Decolonization: Césaire, And Frantz Fanon

In The Colonizer and the Colonized, Albert Memmi’s essential argument is that the collapse of colonialism is inevitable. According to Memmi, there are only two answers for the colonized to disrupt the system of oppression. The two possible “solutions” are assimilation and revolt. In response to the marginalization of the colonized, both answers carry a high price. In Memmi’s eyes, neither will work in the end. The first of two answers on the road to collapsing colonization is assimilation. Imitation and compromise are not the answer to decolonizing, for neither the colonized nor the colonizer.

The process of decolonization proved to have its own struggles within those who were seeking their independence from imperialist powers. Evidently, these nationalist movements were different in many regions, but they generally shared the sentiment that “Westernization” had taken something away from them. This proved to be the case in Africa and Asia, where the colonization movement from imperialist powers was of strong presence, and that had trouble weakening during and after the Cold War. Part of this struggle was due to the forms of government that were imposed, and because many of these colonies had been in this position for such long time that they were not able to predict upcoming conflicts after their independence. However, in many cases, the problems were more complicated and often implied a combination of reaction to westernization and internal conflicts. Undoubtedly,

“Decolonization is Not a Metaphor” is an article by Eve Tuck and K. Wayne Yang. Through the article, the attempt to explain that the widely used term, “decolonization” is not applied as the term itself specifies. According to Eve and Wayne Yang, the term “decolonization” is now used in social justice rethoric such as enhancing the quality of societies and education and schools (Tuck & Yang, pg 3). The authors argue that decolonization must not lose its initial sense and meaning because any use other than what decolonization insinuates, turns the terms into a metaphor.

From 1945 and beyond, leaders have selected different paths to affect change. Some encouraged independence through violence, peaceful actions, diplomacy, and the commitment of their struggling nation. Others sparked revolutions by appealing to the peoples’ needs. Through policy, and sometimes uniting a people, trailblazers changed the face and structure of their nation. A column from a journalist during the time period would help to see a broader perspective during such varying and exciting time. Decolonization, revolution, and nation building are all goals of any effective leader willing to make a change.

of his own country’s colonization, Sekou Toure laments that the colonial powers assimilated each of their colonies

Decolonization is the undoing of colonialism, where a nation establishes and maintains its domination over dependent territories. In the words of Fanon, in the reading The Wretched of the Earth, “National liberation, national reawakening, restoration of the na­tion to the people or Commonwealth, whatever the name used, whatever the latest expression, decolonization is always a violent event.” (Fanon, 1). Frantz Fanon was one of many authors who supported decolonization struggles occurring after World War II. He breaks down decolonization into two senses: one being the physical act of freeing a territory from external control of a colonizer, and the other being the psychological act of freeing the consciousness of the native from the alienation caused by colonization. Fanon particularly advocated that violence was justified by overthrowing colonial oppression. In his reading, The Wretched of the Earth, Fanon wrote on why and how colonialism must be stopped. Fanon argued that the colonial infrastructure must be destroyed. “Decolonization, which sets out to change the order of the world, is clearly an agenda for total disorder. But it cannot be accomplished by the wave of a magic wand, a natural cataclysm, or a gentleman’s agreement. Decolonization, we know, is an historical process: In other words, it can only be understood, it can only find its significance and become self coherent insofar as we can discern the history-making movement which gives it form and substance,”

The process of decolonization in Africa during the 1950’s through the 1970’s was a very smart yet risky idea. For some places independence was easily gained yet in other areas it was a battle. During the time periods where colonization existed, Africa was peaceful and kept things in order. People had control over their specific locations and there were no questions to be asked. Once it was decided to remove these rights, things got out of hand rather quickly. Violence was a main occurrence during the decolonization timeframe because rules, rights, leaderships, etc. got altered and drastically changed. Sometimes nonviolence was used but it usually wasn’t as effective. A major example of using nonviolence actions to gain independence is when

Frantz Fanon argues the decolonization must always be a violent phenomenon because resisting a colonizing power using only politics will not work. Europeans justified colonization by treating it as gods work. They believed that god wanted then to occupy all lands and spread the word of god to savages of darker skin color. Fanon joined the Algerian Nationalist Movement when the Algeria was being colonized be the French. Many examples of violence written of in The Wretched of the Earth were taken from the struggle for independence in Algeria. Also the writing is sympathetic towards colonized natives. Fanon claims decolonization causes violent actions from both settlers and natives and creates intolerant

Decolonization can be achieved by gaining independence, along with interaction of power also, it is a political process that causes violence in in a lot of circumstances and may sometimes be resolved by negotiating on peaceful terms. But can also lead to violent resistance and arm struggle by the native population. Eventually with World War coming to an end, it brought a revolution of decolonization in many countries. For many people, this was a positive thing as they were to obtain independence from colonies and empires. Decolonization was a long process to begin with, it took almost thirty years after World War II for some places. With colonial powers getting weaker, that was great chance for independence for Africa and Asia. Not only

words, if decolonization is a process in which " 'The last [native] shall be first and the first [settler] last, ' this will only come to pass after a murderous and decisive struggle between two protagonists" (37). In these contexts, Fanon argues clearly that all of oppressions represented by colonialism and imperialism are violent in nature and must be destroyed only by greater violence:

If prompted with the question what is colonization and or how did Europe and America colonize different countries and peoples the answer might be as simple as: it was the process of taking land from other countries and pushing to change the peoples of those countries towards western ways. This answer is to simple, a lot of people do not know the motives behind colonizing another country. Even though the motives behind colonizing another country depend on the time and location of the colonizing, Europe and America have always set above every other country around the world. They title themselves as being superior to all others. Thus, a lot of countries bought into the western ways and believe Westerners to be “demigod”. In Michael Adas essay, Contested Hegemony: The Great War and the Afro-Asian Assault on the Civilizing-Mission, even though the focus is on the ups and downs of colonization in Asia and Africa. The essay looks at the motives behind colonizing these peoples, why some bought into the idea and how World War One changed everything for Europe, Asia and Africa in terms of colonization.

“The colonised man finds his freedom in and through violence” (Fanon, 1963). Fanon’s idea of praxis is “the counter-violence of the colonised is a form of “praxis” or human action that negates the violence of colonisation” (Fanon, 1963). Fanon was a thinker who engaged critically with ideas of Marxism. Contrary to Marx’s assertion of the proletariat as the motor force of history and the peasantry and lumpenproletariat as counter-revolutionary, Fanon asserts that the peasantry and urban lumpen in third world decolonizing countries like Algeria constitute the main revolutionary force. Algeria did not have an industrial working class like what existed in Europe, but rather a large unskilled and casual workforce. Fanon called this class the lumpenproletariat, those residing in the shantytowns and slums. He saw an important political role for them. These were just some of the ways that he rethought and expanded the Marxist ideas in the colonial context. Going further, Fanon argued that the primary contradiction in colonial society is not just between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, as Marx had outlined in the Communist Manifesto, but between the European white rulers and the Arab population. For Fanon the divide is not just class, but also racial. After independence, Fanon argues that the situation of poverty

Wretched of the Earth by Frantz Fanon explores the roles of violence, class, and political organization in the process of decolonization. Within a Marxist framework, Fanon theorizes and prophesizes the successes and failures of independence movements within colonized nations. He exalts the proletariat as a revolutionary class that is first to realize the necessity of violence in the removal of colonial regimes. Yet the accomplishment and disappointments of the proletariat are at the hand of men. Fanon neglects women in terms of the proletariat’s wishes and efforts. In spite of this exclusion, Fanon nonetheless develops a theory that could apply to the proletariat as a whole, women included. For although Fanon failed to acknowledge women’s

Decolonization in the British Empire is a deliberate process involving the colonial power and emerging local elite. The discussions in Chapters 1 and 2 provide insights into colonial development and the pre-independence environment which provide context for answering the research questions and testing the hypotheses. This chapter examines the first question- why do some newly sovereign states retain ties with the JCPC? Based on my theory that states chose the final appellant court it expects to be a reliable partner in the new governing coalition. The emerging elite that form the coalition are influence by the colonial experience of colony. For the purposes of this research the U.K.’s Westminster Act of 1931 or the official year of independence is considered the critical juncture. The Westminster Act gives the Dominions- Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, the option to abolish appeals to the JCPC. The critical juncture for all other states is the year of independence starting with India and Sri Lanka in 1948 to the most recent, Brunei, in 1984.

What effect has decolonization brought? The decolonized nations cope with their own course of action on all fronts - economic, social, political and cultural. Even as they struggle to rid themselves of the shackles of the erstwhile influences, they try to regain touch with their ‘golden past’ and also believe in a brighter future. With centuries of economic exploitation to undo, it does seem to be a daunting task. However, colonial theorists like Frantz Fanon believe that the colony regaining its place in the order, returning to its hierarchic origin is but inevitable.