I write little essays when I feel particularly moved by something I've read, it's therapeutic. Don't know if this is the right section, but here goes. Don't mind the spelling and grammar errors.
In Frantz Fanon’s final work, The Wretched of the Earth, he analyzes the psychological effects of the colonization and decolonization on the minds of the colonized individuals. In his analysis, he advocates for the use of violence to affect change in the decolonization movement. In fact, he considers violence and necessary measure to end any colonial presence as it is “naturalized” in the colonial experience, as Fanon writes, “Challenging the colonial world is not a rational confrontation of viewpoints. It is not a discourse on the universal, but the impassioned claim by the colonized that their world is fundamentally different” (Fanon 1965:6). This dialectic, created by the colonial encounter places the colonized subject and the colonizer in two compartmentalized worlds that are openly antagonistic to each other. In this dialectic, the colonized subject become dehumanized, leading to atmospheric violence, and finally revolutionary action makes violence a predetermined outcome formed by the colonial experience.
The colonized subject and the colonizer live in a compartmentalized world; the former is exploited by the latter. Defined by more than social and economic inequality, in this dualistic world the colonized subject becomes the opposite of what is good and just as Fanon states, “The colonial world is a Manichaean world. The colonist is not content with physically limiting the space of the colonized, i.e., with the help of his agents of law and order. As if to illustrate the totalitarian nature of colonial exploitation, the colonist tums the colonized into a kind of quintessence of evil” (Fanon 1965: 6). Everything about the colonized from their myths, customs, practices, and beliefs becomes an infectious agent that must steadfastly be guarded against. Therefore, by the colonists’ own design and from the outset of the colonial encounter the colonized subject is put into an antagonistic role against the colonizers. His/her beliefs before colonization are demonized, and every effort is made to make them less: less than what the colonizer preaches and believes. A typical example of this occurring is through conversion to Christianity as Fanon writes, “The Church in the colonies is a white man's Church, a foreigners' Church. It does not call the colonized to the of God, but to the ways of the white man, to the ways of the master, the ways of the oppressor” (Fanon 1965: 7). As is implied in the previous quote, although the colonized is called to take on the effect of his/her colonizers the subject is never expected to truly be accepted by whatever paradigm he’s draped in, it only functions as a tarp to be laid over whatever the colonized had held in his/her mind before colonization. And as mentioned previously, this dialectic is not a merely based on political and economic basis as the one Marx described as Fanon writes, “It is not the factories, the estates, or the bank account which primarily characterize " The ruling class” The ruling species is first and foremost the outsider from elsewhere, different from the indigenous population, "the others."” (Fanon: 1965:5). Indeed, the “the ruling species” is not better than it’s subjugated through political or economic reasons, it’s superiority is granted at birth. Naturally, this leads to the dehumanization of the colonized subject.
The end result of living in this Machinaean world is the dehumanization of the colonized subject and his/her being written off from the rights and privileges afforded to his/her, evidently very human colonizers. The colonized subject, as it goes, is treated inhumanely not only politically and economically but through his/her very perception as Fanon writes, “…when the colonist speaks of the colonized he uses zoological terms. Allusion is made to the slithery movements of the yellow race, odors from the "native" quarters, to the hordes, the stink, the swarming, the seething, and the gesticulations. In his endeavors at description and finding the right word, the colonist refers constantly to the bestiary” (Fanon 1965: 7). This hegemonic antagonism by the colonist is not lost on the colonized subject despite the use of various figures of speech. The colonized subject gets the immediate and correct point, he/she is not human, less so in fact. But the colonized is subjugated and dominated, not domesticated and understands that they are in fact human, and as expected, are ready to defend their humanity as Fanon writes, “And at the very moment when they discover their humanity, they begin to sharpen their weapons to secure its victory” (Fanon 1965: 8). After this realization is an atmosphere rife with the undertone of violence begins.
Atmospheric violence is the first volley of revolutionary action in decolonization movement. Fanon describes the process when he writes, “The good "natives" become scarce, silence falls when the oppressor approaches. Sometimes looks harden and attitudes and remarks are downright hostile” (Fanon 1965: 31). In this hostile atmosphere of contempt and edginess, the sparks of revolutionary action will inevitably be ignited. The colonist, having set up the situation in the first place, is well aware of the change in attitudes of the subjugated and quickly organizes his military forces to prevent any insurrection. But violence is inevitable as Fanon states, “A trivial incident and the machine-gunning begins” (Fanon 1965: 32). This is the inevitable result of the colonial, compartmentalized world were two opposing worlds, established through violence and only be ended through violence.
In conclusion, as the old axiom goes, violence begets violence, and the colonizers having established opposed worlds where one sector is demonized and dehumanized can only expect equal and opposite retribution in the form of decolonization. To attempt to snatch away humanity from the colonized through subjugation and colonization is impossible and the facade can only be enforced and maintained through violence. Likewise, such regimes must be destroyed through a necessarily violent reprisal from those that wish to assert that, they too, are human.
In Frantz Fanon’s final work, The Wretched of the Earth, he analyzes the psychological effects of the colonization and decolonization on the minds of the colonized individuals. In his analysis, he advocates for the use of violence to affect change in the decolonization movement. In fact, he considers violence and necessary measure to end any colonial presence as it is “naturalized” in the colonial experience, as Fanon writes, “Challenging the colonial world is not a rational confrontation of viewpoints. It is not a discourse on the universal, but the impassioned claim by the colonized that their world is fundamentally different” (Fanon 1965:6). This dialectic, created by the colonial encounter places the colonized subject and the colonizer in two compartmentalized worlds that are openly antagonistic to each other. In this dialectic, the colonized subject become dehumanized, leading to atmospheric violence, and finally revolutionary action makes violence a predetermined outcome formed by the colonial experience.
The colonized subject and the colonizer live in a compartmentalized world; the former is exploited by the latter. Defined by more than social and economic inequality, in this dualistic world the colonized subject becomes the opposite of what is good and just as Fanon states, “The colonial world is a Manichaean world. The colonist is not content with physically limiting the space of the colonized, i.e., with the help of his agents of law and order. As if to illustrate the totalitarian nature of colonial exploitation, the colonist tums the colonized into a kind of quintessence of evil” (Fanon 1965: 6). Everything about the colonized from their myths, customs, practices, and beliefs becomes an infectious agent that must steadfastly be guarded against. Therefore, by the colonists’ own design and from the outset of the colonial encounter the colonized subject is put into an antagonistic role against the colonizers. His/her beliefs before colonization are demonized, and every effort is made to make them less: less than what the colonizer preaches and believes. A typical example of this occurring is through conversion to Christianity as Fanon writes, “The Church in the colonies is a white man's Church, a foreigners' Church. It does not call the colonized to the of God, but to the ways of the white man, to the ways of the master, the ways of the oppressor” (Fanon 1965: 7). As is implied in the previous quote, although the colonized is called to take on the effect of his/her colonizers the subject is never expected to truly be accepted by whatever paradigm he’s draped in, it only functions as a tarp to be laid over whatever the colonized had held in his/her mind before colonization. And as mentioned previously, this dialectic is not a merely based on political and economic basis as the one Marx described as Fanon writes, “It is not the factories, the estates, or the bank account which primarily characterize " The ruling class” The ruling species is first and foremost the outsider from elsewhere, different from the indigenous population, "the others."” (Fanon: 1965:5). Indeed, the “the ruling species” is not better than it’s subjugated through political or economic reasons, it’s superiority is granted at birth. Naturally, this leads to the dehumanization of the colonized subject.
The end result of living in this Machinaean world is the dehumanization of the colonized subject and his/her being written off from the rights and privileges afforded to his/her, evidently very human colonizers. The colonized subject, as it goes, is treated inhumanely not only politically and economically but through his/her very perception as Fanon writes, “…when the colonist speaks of the colonized he uses zoological terms. Allusion is made to the slithery movements of the yellow race, odors from the "native" quarters, to the hordes, the stink, the swarming, the seething, and the gesticulations. In his endeavors at description and finding the right word, the colonist refers constantly to the bestiary” (Fanon 1965: 7). This hegemonic antagonism by the colonist is not lost on the colonized subject despite the use of various figures of speech. The colonized subject gets the immediate and correct point, he/she is not human, less so in fact. But the colonized is subjugated and dominated, not domesticated and understands that they are in fact human, and as expected, are ready to defend their humanity as Fanon writes, “And at the very moment when they discover their humanity, they begin to sharpen their weapons to secure its victory” (Fanon 1965: 8). After this realization is an atmosphere rife with the undertone of violence begins.
Atmospheric violence is the first volley of revolutionary action in decolonization movement. Fanon describes the process when he writes, “The good "natives" become scarce, silence falls when the oppressor approaches. Sometimes looks harden and attitudes and remarks are downright hostile” (Fanon 1965: 31). In this hostile atmosphere of contempt and edginess, the sparks of revolutionary action will inevitably be ignited. The colonist, having set up the situation in the first place, is well aware of the change in attitudes of the subjugated and quickly organizes his military forces to prevent any insurrection. But violence is inevitable as Fanon states, “A trivial incident and the machine-gunning begins” (Fanon 1965: 32). This is the inevitable result of the colonial, compartmentalized world were two opposing worlds, established through violence and only be ended through violence.
In conclusion, as the old axiom goes, violence begets violence, and the colonizers having established opposed worlds where one sector is demonized and dehumanized can only expect equal and opposite retribution in the form of decolonization. To attempt to snatch away humanity from the colonized through subjugation and colonization is impossible and the facade can only be enforced and maintained through violence. Likewise, such regimes must be destroyed through a necessarily violent reprisal from those that wish to assert that, they too, are human.
