The Age of Fanon, 1
By Bhakti Shringarpure. This July, we commemorate the centenary of Frantz Fanon with writings and podcasts that explicitly connect Fanon's life and writings to Palestine.
We are all Fanonian now.
Twenty-one months into an epoch this obstinately colonial and this driven by violent hatred towards Palestinians has made it clear that only Frantz Fanon’s words on violence make sense today.
Fanon would have been 100 years old this year, a cause for somber commemorations at a time when his words feel prophetic and empowering, yet devastating at the same time.
Born in Martinique on July 20, 1925, Frantz Fanon was a psychiatrist whose work engaged with the effects of colonialism upon the colonized. During his time, as the head of Blida-Joinville psychiatric hospital in Algeria, he became an active member of the Algerian struggle for independence against French colonialism, traveled all over the world as a representative of the provisional government of Algeria and, all the while, remained a prolific writer with a large output of scholarship, journalism, reflections, manifestos and essays about colonialism, decolonization, revolution, resistance, race and psychiatry.
His life was cut short when he was only 36 years old. In 1961, as Fanon lay on his deathbed suffering from leukemia, he wrote a set of essays that would become his most controversial book, titled Les Damnés de la Terre. Literally translated as the “damned” of the earth, it has come to be called The Wretched of the Earth in English. But I prefer “damned,” which has always carried the power of a vituperative, cursing outburst of the colonized being condemned to hellish punishment. It is much stronger than the subjugated and limp despair of the term “wretched.”
In particular, it is Fanon’s first chapter, “De la violence” (On violence) that has led to debate and handwringing since the moment of its publication 64 years ago. The chapter first unpacks the core violence of a settler colony. Fanon makes no bones about the totalizing violence of colonialism, whether enacted upon the bodies of the colonized, upon the spaces of the colonized, or upon the culture of the colonized. More importantly, Fanon claims that the physical, psychic, spiritual and political liberation of the colonized subject can only happen through violent means.
Fanon explains how settler colonialism is born and sustained: through violence. The colony is settled and occupied through violence; colonial governance is administered through violence; and colonial power is sustained through violence that seeps into every single aspect of the life of the colonized “native.” Fanon writes that in the “capitalist countries” in Europe or North America, there are ways in which the hierarchy between the ruler and the ruled, the exploiter and the exploited, or the governing class and the governed is obscured as “a multitude of moral teachers, counselors and ‘bewilderers’ separate the exploited from those in power.”1
But this is not the case in the colony where, “on the contrary, the policeman and the soldier, by their immediate presence and their frequent and direct action maintain contact with the native and advise him by means of rifle butts and napalm not to budge. It is obvious here that the agents of government speak the language of pure force. The intermediary does not lighten the oppression, nor seek to hide the domination…”
Over six decades later, Fanon’s words can be applied directly to Israel’s colonization and occupation of Palestine, and their enduring practice of apartheid. Israel is a settler colonial entity founded on the erasure of Palestinian people, spaces and culture, and it is sustained entirely through “brute force,” which is its core political structure. Israel is a heavily militarized society with forced conscription and absurdly high rates of incarceration of Palestinians. Torture during interrogation is legal in Israel, and child detention is rampant. There is no realm of existence for the colonized Palestinian that is untouched by Israeli brute force. Indeed, as Fanon says, there is no lightening of the oppression nor any desire to hide it.
Mohammed El-Kurd brings Fanon’s thinking into Palestine today with clarity: “Our world is built by the settler, for the settler…The settler holds the gavel, the baton, and boasts a divine decree. The settler controls our groundwater, seas, and rain, and bills us for them, even criminalizes our thirst. After drawing the borders, he now dominates the borders. He controls our roads and what passes through then. He can, and does, clog the arteries of our nation.”2
But Fanon’s already explosive truth-telling becomes controversial because of his clear-eyed assertion that the colonized can only counter, resist and achieve decolonization through violent means. This idea has provoked much anxiety in the last six decades. Even more scandalous has been Fanon’s statement that violence becomes a “cleansing force.” The exact sentence is, “At the level of individuals, violence is a cleansing force. It frees the native from his inferiority complex and from his despair and inaction; it makes him fearless and restores his self-respect.” Furthermore, the violence channeled into decolonization fundamentally alters the colonized and brings forth a new language, new men and new humanity into existence.
Fanon’s ideas about the emergence of new, liberated, awakened and freed humans born of the cleansing force of violence are not casual, throwaway observations. They emerge out of a long, structured argument that illustrates the extent to which colonial violence has completely taken over the life of the colonized. And that after years and years of knowing only brutality, and grasping fundamentally that peaceful and diplomatic solutions have yielded neither liberation nor refuge from violence, the colonized finally channel their repressed fury into violent resistance. Fanon’s years as a psychiatrist in Blida, brought him face to face with the Algerians who were tortured and brutalized by the French, and gave him insight into what he calls their “muscular” fantasies of wresting back power from the colonizer.
Importantly, Fanon proves over and over that it is, first and foremost, the colonizer that is “the bringer of violence into the home and into the mind of the native” - that the native colonized has not been exposed to any other expression of power. To gain power, to feel powerful, violence becomes the only way. It has been made to become the only way.
After the Hamas attacks of October 7th, governments, institutions, and the media have insisted on complete amnesia. Facts and truth have been twisted and gutted so much that the concept of history itself has become something of a hallucination. Feigning innocence and victimization, and behaving as if the Hamas attacks lacked any historical context is the norm.
Demanding why Palestinians don’t adhere to non-violent resistance even as they are massacred on an hourly basis is the pinnacle of good rhetoric these days. Not only is this a ridiculous question given the powerful and impactful anti-apartheid Boycott, Divest, Sanction (BDS) movement that is fundamentally peaceful, but it is a ridiculous question because it is a delusional framing of non-violent resistance.
Leaders like Gandhi and MLK certainly evoked non-violent action to organize strikes, boycotts and marches, and to inspire civil disobedience to unify the masses. But the colonizers and white supremacists never stopped pulling out their guns, whips, batons and bombs, and despite small sporadic victories, there is no resounding proof that non-violence has actually worked as a singular ideology or movement. Non-violent means have always had to work alongside violent ones, and non-violent activists will almost always be met with violence.
Stokely Carmichael said that, “in order for nonviolence to work, your opponent must have a conscience.” I think if it has not been clear for the past hundred years, it is pretty clear today that neither Israel nor the United States nor Europe will ever grow a conscience. They never have, they never will. Arundhati Roy has rightly asked why non-violence is preached to individuals, but not to the state. As nation-states deploy their sovereign powers to obliterate an entire population while brandishing a fake interest in non-violence, Fanon’s declarations about violence become crystal clear.
The question, “Do you condemn Hamas?” has also become a refrain for any commentator deemed pro-Palestinian. The violent means of resisting Israeli occupation deployed by Hamas have to be condemned over and over so that the commentator could maybe attempt to condemn Israel’s genocidal war, which is much older and has been at least a million times more violent and than any damage Hamas has caused. Perhaps some people sincerely did condemn Hamas at the start of it all, but today, two years later, every single aspect of these theatrics has been unmasked. For a while, there was no mainstream consent to actually engage with, or even marvel, at Hamas’ strategic, secret planning over the years, the execution of the attacks, the actions of the militants, or the broadcasted clip of a Yahya Sinwar, mid-combat, minutes before his death.
Recently, Irish rappers Kneecap and English punk rocker Bob Vylan chanted “Death, death to the IDF.” Governments, institutions and the media were quick to condemn and censor them. The police are investigating and the musicians are being dropped from various festivals.
El-Kurd articulates this hypocrisy best when he writes about how the “semantic violence” of words is somehow made to “dwarf” decades of systemic and material violence enacted against Palestinians by Israelis. Language is a bigger violence than actual violence. “Using the wrong words has the magical ability to make objects disappear; the boots, bullets, batons, and bruises all become invisible if you say the wrong words, in jest or in fury.”
But at that the concert, the crowds got it. Everyone gets it. These musicians’ chants of fury finally gave consent to express two years of pent-up anger and powerlessness. They were fantasies of hatred towards a brutal, utterly savage genocidal Israeli army. Fanon writes that the dreams of the native “are always of muscular prowess; his dreams are of action and of aggression.” And these were curses articulated only in words, no actual weapons came into play.
It has taken so long, but the consent to express the seething violence inside is now here. It has been unleashed. Because finally, we all understand what Fanon meant.
We are all Fanonian now.
Love and solidarity❤️🔥
Bhakti Shringarpure
The Age of Fanon series by the Radical Books Collective commemorates the centenary of Frantz Fanon with essays and podcasts that explicitly connect his life and writings to Palestine.
Forthcoming this July!
An interview with Frantz and Josie Fanon’s son Olivier Fanon where he speaks about growing up in Algeria with the proud weight of his father’s legacy and educates us about the equally prolific and understudied life of his mother, Josie.
An essay unpacking recent works that attempt to aestheticize Fanon and diminish his wife Josie Fanon (Adam Shatz and Jean-Claude Barny) in a concerted attempt to de-radicalize his ideas and strategically place Fanon into the folds of zionism.
An interview with filmmaker Hassane Mezine whose documentary Fanon Hier, Aujourd’hui remains a potent exploration of Fanon’s life and the relevance of his ideas today.
Upgrade to paid if possible so we can continue to do this work.
Constance Farrington’s translation of this chapter is my preferred version and is available online: http://hyle.mobi/Reading_Groups/Concerning%20Violence,%20Frantz%20Fanon/
Perfect Victims: And the Politics of Appeal by Mohammed el-Kurd, 2025, Haymarket Books. Buy here: https://www.haymarketbooks.org/books/2499-perfect-victims
I fear your analysis, and conclusions, are right. I fear it because the thought that one can only cleanse past violence with more violence is perhaps a death sentence for the world itself . There is no certainty that the necessary violence of the “Good” will overcome or rectify the horrors inflicted upon them …….. Palestine is the very example of this. To be Right does not mean that the Wrong will be defeated, but it does give the authority to fight fire with fire instead of continuing to sacrifice the doves of peace.
I agree with you. I've always been for non-violence but there comes a point when people are driven to violence because everything else has failed and I think we have reached it. I believe the suppression of peaceful protest will unleash it everywhere, now that it is clear to everyone that those decades where we believed America and UK and Europe were the 'good guys', despite all the evidence to the contrary, was a delusion. It's clear out leaders don't care about the Palestinians, but it's also clear they don't care about us or what we think. But there will be payback and they know it, or if they don't they soon will. I very much hope the UN do dismantle the Security Council and let the colonised nations have a chance to decide these issues. It's time.