1. 13083915 WordCount:1646
1
Is social change best achieved through rational debate or violent struggle?
The notion of social change has been disputed, due to the alternate means in achieving it,
explored by Political theorists. Theorists such as Marx and Fanon advocate violent struggle as
the means to achieve social change. Whilst others dispute such a stance, believing that social
change is attained through rational debate and critical thought (Locke). This commentary will
concentrate on Franz Fanon’s texts, (Black Skins White Mask and The Wretched of the Earth)
to elaborate why violent struggle is the best means as it is a necessity to achieve social change,
which Fanon defines as ‘decolonisation’. I will discuss with accordance to Immanuel Kant’s
texts (What is enlightenment and Perpetual Peace) in order to maintain the support of violent
struggle by identifying the limitations of rational debate. Firstly I will identify Kant’s
restricting philosophy regarding history, deeming Fanons violent struggle as a necessity.
Secondly, I will detail how violence is crucial to counter the dominant and overt power relations
which subjugate some individuals, thus highlighting why violence is required. Thirdly I will
identify the aftermath and the liability of violent struggle as opposed to rational debate. The
preponderant argument this commentary will convey is Fanon’s philosophy of violent struggle
as crucial in facilitating social change due to the repressive agents and structural inequality
within society.
Kant identifies the process of social change through an individual’s own self, ‘man's emergence
from his self-imposed nonage’ is recognised as enlightenment. Kant’s cosmopolitan ideology
states such reform is inevitable for it is our human duty to mature and it is within our shared
history to progress morally. Therefore it is not the dilemma of social progress not happening
but rather how. Kant’s self-imposed means entails ‘cultivating one’s mind’ and being free from
those in society that supervise (Kant, 1784). In order to attain enlightenment Kant argues there
needs to be freedom to practice private reasoning. This is the process of private deliberation
2. 13083915 WordCount:1646
2
before an utterance to the public, situating the individual in history whilst critiquing their
present and oneself. It is from this liberty of the mind that allows intellectual history,
consequently political amendments such as ‘policies in government’ (Kant, 1784).
Kant’s cosmopolitan philosophy entails me to ask, how can one think freely with reason in the
occurrence that the individual lacks knowledge on their history or a man made one? Also
‘Should all of these subjects be considered to reside in a state of guilty immaturity?’ (Dussel,
1993:68). Fanon details the process of colonisation as ‘violence in its natural state’ (Fanon,
1963, 61). This was not just an exploitation of native land but the demonization and destruction
the native’s livelihood, customs and traditions. This rid the native of their history, producing
psychological suffering. Fanon would deem Kant’s means of social change as inadequate for
all especially for the colonised man. Kant’s Eurocentric argument deems social change through
rationality, limiting applicability to all contexts/ circumstances. For we can highlight the
inability for the colonised man to freely think and reason due to his lack of known history, for
his narrative is and was created by ‘white power’ thus ‘experiencing his being through others’.
This demonstrates the necessity of violence in order to allow a ‘cleansing force’ (1961:94).
Fanon deems such violence will allow a solution to one’s unknown history by allowing a space
(geographically and psychologically) to create a new history, such as new customs and
traditions. In the end producing a new human society.
The ‘self-imposed immaturity’ and ‘benevolent guardians’ that Kant views as agents
responsible in restricting enlightenment, creates a reductionist philosophy regarding power
relations (Kant, 1784). This portrays social change as limited to the accumulation of
knowledge; therefore it disregards anything other than mental liberation. Reducing social
change to ones intellect and ability to reason independently neglects features of society that
overtly prevent change. This covert means of maintaining immaturity and the ‘fondness’ of
3. 13083915 WordCount:1646
3
being so that Kant pronounces, deems the power relations within society as not oppressive thus
disregarding hegemony in society. This is why Kant’s social change philosophy is not suitable
for settings where physical agents are known; therefore limiting rational means in certain
postmodern societies who strive to obtain social change (Kant, 1784).
Fanon details education as an agent of resistance producing discourse of ‘pure violence’,
indicating an agreement with Kant’s agents of mental resistance preventing social change
(1961:4). Though In addition, Fanon details power dynamics in society which are covert and
physical in preventing social change. ‘The last can be the first only after a murderous and
decisive confrontation between the two protagonists’; Fanon’s positioning through
terminology identifies the unequal power relations within society (Fanon, 1961:3). Here we
can identify the overt division of society as opposed to the insensible Kantian one. Fanons
‘Manichean’ description of the colonial world which is ‘cut in two’ demonstrates the hegemony
of the colonizers and the necessity of violence to rid them. This binary opposition resonates
with Edward Said’s Orientalism, which demonstrates the colonised sector as ‘the other’ (Said,
1978:2). This Manichean world reveals the need for violence for there is no ‘friendly
understanding’ or mutual recognition. ‘The agent does not alleviate oppression or mask
domination. He displays and demonstrates them with the clear conscience of the law enforcer,
and brings violence into the homes and minds of the colonized subjects’ (Fanon, 1961:4). The
violence by the ‘settlers’ against the ‘natives’ are existent in everyday life. The direct
intervention by the colonizers requires violent struggle as retaliation, for Fanon states the
colonised were ‘up against something irrational’ (Fanon, 1952, 89). This apparent way of
distinguishing the colonizers and natives can be seen to weaken rationality between the two
lacking mutual understanding. Fanon details this through the term ‘colour prejudice’, which he
believes has a propensity for violence, evident by the colonizers (Fanon, 1951:89). In the
4. 13083915 WordCount:1646
4
instance that the colonised man does obtain knowledge and thus reason, how can he triumph
against agents that use violence from their unreasoned prejudice?
To exemplify how Kant’s reasoning is inadequate in the postmodern world we can detail the
Black lives Matter movement of 2013. The violent agent of the police brutality against ‘African
American males between 15 and 34’ (The Guardian,2015). This could be due to racism
resonating with ‘colour prejudice’. The riots from the movement can be particularised as an
‘impassioned claim by the colonised that their world is fundamentally different’ (Fanon,
1961:6). The use of rational rebate in this case would not have been sufficient in allowing the
policeman to understand his wrong doings and his privilege. One could argue this is due to the
binary opposition which portrays the policeman in a ‘civilised’ manner and the black man as
‘uncivilised’ diminishing the notion of wrong doings (Said,1978:24).
Fanon deems violent struggle as essential to bring about authentic ‘decolonisation’, replicating
colonialism ‘characterised by violence’ (Fanon, 1961:36). Fanons philosophy of violent
struggle to allow decolonisation can be criticised on its lack of prescriptive information,
especially on the aftermath of violence. Fanon briefly discusses this, the fight against ‘poverty,
illiteracy and underdevelopment’, indicating at a ‘social revolution’ (Jean-Marie, 2007: 79).
Rather than the end of utopian society, decolonisation demonstrates a continuous struggle. One
must ask, is this violent means of attaining social destruction worth it if the end is weak nation
or an uncertain nation.
Kant would disapprove of ‘decolonisation’ as an end, due to national issues not leading to a
republican state. Kant’s republican allows freedom of the individual whilst maintain a social
contract which allows benefits such as freedom of reason. This is shown through practicing a
kingdom of ends, entailing society treats its members as ends rather than means. This contract
is not by force rather by freedom to choose. In order to obtain such a state Kant puts forth a
5. 13083915 WordCount:1646
5
prescriptive programme to government officials who already obtain an enlightened mentality.
For example ‘no secret treaty of peace shall be held valid in which there is tacitly reserved
matter for a future war’ (Kant, 1798). Such a plan for peace diminishes the need of nation
building; we can appreciate Kant’s enlightenment maintaining the order of the state though
allowing freedom to reason thus changing its prejudices.
However, Fanon will refute the European ideology that a republic emphasises, as it is maintains
the domination and subordination of the colonised people. Further highlighting why Fanon was
strongly advocating a violent revolution as the colonised people will ‘have nothing to lose and
everything to gain’ (Fanon, 1961:61). The lumpenproletariats are the individuals who Fanon is
especially speaking on. It is those who are already deprived of welfare which Fanon
exemplifies through the life of the maid, who is ‘paid two pounds a month’. Despite the welfare
one may attain in a republican state, Fanon dismisses it for it would simply be reformation of
the colonial sector with Native elites, maintaining power inequality. Fanon would rather the
underdeveloped countries maintain national struggle in order to ‘find their own particular
values methods and styles’ rather than a European style rule (Fanon, 1961:98).
In general this commentary has identified the means of social change through rationality,
demonstrated through Kant’s enlightenment, though this can only be done in specific settings
and people. Kant’s emphasis on individualism and freedom from private reasoning permitting
social change disregards hegemonic positions. These limitations of Kant’s cosmopolitan
philosophy have portrayed violent struggle as more favourably, especially for those within the
restrictions of rationality. Fanon understands such limitations from the way he portrays
decolonisation as a necessity. Fanon deems the best social change is the one where the end is
a ‘cleansing force’ which violent actions do competently (Fanon, 1961:93). Nevertheless, it
would be unrealistic to deem the aftermath of violence as the easiest means of social change
6. 13083915 WordCount:1646
6
due to the continuous struggle. Following this we must acknowledge the uncertainty in which
Fanons violent struggle ends with, making it an unpredictable means of reform as well as a
necessary one.
Bibliography
7. 13083915 WordCount:1646
7
Dussel, E. (1993). Eurocentrism and Modernity (Introduction to the Frankfurt Lectures). The
Postmodernism Debate in Latin America. 20 (3), 65-76.
Edward, S (1978) Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. Reprinted with a new
Afterword 1995. New York et al.: Penguin, Introduction.
Fanon, F. (1952) Black skin, white masks. New ed. edn. London: Pluto Press.
Fanon, F. (1961) The wretched of the earth. London: Penguin.
Jean-Marie, V (2007). Fanon: Collective Ethics and Humanism. New York: Peter Lang
Publishing. 1-150.
Kant, I. (1784) An answer to the question: What is enlightenment?. Cambridge. Cambridge
University Press
The Guardian. (2015). Young black men killed by US police at highest rate in year of 1,134
deaths. Available: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/31/the-counted-police-
killings-2015-young-black-men. Last accessed 21 April 2016.
