4. TEXT
BLACKNESS AS A SOCIAL UNIFORM
▸Blackness as a constructed identity
▸“As long as the black man is among his own, he will have no
occasion, except in minor internal conflicts, to experience his
being through others.”
▸Association of blackness with negativity
5. TEXT
FIXED IMAGE AS BLACK MAN AND NEW
IDENTITY
▸Anti-semite and the Jew — Jean-Paul Sartre
▸Fixed image as black man
▸New identity — be a man among other men
8. TEXT
THE MIDDLE CLASS NATIONALIST AND
ECONOMY
▸Incapability to seek out new systems of managements
▸Economic stagnation
▸Surround artisan class with a chauvinistic tenderness
▸Raw materials or unfinished products
9. TEXT
NATIONALISM AND ECONOMIES
▸Nationalisation of economy
▸Local middle class — Intermediaries for foreign capitalist
concerns
▸Nationalised Agriculture without introducing new agricultural
methods
▸Producing unfinished, or raw materials.
11. TEXT
CONCLUSION
▸Worries about end-product of nationalism
▸Move rapidly from sense of nationalism to political social
consciousness
▸Intellectuals collaborating with the public against the national
bourgeoisie
12. TEXT
HIS WORK AND NATIONALISM
IDENTITY AS
BLACK
WHITE
TO BE
LIBERATE
FROM THE
GIVEN
IDENTITY
COLONIALIS
M
NATIONAL
CONSCIOUS
NESS
TO BE
INDEPENDE
NT FROM
COLONIALIS
M
GOAL
CREATED
EXTERNAL
FACTOR
13. TEXT
DISCUSSION POINT
▸Is foreign investment and the relationship with wealthy
countries become tackle for the independence?
▸Can nationalism be a force for good?
▸Can social and political consciousness come before the
national consciousness?
Editor's Notes
Fanon narratively speaks about his experience as a black man.
Before I move to Fanon’s first essay, I want to show you an advertisement from Thailand.
Not only Thailand, but still many countries (especially in Asia) idolise the whiteness while they neglect the blackness.
This advertisement shows the inferior image of black.
You can see from the advertisement, that people want to be white, and not black.
It’s not only in this advertisement, but even in US, the whitening products were popular among afro-americans during 1950-1970.
Then, is blackness inferior by nature, or is it by social construct?
In ‘The Fact of Blackness’, Fanon argues that blackness is a constructed identity, which has a purpose of distinguishing black and white. That is, a person who is black is not black by nature but, instead of being an innate identity, such a person has in fact been blackened by the society in which the individual lives.
By saying “As long as the black man is among his own, he will have no occasion, except in minor internal conflicts, to experience his being through others.” he argues that the inferiority of black are made by society. This sentence also shows his idea that the terms black and white have no meaning outside of racial discourse.
He believes that the term “black” is understood as a negative term, and led to the association of blackness with negativity by whites.
In his article, Fanon uses Sartre’s article, “The Anti-Semite and the Jew” as a means of comparison. By saying that “The jew is disliked from the moment he is tracked down”, he differentiate the alienation toward black from other alienation. Fanon points out that Jew are not able to be recognised by his look, but as soon as you see a Black man his Blackness is obvious.
He calls this that he has a fixed image, and he is locked into the infernal circle as a black.
I agree with his point, that racism is different from other alienation. Because it’s obvious, it can’t be hidden.
Through his essay, he shows his willingness that he wants to find a new identity other than black. He wants to be a man among other men. So he asks white about the rational reason for racism. When he didn’t get an answer, he calls himself as an irrational being.
It some like he decided to become illogical himself to respond to illogical racism.
It made me of come up with the phrase, eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth..
Fanon argues that colonisation creates class division within the colonial society. It creates the national bourgeoisies, but this bourgeoisies are not a bourgeoisie in a Marxist sense, because it lacks capital to generate productivity. Bourgeois class run the government for its own benefit.
According to him, colonisation also awakes the national consciousness, and the middle class of the colonial society are the force which motivate its people for decolonisation. But it often emerges in a problematic forms, such middle class are lack of economic resources, and they are geographically concentrated in capital city which cause the economic gap between the capital and other cities.
Since the middle class have abstract knowledge and relation to actual material resources and possibilities, they often cause economic stagnation with its false policies.
The middle class also finds it impossible to set up factories that make profit both for themselves and the country, they surround the artisan class with a chauvinistic tenderness in keeping with the new awareness of national dignity, and which moreover will bring them in quite a lot of money.
Also, since there are no single industry in the country, the colonised country is still sending out the raw materials, and unfinished products.
The middle class in post colonialism countries lacked the dynamic, transformative character of rise of earlier middle class. Rather than pursuing the national interests, they pursue their own interests and become a intermediaries for foreign capitalist concerns.
For example,
Agriculture - they do not try to introduce new agricultural methods, and it obtains privileges even more than the time it was possessed by colonisers.
in another industries, they produce same raw materials like under the colonial time
Racism.
The nationalism often results another racism. The nationalisation of the economy brings the conflict with non-national africans and Fanon argues that from nationalism -> ultra nationalism -> chauvinism -> racism.
And Africans kick out the foreigners from the country.
Tribalism
In the rural area. Bourgeoisie fails to enlighten public. fails to bond them as a whole. He argues that it is easy for people who are in underdeveloped countries, to develop the social consciousness before national consciousness, and it can bring the danger things like tribalism happens.
Religious conflict - Islam vs Catholic
Bourgeoisie focus on its own interest. Do not consider the profit of whole nation——> national bourgeoisie as obstacle. they are opposed to interests of whole Africa.
Fanon was arguing the middle class are selfish, but I didn’t fully agree with this argument. That I thought if the middle class was not thinking about national interests at all, what motivated them to be independent from the colonised country, and why they tried to motivate public with national consciousness idea.
He believed the nationalism itself can not do much
so
the movement from sense of nationalism to political social consciousness is important.
But at the same time he argues that if political, social consciousness comes before the sense of nationalism, it could be dangerous that it can bring the tribalism.
I found it as the limitation of his argument, that he was seeing the nationalism as a necessary evil, but did not pose any alternative options.
Also, he argues that postcolonial nation should not depend on foreign investment or better relations with wealthy countries,
but the mobilising of its “revolutionary capital, which is the people”.
But I question that if the foreign investment and the better relations with wealthy countries can’t have any positive effect on the post-colonial countries. As he argues in the article, that bourgeoisie fails to take the industries into the further level, that the colonised countries remain producing raw material, and unfinished products. But even though with the relations with the wealthy countries, if the bourgeoisie understand the strong point of their national economics, I believe that colonial countries can make a better situation and thrive the true meaning of independence than the time it was colonised.
There are 10 years of difference between two articles. From the first article, he tried to discover the core of self, while in the second article he was trying to discover the core of people and the independence.
I tried to connect two readings together in a sense of nationalism, and post colonialism.
And I came to the conclusion of this.
the identity of black was given by white people, likewise national consciousness were created by colonialism. And that as he wants the new identity other than the blackness to be liberated from it, the middle class brought nationalism to be independent as well.
2nd question is the title of talking point forum of BBC in 2001.
