By Alice Routledge
Fanon’s wretched of the earth portrays a convincing narrative depicting the general experience of colonised peoples. This generalisation allows an overarching analysis on the larger themes of colonisation and decolonisation which, as he presents them, overlap repeatedly. Throughout the book he focuses on a number of these themes such as violence, the relationship between “settler and native” (Fanon, 1963), wider themes of race relations and emergence of this perpetuated by capitalism, and the limitations of Marxism in analysing the colonial society. His own limitations may also lie within this generalisation of the whole colonial experience from only a specific territorial knowledge of Algeria, frequent exaggerations and his book being “marked by serious pitfalls and contradictions” (Zeilig, 2012) as argued by Zeilig.
However, this doesn’t take away from the value of his book as a Marxian call to arms and the incredulous impact. This can be seen as Zeilig himself argues the influence of this book “was far greater, and difficult to chart” (Zeilig, 2012). Situating Fanon and his text, it is important to recognise his Marxist and Hegelian influences which shape much of his ideas surrounding capitalism, class and colonialism. For example, Zelig argues that “following Hegel, the book concludes with an appeal for humanism that Fanon maintains throughout his work” (Zeilig, 2012). This can then be seen in the text, especially in the quote: “to live as civilized people . . . is first to be oneself, by assuming one’s history . . . becoming conscious of the past is the first duty of a people,”(Fanon,1963) which links closely to Hegel’s idea of self-recognition. Although the humanist canon of thought itself which they both draw upon reflects Fanon’s psychological background, it also has limitations usually associated with the assumptions it makes over human agency and its ability to drastically change society.
However, Fanon more commonly is a self described Marxist which is evident in the text if from nothing else but his repetitive use of “comrades” (Fanon, 1963); a word closely related to communism. However, the Marxist ideology evidently has a long list of critiques especially in relation to the analysis of race and colonisation. As Robert Knox would argue, the absence of race in Marxist discussion is a limiting silence as colonialism led to the “international division of labour [which] had systematically underdeveloped the global periphery” (Knox, 2016 p. 81-126). Poplar Marxist thought fails to consider this. This could be seen to limit Fanon’s argument but he does acknowledge this weakness by using the term “stretched- Marxism” (Fanon, 1963, p. 39)instead. He argues that race is now a central element to the economic base of capitalism. Chimni then defines this concept in relation to Fanon more specifically stating that “class includes both race and gender” which “are not subsumed into class nor simply additions to it”(Knox, 2016 p. 81-126).
Despite this acknowledgement, his implementation of Marxism, stretched or not, can be seen as limiting. He claims to employ stretched Marxism yet doesn’t change any aspect of his analysis, except for a consideration of race as he still considers economics to be the reason behind colonialism. Furthermore he is still adopting a European ideology which contradicts his later statement “if we wish to reply to the expectations of the people of Europe, it is no good sending them back a reflection, even an ideal reflection, of their society and their thought” (Fanon, 1963, p. 315) Furthermore, Newlove also emphasises Fanon’s “rejection of everything European” (Newlove, 2019). Clearly then, this contradiction linked to his use of the Marxist thought limits the validity of his argument somewhat as it is inconsistent.
Furthermore, his adoption of European culture can be seen again as he writes in French, the language of the coloniser. This contradicts the preface of his own text as Jean-Paul Sartre suggests when Fanon is writing “he speaks of you often, never to you” (Fanon, 1963, p. 9). This begs the question as to why he doesn’t write in Arabic, the national language of Algeria, if he truly doesn’t believe in reflecting European ideals. This shows a limitation of Fanon’s work which is not necessarily related to Marxism, but indeed links to the contradictions of Fanon’s rejection of European value yet he himself uses them as with Marxism. Perhaps then this can be seen to limit his analysis of these themes, especially as this European disillusionment forms the basis of his further themes of postcolonial development and the Manichean relationship between the ‘native’ and the ‘settler’.
Additionally, Fanon also follows this Marxist thought as he suggests “that African unity can only be achieved through the upward thrust of the people” (Fanon, 1963 p. 163) or, that the struggle for decolonisation must come from those not of the bourgeoisie or middle class within colonised nations. Not only does he contradict this point though the entirety of the book as he would classify as western educated elite, and he still clearly affected change, but he also erases the role of middle-class leaders throughout the colonised work exacting change. Zeilig establishes this a significant criticism; arguing that “his refusal to see how a movement could be centred on the power of the organised working class and independent working-class politics limited the positive reach of his ideas”(Zeilig, 2012) . Once again, this highlights the weakness of his generalisations of the entire colonial community. This viewpoint is significant as it establishes what Fanon believed was the basis for colonialism, his critique on then-current political thought and his limitations in trying to counteract this. This influence also shapes how he tackles the other themes discussed in this book. It addresses that all these themes heavily overlap. His discussion of race and capitalism form an integral part of the relationship between the ‘capitalist’ and the ‘colonised’.
Drawing on his idea of stretched capitalism, we see the theme of race is intrinsically linked as he describes the term: “you are rich because you are white, you are white because you are rich. This is why Marxist analysis should always be slightly stretched every time we have to do with the colonial problem.” (Fanon, 1963 p.39). Race becomes integral in colonial discussions despite his argument that capitalist society is “only accidentally white” (Fanon, 2008). This furthers the idea of stretched-Marxism as he argues “military and economic oppression generally precedes, makes possible, and legitimises racism”. The myth of white superiority originates from the expansion of capitalism and attempts to legitimise oppression to maximise profits.
Fanon argues that race as a theme emerges from colonisation, and this not only fits into the native-settler relationship but reflects Fanon’s Manichean view of race and colonial society as a whole. “It’s a simplistic division between colonist and colonized, white and black, good and evil” (Knox, 2016 p. 81-126). He argues that no cultural or religious distinctions were seen between natives showing Fanon’s argument that this was insignificant to the settlers who were the makers of history. They defined the world as such. This is further supported by Lambert, who suggests the case studies that Fanon references in chapter 5 strengthens his book. It gave concrete examples which suggested a move from “the explanation of consciousness from "racial essence" to political economy, in doing so [shifting] the category of identification from blacks to the colonized, regardless of their race.” (Lambert, 1993, p. 239-262). So one racial idea of the native represented them all. This stripping of identity demonstrates the dehumanising aspect of the relationship and colonisation as a whole which Fanon illustrates. This is valuable in his call to arms as well though as the pejorative language of all against an oppressor may unify the ‘native’ populations. This is also seen through Nkrumah’s call for a United States of Africa and Fanon’s further depiction: “blacks who are whiter than whites and that the fact of having a national flag and the hope of an independent nation does not always tempt certain strata of the population to give up their interests or privileges” (Fanon, 1963 p.143). To define them as one bring them under this struggle. This shows value in his arguments in relation to his aims.
He makes a larger comment on race while remains consistent with this Marxist narrative. He implies that decolonisation breaks this Manichean logic of race, yet not that between the ‘bourgeoisie and ‘proletariat’: “The national bourgeoisie… which has assimilated colonialist thought in its most corrupt form, takes over from the Europeans, and establishes in the continent a racial philosophy which is extremely harmful to the future of Africa” (Fanon, 1963 p.161). This shows those of any race can become the oppressors under capitalism and the cyclical nature of violence. This further links back to his idea of accidental white colonisers and the interlinking of many of these themes. Once again showing where he remains consistent, his argument remains strong.
Continuing on this analysis of the relationship, we once again are presented with the overlapping nature of these themes as Fanon tries to construct a cohesive story. Fanon's take on violence is also integral to his evaluation of the relationship between the “native” and the ‘settler’. First, it is significant to define what Fanon means by native. The definition of the term native is not simply that of a colonised person, as it is the relationship with the settler which brings native into existence, as shown through “the status of "native" is a nervous condition introduced and maintained by the settler among colonized people with their consent” (Fanon, 1963 p.29). The non-duality of this relationship forms the definition of the native and settler. Thus, he defines the native as reliant upon the coloniser or “the governing race” which “is first and foremost those who come from elsewhere, those who are unlike the original inhabitants” (Fanon, 1963 p.39). This then fits into his argument surrounding their relationship, and the impact these two divisions of the colonial world have on each other.
The violent aspect emerges as Fanon argues this relationship, and thus the settler and native, is formed and defined by violence. To break free of these labels violence is needed, “the native cures himself of colonial neurosis by thrusting out the settler through force of arms” (Fanon, 1963 p.20). Fanon argues this finally allows the native to be human and writing history, instead of the coloniser. This is expanded upon as he suggests "to shoot down a European is to kill two birds with one stone, to destroy an oppressor and the man he oppresses at the same time: there remain a dead man, and a free man” (Fanon, 1963 p.21). He states that the breaking of this relationship is humanising for the ‘native’ as he once again draws on a Hegelian analysis. However, the idea that this concept of the ‘native’ is consensual on both parts is “deeply problematic”, as Zelig argues.“The Algerian method of “insurrection” was “ill-suited” to certain colonised peoples. Zelig goes on to suggest this would require “condemning Angola’s nationalists for refusing to launch their own “insurrection” regardless of timing or local circumstances”(Zeilig, 2012). Once again, this demonstrates the limiting value of the generalisation he makes on the context of Algeria alone. This detracts from the validity of Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth.
Overall, Fanon writes a powerful book but unfortunately, the generalisations he uses can be seen to be both his biggest strength and downfall. As this can not possibly reflect every experience of colonisation, yet this allows him to apply his themes to the highest number of colonised people possible. This reflects his aims to exact violence and thus accomplish the outcome of decolonisation, which he believes are inherently linked. Although he has some weaknesses and limitations in his writing, Fanon’s The Wretched of The Earth is ultimately a successful book as Micheal Lambert reiterates, it was written: “not as a dispassionate analysis but as a [Marxian] call to action” (Lambert, 1993, p. 239-262). It accomplishes his aims by effectively by using powerful language, irony and the general contrast between what life is like and what it could be, in order to exact a reaction and demonstrate the reasons for violence and try to shape the future. Furthermore, the weaknesses of his text don't erase the relevance in portraying the general colonial experience and highlighting the atrocities of colonisers, especially within the Algerian context. Perhaps the preface doesn’t as accurately reflect the nature of the book as well as it's intended to, but this is not at the fault of Fanon nor should this detract from the quality of his work. Generally, he writes a valuable piece of literature which adds significantly to the history of political thought which is made clear through Zeilig’s statement that this book made Fanon “the most important figure in the ideological struggle against colonialism in the 20th century”(Zeilig, 2012).
Bibliography
Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth, Grove Press, 2004 (1963)
Franz Fanon 2008, Black Skin, White Masks, Richard Philcox (trans.). New York: Grove Press
Robert Knox, ‘Valuing Race? Stretched Marxism and the Logic of Imperialism,’ London Review of International Law, 4, 1, 2016: 81-126.
Michael Lambert. “From Citizenship to Négritude: ‘Making a Difference’ in Elite Ideologies of Colonial Francophone West Africa,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 35 (1993): 239-262
Chris James Newlove (2019) The wretched of the earth and strategy: Fanon’s ‘Leninist’ moment?, Review of African Political Economy, 46:159, 135-142
Sekyi-Otu, Ato, Fanon's Dialectic of Experience, (Harvard University Press,1997)
Gary Wilder, “Race, Reason, Impasse: Césaire, Fanon, and the Legacy of Emancipation.” Radical History Review 90: 1 (2004): 31-61
Leo Zeilig 2012, ‘Pitfalls and Radical Mutations: Frantz Fanon’s Revolutionary Life,” International Socialism, 134: http://isj.org.uk/pitfalls-and-radical-mutationsfrantz-fanons-revolutionary-life/
Komentáře