Reading :: The Wretched of the Earth

The Wretched of the Earth
By Frantz Fanon

This 1961 classic of decolonialist literature has a preface by Jean-Paul Sartre -- which we'll skip.

On the first page, Fanon tells us: "decolonization is always a violent phenomenon.  ... decolonization is quite simply the replacing of a certain 'species' of men by another 'species' of men. Without any period of transition, there is a total, complete, and absolute substitution" (p.35). He argues that decolonization is "a historical process," "the meeting of two forces, opposed to each other by their very nature, which in fact owe their originality to that sort of substantification which results from and is nourished by the situation in the colonies" (p.36). In this situation, it is "the settler who has brought the native into existence and who perpetuates his existence" (p.36). He adds: "In the colonies the economic substructure is also a superstructure. The cause is the consequence; 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" (p.40) -- that is, the Marxist claim that everything comes back to economics is inadequate, since colonialism sets the terms for economics. This is more than a slight stretching! And thus "Everything up to and including the very nature of pre-capitalist society, so well explained by Marx, must here be thought out again" (p.40).

He argues that decolonization is ascendant for various reasons. The colonial powers want to avoid the violence of revolution (p.70) and the infiltration of Communists (p.74), and decolonialization allows the US to escape the bad press and Soviet propaganda about colonialism (p.79). The West has tried to slow and manage decolonization, but it cannot stop it. 

Furthermore, "colonialism, as we have seen, is in fact the organization of a Manichean world, a world divided up into compartments" (p.84). And he argues that former colonies should not be swept up in the Manichean Great Power competition between the US and USSR: "The underdeveloped countries, which have used the fierce competition which exists between the two systems in order to assure the triumph of their struggle for national liberation, should however refuse to become a factor in that competition" (pp.98-99). Rather, "The country finds itself in the hands of new managers; but the fact is that everything needs to be reformed and everything thought out anew" (p.100).

Like Cesaire, he argues, "what is fascism if not colonialism when rooted in a traditionally colonialist country?" (p.90). And "Not long ago Nazism transformed the whole of Europe into a veritable colony. The governments of the various European nations called for reparations and demanded the restitution in kind and money of the wealth which had been stolen from them: cultural treasures, pictures, sculptures, and stained glass have been given back to their owners" (p.101). Thus: "In the same way we may say that the imperialist states would make a great mistake and commit an unspeakable injustice if they contented themselves with withdrawing from our soil the military cohorts, and the administrative and managerial services whose function it was to discover the wealth of the country, to extract it and to send it off to the mother countries" (p.102). He calls for "a double realization: the realization by the colonized peoples that it is their due, and the realization by the capitalist powers that in fact they must pay. For if, through lack of intelligence (we won't speak of lack of gratitude) the capitalist countries refuse to pay, then the relentless dialectic of their own system will smother them" (p.103). That is, without reparations, capital can't find a safe outlet and is blocked and frozen in Europe, leading to catastrophe in the long run (p.104). The former colonies will no longer buy things from Europe, and thus the capitalists will struggle against their own governments and monopolies will eventually realize they must give aid (p.105). He urges the West to stop the Cold War and give aid to underdeveloped regions, for the fate of the world depends on it (p.105).

(Here, as in Freire, the author invokes dialectic as an analogue for justice.)

Fanon turns to the question of the relationship between a nationalist party and the masses. He first notes that the idea of political party has been developed for highly industrialized societies, then imported into colonized areas (p.108), and that the analogue does not work so well: "in the colonial territories the proletariat is the nucleus of the colonized population which has been most pampered by the colonial regime" (p.108) -- i.e., the proletariat are the bourgeoisie (p.109). He goes on to discuss the difficulties in developing a revolution in a colonized area, then looks forward to the future decolonized society:

In a veritable collective ecstasy, families which have always been traditional enemies decide to rub out old scores and to forgive and forget. There are numerous reconciliations. Long-buried but unforgettable hatreds are brought to light once more, so that they may more surely be rooted out. The taking on of nationhood involves a growth of awareness. The national unity is first the unity of a group, the disappearance of old quarrels and the final liquidation of unspoken grievances. (p.132)

and 

The settler is not simply the man who must be killed. Many members of the mass of colonialists reveal themselves to be much, much nearer to the national struggle than certain sons of the nation. The barriers of blood and race-prejudice are broken down on both sides. (p.146)

This is optimism on the level of the Leninist notion of the withering away of the state! 

We see the continuing influence of Marxism-Leninism in the rest of the dialogue. For instance, the rich are predators -- and subhuman:

The more the people understand, the more watchful they become, and the more they come to realize that finally everything depends on them and their salvation lies in their own cohesion, in the true understanding of their interests, and in knowing who their enemies are. The people come to understand that wealth is not the fruit of labor but the result of organized, protected robbery. Rich people are no longer respectable people; they are nothing more than flesh-eating animals, jackals, and vultures which wallow in the people's blood. (p.191)

And labor (as opposed to slavery) gives us dignity: 

the idea of work is not as simple as all that, that slavery is opposed to work, and that work presupposes liberty, responsibility, and consciousness. (p.191)

In a later chapter, Fanon turns to actual cases of mental disorders to discuss how colonialism affects the colonized. 

He concludes by calling the former colonies to make their own way independent of their former colonizers:

So, my brothers, how is it that we do not understand that we have better things to do than to follow that same Europe?

That same Europe where they were never done talking of Man, and where they never stopped proclaiming that they were only anxious for the welfare of Man: today we know with what sufferings humanity has paid for every one of their triumphs of the mind. (p.312)

And "It is a question of the Third World starting a new history of Man" (p.315).

All in all, the book reminds me of Lenin. The analysis is unrelenting and unflinching. But that analysis gives way to a vision of the future that is overoptimistic and perhaps oversimplified. Just as Lenin saw the state withering away once the oppressions of capitalism had ceased, Fanon saw the decolonized coming together in a common purpose once the oppressions of colonialism had ceased. But perhaps that optimistic, clearly delineated vision is what one needs in order to move confidently into an uncertain future. In any case, it's well worth a read, both for the analysis and for the proposed vision.