Franz Fanon Decolonization

Just about any country that one can name has some history of civil unrest, class issues, rioting in the streets, and outright warfare. These patterns of behavior are common denominators for most civilization in the world. The names, faces, and places may change, but the motivations are generally the same, because of the need for change and the willingness to do whatever is necessary to achieve it. In contrast to the United States, which was in the process of freeing itself from British colonial rule, France was working to free itself from royal absolutism. This period is historically known as the French Revolution. Many scholars do not agree on the chronology of the French Revolution; some scholars suggest that the Revolution took place between 1789 to 1799 while others feel that it did not end until Napoleon lost power in 1815. To better understand the history of the French Revolution it is necessary to discuss the causes, major events, significant figures, and the outcomes associated with these political developments. Without this uprising, that changed the face of the entire country and influenced local political life in many countries in Europe, in all likelihood the France we know today would never have existed.

As Plato pointed out in The Republic, the government should be ruled by the most wise, intelligent, non-corrupt and individual in the city who does not want to rule, thus being the philosopher. The "philosopher king" idea on paper works well because it portraits the philosopher as a robotic figure who has no heart and does whatever that's good for the city. In real life, humans no matter how unbendable they are, they will still be changed by the original sins like lust and greed. Even Plato admitted with the allegory of the Ring of Gyges, which no matter how legitimate an individual is, as soon as he get his hands onto power he start to sin. In The Republic, the Ring of Gyges is described as a ring that gives invisibility power then the man goes out and does whatever he wants and is unnoticed. In reality, even when a philosopher is given a king's power, his sins would make him unfit for Plato' model.

“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.

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,

The inconsistencies in the implementation even partly contributed to the outbreak of the Second World War (xxx, xxx). The European powers mobilized their African subjects with propaganda vilifying the racial-supremacist ideology of the Fascist powers. This set-in motion a process in which “Fascist nationalism produced the opposed reality of anti-Fascism; and anti-Fascism became antiracism; and antiracism led in due course to an end of colonization” (Davidson, 1992). The result was the erasure of European colonial rule from large swathes of the African continent within a relatively short period of time (xxx, xxx). Consequently, this led to the development of a decolonized version of the self-determination concept. The decolonization version of self-determination was based on the following three principles: i) all dependent peoples are entitled to freedom; ii) the peoples so entitled are defined in terms of the existing colonial territories, each of which contains a nation; and iii) once such a people has come to independence, no residual right of self-determination remains with any group within it or cutting across its frontiers (Emerson 1964). This version of self-determination had numerous implications. The concerned entities often did not find it necessary to demonstrate effective legitimate authority to gain and

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,”

Decolonization, according to Todd Shepard, can be defined as “merely the end of European states’ formal colonial empires” (p. 9), and in the time period from 1945 to 1965, decolonization became more of an inevitable concept than an unimaginable one. Decolonization intersects with W.E.B DuBois’s ‘color line’, which promoted decolonization by way of the colored side of the line’s desire to: obtain sovereign rights, put to rest the myth of “race”, and be heard and taken seriously.

If you were to educate everyone, and everyone was to put the same amount of effort and time into their research, and among testing, the results showed vast differences in I.Q, would you still invite all of those people to a meeting to discuss future matters? I would not think so, you would want the top scholars, whereas the others, although given the same opportunity just were not born with the same qualities needed to be specially educated. Philosopher Kings, with their high intelligence, can sense who has the capacity to learn to the fullest extent and who does not. So you are skipping the process of having to educate everyone, only to have a portion be able to show the results.

Marilyn Frye has universal definition of oppression as being “a system of interrelated barriers and forces which reduce, immobilize, and mold people who belong to a certain group and effect their subordination to another group” (7). Feminists are working to dismantle the restrictive powers to create equivalent opportunities for all people. On paper, it seems black and white because everyone is working together towards the same goal of equality. On the ground, the divisions of gray can be seen between the vast variety of methods and opinion. As the tension builds, there are two main camps formed: The Western feminist and the Non-Western feminist. (While I personally object to this terminology because of its Eurocentrism, I have yet to find alternatives that encompass the same meaning so it will have to stay standing as imperialist as it is.) Both sets of activists have different roles within these current predicaments facing the unjust treatment of women. Western feminists find themselves in a stalemate of passing critical judgement on another culture or standing aside and letting the injustice continue. Non-Western feminists are working against the oppression in their society as well as the overreaching Western feminists before they can make their voices heard. Therefore, my argument is that Western feminism needs be revised into becoming the megaphone for Non-Western feminist issues. That way ideas from people on the ground are not disregarded and those on the outside who

In Books V and VI of Plato’s Republic, Socrates claims that true philosophers are the best fit to rule as kings to the cities because of their political greatness and wisdom which stems from their knowledge of the intelligible realm. Through the allegory of the cave, Socrates enhances his argument that the people inside looking at the shadows are constrained within their own understanding in the perceptual and physical realm. In comparison, true philosophers have a greater sense of truth and understanding from their knowledge of the world outside the cave. Ultimately, true philosophers who have true knowledge, contrasting to the others who only have belief, are fit to rule because of their understanding of justice and intent to adequately

Socrates is adamant that only philosophers have the ideal state of mind to rule because they are able to grasp the theory of the forms, which allows them to make rational decisions without being

The purpose of this paper is to analyze to main questions. The first part of the paper will define transnational feminism and identify key factors within a transnational perspective. Another part will be discussing some transnational feminist critiques of mainstream “white/Western” feminism and will also give ideas that a transnational feminist would suggest in order to make positive changes for women. The second part of the paper will choose two concepts to define, as well as discuss how they relate to one another from a transnational perspective. In addition, the relation of how they related to gender or affect the political, social, and/or economic status of women in the world will be analyzed.

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

Plato’s view of division of labour is divided into three types of peoples’ task in life which are workers as farmers, military type and guardians. Actually, the ruling task of Plato’s Republic is the guardian’s responsible who had achieved the greatest wisdom or knowledge of good. Due to that, Plato claims that “philosopher must become kings or those now who called kings must genuinely and adequately philosophise’’ (Nussbaum1998, p.18). However, people argue about the reasons that the philosopher should rule the city, while the philosophers prefer to gain knowledge instead of power, thus they don’t seek this authority. Therefore, the argument should alter to why the philosophers are the best ruler to govern people. Indeed, Plato states

This concept is based on his belief that philosophers are the only holders of true knowledge. In Republic Plato uses Socrates in dialogue to state, “Once one has seen it (Forum of Good), however, one must conclude that it is the cause of all that is correct and beautiful in anything, that it produces both light and its source in the visible realm, and that in the intelligible realm it controls and provides truth and understanding, so that anyone who is to act sensibly in private or public must see it” (Plato 189). Plato uses Socrates to argue that the only people with true knowledge are those who have access to the Forum of Good. According to Plato, this Forum is the source of all other forums and all intelligence and knowledge so a political state must have access to the Forum in order to thrive. However, the only ones who have access to this forum are philosophers and for this reason he argues that the welfare of the state is dependent on the existence of philosophers. He furthers this argument by stating that as a result it is philosophers who are most fit to rule, thus introducing the concept of a philosopher king as the most fit form of political rule for the welfare of all. These principles, although they have been adapted to account for differences in beliefs, societies, and political structures, are still the basis of many current political