Frantz Fanon was a prominent philosopher, psychiatrist, and revolutionary activist from Martinique. He is best known for his influential work on decolonization and the psychology of revolution.
Fanon’s books “Black Skin,White Masks” and “The Wretched of the Earth”, explores the psychological and sociopolitical effects of colonization on both the colonizer and the colonized. He argues that colonialism dehumanizes and oppresses the colonized, leading to a sense of inferiority, alienation, and cultural dislocation.
According to Fanon, decolonization is not just a political process but also a psychological and cultural one. He believed that the process of decolonization required a complete rejection of the colonizer’s values, institutions, and systems of oppression. Fanon advocated for a violent revolution as a means to dismantle colonial structures and create a new society based on the principles of freedom, equality, and self-determination.
Fanon’s theory of decolonization emphasizes the importance of reclaiming and reasserting one’s cultural identity, as well as the need for a collective struggle against colonialism. He argued that the colonized people must engage in a process of self-discovery, self-affirmation, and empowerment to overcome the psychological effects of colonization.
In his book published in 1961,“The Wretched of the Earth” concludes that “decolonization is always a violent phenomenon.” He says that violence is the only language spoken by the oppressor or colonist and the only way to respond to a violent system. Fanon promoted radical measures such as violence to bring about reform.
Fanon believes that “non-violence” is itself a colonial concept, part of the larger colonial apparatus, and points out the pattern of occupiers who had “imposed his rule by means of guns and machines” turning around and preaching non-violence.
At the decisive moment, the colonialist bourgeoisie, which up till then has remained inactive, comes into the field. It introduces that new idea which is in proper parlance a creation of the colonial situation: non-violence. In its simplest form this non-violence signifies to the intellectual and economic elite of the colonized country that the bourgeoisie has the same interests as they and that it is therefore urgent and indispensable to come to terms for the public good. Non-violence is an attempt to settle the colonial problem around a green baize table, before any regrettable act has been performed or irreparable gesture made, before any blood has been shed. But if the masses, without, waiting for the chairs to be arranged around the baize table, listen to their own voice and begin committing outrages and setting fire to buildings, the elite and the nationalist bourgeois parties will be seen rushing to the colonialists to exclaim. A good example is is the period between 1945 and 1980 where four to five dozen states in Asia and Africa gained independence from their European colonial rulers . It is clear that the use of violence was key to fight colonial power and non violence played a very minor role in the overall decolonization process. Fanon became a spokesman for third world denizens of all nations.
Furthermore the situation in Ukraine is supported by Fanon when he talks about the relationship between violence and the shift in consciousness it can bring. At the level of individuals, violence is cleansing force. It frees the native from his inferiority complex and from his despair and inaction; it makes him fearless and restores his self-respect hence the actions by Putin to retain Russia’s glory during the Soviet Union era.
However, there’s limitation that decolonization is always a violent phenomenon. When Frantz Fanon wrote his book, the Cold War was in full swing and the world was in a time period of mass revolt and a changing global order which further complicated the colonial situation and struggle for independence in the colonized world. But in the modern age where colonialism is more subtle through the introduction of soft power diplomacy, it is difficult to see the benefits from violence when the targets of violence are less accessible for example the Indo-US Nuclear Deal signed in 2005 between the two governments concerning peaceful uses of energy.So it is difficult to use fanonism today as the structure and meaning of colonial states has developed. It is clear that in the cases of the 20th century,decolonization was an unavoidable means to overthrowing a violent system because the status quo during that time was violent.
In conclusion , Frantz Fanon is a believer of violence and to bring about reform and social transformation there must be the use of violence as the human being by nature is selfish, nasty and their life is brutish to the extent that the oppressor will never listen to anything like a dialogue.
Site Title 