The question of whether violence is necessary from the view of frantz fanon

At whatever level we study it--relationships between individuals, new names for sports clubs, the human admixture at cocktail parties, in the police, on the directing boards of national or private banks--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.

The question of whether violence is necessary from the view of frantz fanon

This very important film is directed by Goran Hugo Olsson and is narrated by Ms. Lauryn Hill, the internationally known rapper and singer. Decolonization is a historical process.

It cannot be understood; it cannot become clear to itself except by the movements which give it historical form and content. Decolonization which sets out to change the order of the world is obviously a program of complete disorder. But it cannot come as a result of magical practices, nor of natural shock, nor of a friendly understanding.

From birth, it is clear to him that this narrow world strewn with prohibition can only be called in question by absolute violence. Their first encounter was marked by violence, and their existence together, that is to say the exploitation of the native by the settler, was carried on by a great array of bayonets and canons.

The native is boxed in a corner. Apartheid is simply one form of the division into compartments of the colonial world.

This is why the dreams of the native are always of muscular prowess; his dreams are of action and of aggression. This is the period when the niggers beat each other up and the police and magistrates do not know which way to turn when faced with the astonishing waves of crime.

All of these patterns of conduct are those of the death reflex, when faced with danger — a suicidal behavior which proves to the settler that these men are not reasonable human beings.

We consider that independence will allow us to develop our own culture, to develop ourselves and to develop our country by delivering our people from misery, suffering, ignorance, because this is the state we find ourselves in after five centuries of Portuguese presence. We are ready at any moment for negotiations.

We are on the same level as men. There are male and female commanders. The heads of the Defense Department are both male and female.

We help each other. There is no difference in rights. We are on the same level. The work the man does, the woman can also do and vice versa. Both are obviously victims of the Portuguese war of imperial conquest over the Mozambican people.

Fortunately, the guerrillas ambush them and inflict major physical losses and as a result they lower the morale of the Portuguese soldiers to fight.

Violence enlightens, because it indicates the means to the end. At the level of the individuals, violence is a cleansing force. It frees the colonized man from his inferiority complex.

It is clear that in colonial countries, the peasants alone are revolutionary, for they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. The starving peasant outside the class system is the first among the exploited to discover that violence pays. For him there is no compromise, no possible coming to terms.

Colonization or decolonization is simply a question of relative strength. The exploited man sees that his liberation implies the use of all means and that of force, first and foremost. They have instead created a beggar mentality. We hold out our hands to receive food.

That is not a good thing. Our farmers have stopped producing, because they cannot sell what they produce. The surplus from farmers in other countries is brought in here. We want something else. Those who really want to help us can give us plows, tractors, fertilizer, insecticide, watering cans, drills, dams.

That is how we define food aid. Those who come with wheat, millet, corn or milk, they are not helping us. They are fattening us up like you do with geese, stuffing them in order to be able to sell them later.The Question of Whether Violence Is Necessary from the View of Frantz Fanon.

On Politics and Violence: Arendt Contra Fanon Elizabeth Frazera, Kimberly Hutchingsb This paper considers the implications of Hannah Arendt’s criticisms of Frantz Fanon and the theories of violence and politics associated with his influence for our We know that the blow will knock out the adversary.

regardless of whether violence may 5/5(2). Frantz Fanon used his lived experience as a revolutionary in Algeria to develop a theory of revolution. Fanon was born in Martinique, a French colony.

Fanon engages heavily with the question of why the use of violence is necessary. He believes that the French have racialised views about the colonised subjects. Tying in with his strong. The violence of the colonial regime and the counter-violence of the native balance each other and respond to each other in an extraordinary reciprocal homogeneity.

This reign of violence will be the more terrible in proportion to the size of the implantation from the mother country.

The question of whether violence is necessary from the view of frantz fanon

As a staunch anti- colonialist directly influenced by the French who took over Martinique, his birth-place, Frantz Fanon, a psychiatrist, recognized the effects of culture on a person's outlook.

Frantz Fanon argues that in every situation dealing with decolonization that violence is necessary in order for the natives to succeed over the settlers.

I will discuss that violence is not necessary, and there are other means in dealing with the issue of decolonization.

Fanon — Revolution