es victims of slavery as one in their crudeness, the unified optimism captured in the term usually proves vital to their effort at achieving liberalism in politics. Fanon supports a materialist understanding of the nationhood that is premised upon open-mindedness and respect for cultural diversity during and after the dismantling of the economic structures of the colonial rule.
Despite the domination of the middle-class, a national culture consists of rich diversity. Colonialism, according to Fanon reverses these values by physically weakening the victims of imperialism (Naimou, 2013). It also erodes traditional cultural riches that existed before the arrival of an exotic, colonial culture. But if a colonial system attempts to embrace the national culture by galvanizing the local intellectual community to recover the ancient, pre-colonial cultural values, Mazrui (1993) has noted that Fanon warns that these endeavours are often artificial and cannot stand the test of time. Fanon elaborates that national culture can only be meaningful when it embodies the common revolutionary contribution of all victims of oppression and reflects them in the equitable sharing of the national cake.
Owing to the fact that a national culture and folklore are two different things, a pure populist culture cannot be the path to the ultimate realization of the peoples actual requirements (Flores-Rodríguez and Jordan 2012). National culture is therefore important to the defence, and approval of the traditional values of a society. Fanon argues that colonialism is a threat to national culture, because colonial influence tends to over-simplify the very core cultural values of national identity.
Apart from cultivating individual dignity, Johnson (2013) argues that Fanon’s concepts of national culture also support dynamism. It tears away acts defence for traditional values among members of a society which only serve to confine members of the society to trivial wars at the expense of bigger