The Originality of Frantz Fanon's Diagnosis of Colonial Subjects - Essay Example

The originality of Frantz Fanons diagnosis of colonial s Introduction Frantz Fanon, a psychiatrist of French origin, applied psychological analysis to evaluate the impact of oppression in the nineteenth century focusing majorly on the oppression of the black Antillean and the Arabs of Algeria. Unlike other critics of racism and colonialism, Fanon embraced a psychological methodology coupled with his political knowledge to diagnose the effect of colonialism on its subjects. Being a trained psychiatrist, Fanon was able to establish the psychopathological impacts of colonialism on the subjects which does not easily go away even with decolonization. Imperatively, Fanon’s works display a unique combination of sociological and psychological understanding in handling the issue of colonization. The social structures created by imperial colonizers such as aggression, domination and general exploitation have an effect on the mental state of the colonial subjects in terms of their thinking and pathological behaviors. Thus, Fanon’s diagnosis of colonial subjects indicates that colonialism affects the natives both socially and psychologically. This paper will evaluate the originality and nature of Frantz Fanon’s analysis of colonialism and its impact on the oppressed. Frantz Fanon’s diagnosis of colonial subjects One of the fundamental aspects of Fanon’s diagnosis of colonial subjects is the issue of inferiority complex. Fanon indicates that the juxtaposition of Black and White races leads to a massive psycho-existential complex in which the Blacks are made to feel inferior. Fanon (1967) argues that the adoption of another culture’s language is the most notable way of completely assuming another culture in totality. In the presence of the oppressor, the colonized is led to believe that due to the fact that the native language is different from that of the dominating colonialist, then the colonized is inevitably inferior. The natives end up working hard to master the language of the oppressor to boost their ego and feel superior. It is evident that the oppressor controls all the resources and the oppressed individual learns that only the knowledge of the language of the oppressor will open the doors to freedom and prosperity (Mbembe 2012). For example, the natives of countries that were colonized by Britain inevitably learnt the English language and even made it to become their national language. It is imperative to note that the natives were psychologically conditioned to believe that the oppressor’s language was superior so much so that even with decolonization, the natives still use the foreign language. Fanon (1952) argued that the White people had “negrophobia”, a phobia that lay in the heart of the racism towards blacks. The whites reduced blacks to a level that perceived them as savages, no less different from the animals in the jungle that needed civilization. In fact, Fanon indicates that the whites considered blacks to have erotic and athletic superiority, a perception that literary compares the blacks to animals. He wrote that: “As for the Negroes, they have tremendous sexual powers. What do you expect, with all the freedom that they have in their jungles? They copulate at all times and in all places.” (Fanon 1967, p. 152) It is evident that Fanon had a unique perspective of how the oppressors perceived the natives. In fact, the colonialists perceived them as primitive beings, let alone thinking of them as equals. The view of the oppressors that the natives were equivalent to the animals in the jungle entered into the consciousness of the natives and eventually emerged as a collective catharsis in a neurotic form. The negative perception of the blacks by the oppressors made the colonial subjects to display symptoms of neurosis such as self devaluation, anguish and aggression. The colonial subjects were conditioned to see themselves as savages and the only way that they could be civilized was through becoming white by assimilation. For example, the male colonial subjects espoused the desire to to marry white people as a sign of conquest while black females believed that sexual relations with white people would elevate their acceptance in the society. This approach to colonial subjects by Fanon clearly indicates that the natives had a manifestation of deep rooted contempt for their blackness, a dislike imposed by the oppressor’s culture. Cultural domination was also used dominantly by the oppressors on the colonial subjects. Some authors investigating the issues of culture in relation to colonialism have indicated that the native cultures simply morphed into the colonial masters’ cultures simply due to social dynamics (Bulhan 1980). However, Fanon takes the view that the oppressors purposively annihilated the cultures of the natives since they considered them to archaic and of little significance with the ultimate goal of imposing their superior white culture. For example, the women in Algeria wore “Haik”, a veil that covered their faces completely in respect to their Arabic culture. The French oppressors made an attempt at cultural destruction in Algeria by prohibiting the wearing of the veil with the ultimate plan of gaining the endorsement of Algerian women. Further, the cultural and intellectual alienation of the colonial subjects was extended to a level whereby the natives were constantly humiliated due to their culture and the subsequent generations of the colonial subjects were compelled to learn the culture of the oppressor. The young colonial subjects were taught in the ways of the white oppressors, with emphasis on the white heroes who were the bringers of civilizations and truth to the black savages (Fanon 1967). Further, Fanon indicates that: “There is identification-that is, the young Negro subjectively adopts a white man’s attitude…Little by little…” (p. 147). This is a clear pointer that the colonial subjects’ culture was discarded by the colonial masters and in its place; the white “civilized” culture was imposed. It is notable that the oppressors implemented social structures that ensured only those natives who adopted the white culture could succeed in life. According to Frantz Fanon’s theory of cultural destruction by the oppressors, the newly educated blacks got jobs in the colonial administration and their status was upgraded in the society while the “uneducated local savages” were condemned to stay in the villages as paupers (Hilton 2011). Fanon’s analysis of psychological aspects of colonialism led to his formulation of a politicized psycho-analytical discourse. This discourse by Fanon was based on his theory that the colonial oppression and psychological oppression were interlinked and ultimately affected the colonial subjects in a negative manner. One of the psycho-pathological views of colonialism was that it inherently distorted or eliminated any sense of identity among the natives. Fanon noted that the colonial subjects were alienated and conditioned to believe that they had no history, no culture and no civilization (Fanon 1965). He indicates that the colonial subjects were misled by the oppressors uphold the notion that they lacked a solid identity and if in any case they had some culture, then the culture was inferior. Thus, Fanon postulates that the colonial masters not only oppressed the natives physically but they also discarded their cultures in totality. He uses this argument to theorize that the oppressors justified their inhuman acts to the colonial subjects by their perception that the natives were savages who did not deserve any better treatment than animals in the jungle. Fanon argued that the oppressors ‘compartmentalized’ the society into two categories, one for the whites and the other for the natives. The whites’ compartment was considered to be highly civilized and built to last. The whites were considered to possess immense wealth and education which inevitably made them the cream of the society. On the other hand, the colonial subjects were portrayed a s absolutely evil, un-kempt, poverty ridden, savagely and in dire need of foreign help in order to be civilized. Further, the colonial subjects were considered devoid of ethics and subject to negating social (Bulhan 2004). For example, the apartheid era in South Africa was marked by unfathomable levels of segregation that were rooted in the belief that black people were basically savages. During the apartheid era in South Africa, the white people lived in highly developed urban centers, complete with all social amenities for a comfortable life. However, Black people lived under squalid conditions in the villages and slum dwellings. In fact, the movement of black people in urban centers was severely restricted with some streets clearly marked as out of bounds for the colonial subjects. In this line of thought, Fanon indicates that only violence could unify the oppressed and give their internal struggle a means of effective closure from the scars of colonial psychopathological oppression. Fanon’s theory of violence was rooted in his belief that the mere achievement of independence from the colonial masters could not be sufficient enough to remove the colonialists’ distorting mirror and return the colonial subjects to their previous identities. Fanon notes that the colonial domination of Blacks had completely caused a complete rapture of the psychosocial structures of the Blacks to a level that they could not be able to return to their rightful sense of identity (Fanon 1967). It is imperative to note that colonial masters put in place social systems that rendered the colonial subject silent, invisible and uninformed. This is because the language, law, culture and the civil society were all tilted in favor of the colonial oppressors. The pervasive nature of colonial oppression inevitably led to the replication of the divisions of colonial identity in the society of the oppressed. Due to this, Fanon argues that there is no possibility of the colonial subject returning to their original identities since they cannot overhaul the existing social cultures as they have already become deeply rooted. Fanon postulates that in this regard, colonial intervention is irreversible and there is no cure for colonialism. In a rather radical manner, Fanon proposes that the colonial subjects can only be cured from colonialism through the use of violence. He indicates that it is only through insurrection and civil war that the colonial subjects can achieve catharsis and be healed from colonial oppression. In order to be freed from colonial captivity, Fanon points out that the colonial subjects have to match imperial domination with the violence of resistance (Fanon 1965). He argues that the colonial subjects have undergone psychopathological oppression that cannot be simply healed by being handed independence from the colonial masters. Violence is not only a political strategy to secure independence but also a psychological necessity to liberate the minds of the colonial subjects from the yokes of the repressive regime. The crisis that faces the colonial subjects is not so much about the physical aspects of colonialism but the psychosocial aspects of colonialism that have lasting mental effects. Fanon notes that the psychopathological oppression is hard to erase even with decolonization. It is imperative to note that the identity politics of decolonization is complex in scope due to its far reaching effects. The critical question is how a post colonial subject can achieve any kind of agency when colonialism radically debilitates psychologically (Mbembe 2012). Fanon (1965) adopts the idea that colonial subjects can attain agency through the cleansing power of violence. In his view, colonialism extensively damages the self consciousness and level of self esteem of the colonial subject. Also, colonialism violates the oppressed in a psychological manner that is difficult to reverse. Emancipatory freedom and liberations includes more than just political self determination and sovereignty. Thus, in order to gain liberation, Fanon argues that the colonial subjects have to engage in the phenomenon of violence. It is evident from Frantz Fanon’s diagnosis of the colonial subject that true liberation comes when it is fought for and not when it is conceded by the colonial powers (Fanon 1965). According to Fanon liberation is inextricably linked to the concept of revolution and uprising. In essence, the handing over of the political sovereignty of a country by imperial powers after years of dominance cannot be accepted as true form liberation. According to his convictions, liberation from the European powers can only come through a creation of a new history, “A history which will have regard to the sometimes prodigious theses which Europe has put forward, but which will also not forget Europe’s crimes ” (Fanon 1965, p.255). Conclusion Fanon’s greatest source of originality as a theorist can be credited to his combination of psychology and politics. In this regard, Fanon approaches the issues of national liberation and social revolution from the perspective of psychopathology. Through this vantage point, Fanon is able to view the dynamics of the colonial subject through both psychological and political aspects. Fanon observes that the colonial subjects experience significant psychopathological oppression from colonial masters which is difficult to erase. For instance, he argues that the oppressors make fundamental changes to the social structures in the society such that it becomes a representation of the colonial identity. Thus, even with political independence, the post colonial subjects still cannot go back to their rightful identity. Therefore, he postulates that in order to the colonial subjects to gain liberation and reclaim their identity, they have to engage in a violent encounter with the oppressors. Bibliography Bulhan, H 1980, ‘Frantz Fanon the revolutionary psychiatrist’, Race & Class 21.3 (1980): 251-271. Bulhan, Hussein Abdilahi. Frantz Fanon and the psychology of oppression. Springer, 2004. Coulthard, G 2010, ‘Place against empire: Understanding Indigenous anti-colonialism’ Affinities: A Journal of Radical Theory, Culture, and Action 4.2 (2010). Fanon, F 1965,The wretched of the earth, New York, Grove Press Fanon, F 1967, A dying colonialism, Grove Press Fanon, F 1967, Black skin, white mask, New York, Grove Press Hilton, T 2011, ‘Frantz Fanon and Colonialism: A Psychology of Oppression’, Journal of Scientific Psychology, 45:23-35 Hook, D, Peace K, and Nhlanhla, M 2004, Critical psychology. Durban, Juta Publishers Mbembe, Achille. "Metamorphic Thought: The Works of Frantz Fanon." African Studies 71.1 (2012): 19-28. Read More