment in Tropical Africa’, in I. Rhodes (ed.), Imperialism and Rewolution op. cit.
Seidman Comparative Development strategies in East Africa op. cit., p. 116 fT.

See N.D.C. Annual Report 1970,

Sixth N.D.C. Annual Report, p. 60.

‘Aid-What Aid! in The Nationalist, 31 January 1971.