Fanon the Relationship Between Colonizer and Colonized free essay sample

Due to his past position as a psychiatrist in a hospital that treated colonized people dealing with the devastating effects of colonization, he had some rather strong positions on this relationship. This position led Fanon to write â€Å"Wretched of the Earth†, a piece which advocates a call to violence by the colonized. Fanon’s position is that because the physiological effects are so negative from being colonized, a revolution must happen. This revolution (decolonization) must be violent. It is the only way decolonization can be successful. The physiological effects of colonization can be devastating. As seen throughout history, the colonizer often demands integration at the very least of the people they are attempting to colonize. In many cases, total annihilation of the people that the colonizer is attempting to colonize occurs. In the United States, we have examples of both. Native Americans were both assimilated into white culture, and they were also blatantly killed in Indian wars for their lands. We will write a custom essay sample on Fanon: the Relationship Between Colonizer and Colonized or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Although there can be some positive effects from colonization, the overwhelming majority would be considered negative. Fanon could not agree with this more. In his piece titled, â€Å"The Wretched of the Earth†, Fanon talks explicitly about the economic position of the colonized. He describes their physical world as being â€Å"a disreputable place inhabited by disreputable people It is a world with no space; people are piled on top of one another, the shacks squeezed tightly together† (Fanon 1961:4). He describes how physical world of the colonizer as being one of light, space, and of paved roads, like the â€Å"good part of town† compared to the â€Å"bad part† of town. He talks about another physiological effect of the colonized: envy. Fanon discusses something very controversial to some, which is the growing want and jealously of those in the lower classes to those in the upper. If only the colonized (lower class) could just take the place of the colonizer (upper class) for just one day. This distaste and resentment for the riches of the colonizer may have had some influence by Karl Marx. Fanon points out that being constantly exposed to the differences in lifestyle make the colonized envious. To imagine what it would be like to live in a world where one day, hordes of foreigners come to invade what you have always known to be you and your people’s home land, then reassigning order based on some unknown document or ruling and taking charge of the place is unimaginable. Most of us in North America nowadays cannot even fathom the concept. Just watching how fast people get upset when the government needs to come into their home or on their land for something speaks volumes to me. Words like furious, outraged, culturally raped and or silenced come to my mind when thinking about it. Let’s face it: if a foreign power came into the United States tomorrow, there would be a fair amount of citizens that would think nothing of throwing down arms to defend their homes and their lands. So why then is it so bad for Fanon to have a call to violence for people wishing to end colonization in their lands? Many people have a problem with Fanon’s position on violence. Fanon argues in Wretched of the Earth threat violence is absolutely necessary for true decolonization. He states, â€Å"In its bare reality, decolonization reeks of red-hot cannonballs and bloody knives. For the last can be the first only after a murderous and decisive confrontation between the two protagonists† (1961:3). This quote is pretty clear, violence is necessary in order to remove the colonizer so that the colonized can then attempt to start putting the pieces back together. Fanon speaks of the difference between â€Å"decolonization† and â€Å"true decolonization†. Regular decolonization is when power has been handed back to the indigenous people of a certain land on paper, but in reality those ho have colonized it still remain, and set in place a system where the indigenous people still depend on them financially. This is not true decolonization, Fanon argues. True decolonization must be violent in order for it to truly benefit the colonized. Fanon does touch on the subject of ‘greed’ by the colonizer, but not enough. It is for this reason mainly that I agree with Fanon. People can theorize and philosophize until they are blue in the face. Realistically, if a strong country arrives at a foreign destination and sees resources and people to be exploited, they will do so. If money can be made by pushing someone else aside, (who perhaps does not have the manpower or weaponry that the colonizer has) they will do it. No amount of talking or asking nicely would make them leave. Again, let us look at the United States as an example. As someone who has been very interested in the relationship between settlers and Native Americans here in the Northwest, I have done at least a fair amount of reading on this subject. Under absolutely no circumstances to I any situation where Euro-Americans would have abandoned their claims to the lands of the American West. The only foreseeable situation where someone like Columbus would have been driven back to Spain would have been if confronted with a war party. When it is all said and done, violence is the only weapon humans have against each other to force each other to do things. For the same reason people have guns in their homes to protect themselves from robbers and home invasions; violence would be absolutely necessary for true decolonization. Fanon writes that to â€Å"destroy the colonial world means nothing less than demolishing the colonists’ sector, burying it deep within the earth or banishing it from the territory† (1961:6). This quote demonstrates another of Fanon’s ideals that the violence needed to remove the colonizer will be cleansing and renewing. Violence needs to happen in order to restore the balance that once was before the colonizer ever set foot in the land of the colonized. The weapon of violence cannot be triumphed, it is the ultimate weapon. It is this reason that the colonized must embrace violence in order to gain the lead over the colonizer. Only then will they listen. Fanon’s viewpoints regarding the violence as a necessary component for total and true decolonization of a land are rooted in experience. He was born to parents on two extremes of the social and or class scale, and therefore was able to experience perspectives from both sides (the colonizer and the colonized). Fanon had a unique position as a physiatrist to study the effects of colonization on indigenous people in Algeria. Because of the multitude of injustices he saw done by the hand of the colonizer to the colonized, he wrote several ‘call to arms’ pieces encouraging a true decolonization of Algeria. To best serve the indigenous people of that land, true decolonization would be needed. Unfortunately, sometimes the only way to fight fire is with fire.