In the first chapter of the Fanon book, the author argues that the process of decolonization is inherently violent. He is often criticized for this statement. Do you agree or disagree with Fanon? Why? Is it possible for a colonized country to gain independence without resorting to violence? As we consider the 4th of July, does our own American experience in gaining independence from the British provide any insight into this question? In what way?
This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.
I completely agree with Fanon for several reasons. Fanon takes the African and Arab countries for a reason as the process of colonization is there visible in its most brutal form. The process of decolonization must be inherently violent as the process of colonization was never peaceful and civilized.
At first, as Fanon describes, the colonists are always the whites, the Europeans, “the civilized and the enlightened”. The ones who are being colonized are always those whose skin is darker than the colonists, “the barbarians, the heathens and the ones who do not behave in a civilized manner”. As the colonized or how Fanon calls them natives are predestined to be ruled over and controlled by foreigners, the colonists can use force and have used both force and violence to submit the natives to foreign control. So as the colonists haven’t come in a mission of spreading tolerance and peace towards the natives, they will not leave while the natives are tolerant to their cruelty. The process of decolonization is by its inner content a violent and stressful process of liberation from the oppressors....
This is only a preview of the solution. Please use the purchase button to see the entire solution