3 ms·
I agree that for example Malcolm X and MLK were in large part allies in the Civil Rights Movement, but that is no reason to gloss over their differences. There
by stareatgoats 3y ago
I agree that for example Malcolm X and MLK were in large part allies in the Civil Rights Movement, but that is no reason to gloss over their differences. There is obviously a marked difference between the expressed non-violence of Gandhi and MLK vs the militancy of Malcom X and Fanon, the latter who, among other things wrote how "at the level of individuals, violence is a cleansing force" [0].
He goes on to justify terrorism against civilians, simply for their inadvertent sharing in the profits of oppression. This line of argumentation did not only justify terrorism in the anti-colonial struggle, it is the hallmark of all terrorists everywhere.
I find it insidious, if not uncommon, to claim that pacifist struggle is somehow dependent on violence, that non-violent struggle is only "effective because of a radical movement with the will to violence at its flank". As if violence, or the threat of it, is the only force that can cause movement. There is no such requirement for a non-violent struggle, there are plenty of other pressures beyond violence that can be applied, as MLK demonstrated. Violence is in fact the laziest and most cowardly solution in comparison, one that gives up on human ingenuity and creativity and simply utilizes our basest instincts.
Fanon may or may not have addressed these points in his writing; I confess to having read only "The Wretched of the Earth", and that was quite a few years ago, and at the time bought his arguments, lock, stock, and barrel.
But regardless of his arguments, he was of a different age, one where armed struggle was a thing of outrage and awe. It is a different world now: an age where any teenager can, and do, start a murderous massacre without anyone hardly lifting as much as an eyebrow, and the whole world stands on the precipice of a disastrous nuclear war by pure accident because of our subservience to violence as the only way of solving conflict. The context has shifted and we need other methods than the barrel of a gun. I submit that Gandhi and MLK can be inspirations, if not directly copied.
[0] http://academics.wellesley.edu/Polisci/wj/204/204-Readings/fanon.htm http://academics.wellesley.edu/Polisci/wj/204/204-Readings/f...
- giraffe_lady 3y agoReading fanon today, the main thing I get from him that the colonized will lead the struggle for freedom. If we aren't going to help them we should at least get out of the way. Standing in safety and scolding them about their methods is nothing. Just nothing.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]