In reply to Sian Lennox below.This 'critique' of Frantz Fanon lacks depth and misrepresents both his life and his ideas, substituting inflammatory rhetoric for substantive engagement.
Calling Fanon an "absurd idealist" disregards the empirical foundation of his work. His insights into colonialism arose from lived experiences, particularly as a psychiatrist in Algeria, where he observed systemic oppression and its psychological toll. His writings on violence do not glorify it but argue that violence is an inevitable mechanism in the decolonization process. Fanon believed colonisation itself is inherently violent, embedding domination into societal structures. For the colonised, reclaiming agency and dismantling oppression requires direct confrontation with this entrenched violence. He describes violence as a grim necessity rather than a romantic ideal.
The accusation that Fanon avoided conflict or relied on privilege misrepresents his life. Fanon’s service in World War II, his exile for supporting the Algerian FLN, and his prolific writing despite terminal leukemia reflect immense courage and sacrifice. Criticising his upper-class background is irrelevant; revolutionary contributions come from all strata of society.
The claim that Algeria’s revolution holds no significance overlooks its role in anti-colonial resistance. Algeria exemplified the global fight for self-determination and how colonised nations sought liberation. Fanon’s focus on Algeria is less about presenting it as an ideal and more about analyzing colonial dynamics and resistance strategies.
There is no evidence in his work of racism. Whilst we can argue that his work marginalises women, focusing heavily on male revolutionary agency many feminists have engaged with his writings to examine how colonialism intersects with patriarchy, using his analysis to explore the colonisation of women’s minds by patriarchal beliefs. Fanon’s exploration of how colonised peoples internalise the values of the coloniser offers a framework to understand how women, especially in patriarchal societies, are psychologically conditioned to accept oppression based on their sex. Although Fanon himself did not emphasise gender as centrally as race in his analysis, his work remains a powerful tool for feminist critique of the psychological and cultural impacts of colonialism on women.
The sweeping claim about "colonised minds" in the Islamic world is not only xenophobic but misrepresents Fanon’s broader critique of colonialism’s psychological effects. Fanon examined colonisation as a dehumanising force across cultures, avoiding simplistic or essentialist judgments.
Finally, the assertion that the West upholds free speech is absurd. Our minds in the west are colonsied by the way the west frames debate to support colonisation e.g. Israel's apartheid regime committing genocide against the people of Gaza. Cases like Julian Assange how the west seeks to destroy the lives of those who disagree. Criticising Fanon while ignoring such contradictions reflects your selective outrage.
Your dismissal is shallow and fails to engage with Fanon's contributions to revolutionary thought. You claim to be progressive and yet clearly, in all you say, show no evidence of being a progressive.
Ramzy Baroud is a Palestinian-American journalist who is a strong advocate for Palestinian rights and self-determination. Why should he waste his time replying to such a shallow reply to his article. His work highlights the ongoing struggle for justice, human rights, and a just solution to the conflict. Many in the west are not tired of his critique why do you think you can speak for the whole of the west? Outside of the west Israel and the US (plus France, Germany and the UK) are being seen for the imperialist monsters which, to my mind, we are. This genocide has opened my eyes to the nature of the USA's forever wars - there is nothing to choose between Biden and Trump when it comes to this.
Every time a woker uses the word Decolonise, and every time they cite Fanon - an absurd idealist who spouted violence but, like most leftists, couldn't handle actual conflict without crying or leaving his upper class privilege and study for the streets - a million working class people sign up for X and then join Trump and his rightwing allies worldwide. And a hundred people who actually understand the context of colonization laugh until they think, f$$k it, I give up on the Left. They are so simple.
As if Algeria represents any kind of enlightenment. And a racist, sexist person from a century ago matters?
There are no more colonized minds than 99% of Islamic men, then and now.
Go live in the Middle East please. The West is tired of your critique. See if you can write freely there.
In reply to Sian Lennox below.This 'critique' of Frantz Fanon lacks depth and misrepresents both his life and his ideas, substituting inflammatory rhetoric for substantive engagement.
Calling Fanon an "absurd idealist" disregards the empirical foundation of his work. His insights into colonialism arose from lived experiences, particularly as a psychiatrist in Algeria, where he observed systemic oppression and its psychological toll. His writings on violence do not glorify it but argue that violence is an inevitable mechanism in the decolonization process. Fanon believed colonisation itself is inherently violent, embedding domination into societal structures. For the colonised, reclaiming agency and dismantling oppression requires direct confrontation with this entrenched violence. He describes violence as a grim necessity rather than a romantic ideal.
The accusation that Fanon avoided conflict or relied on privilege misrepresents his life. Fanon’s service in World War II, his exile for supporting the Algerian FLN, and his prolific writing despite terminal leukemia reflect immense courage and sacrifice. Criticising his upper-class background is irrelevant; revolutionary contributions come from all strata of society.
The claim that Algeria’s revolution holds no significance overlooks its role in anti-colonial resistance. Algeria exemplified the global fight for self-determination and how colonised nations sought liberation. Fanon’s focus on Algeria is less about presenting it as an ideal and more about analyzing colonial dynamics and resistance strategies.
There is no evidence in his work of racism. Whilst we can argue that his work marginalises women, focusing heavily on male revolutionary agency many feminists have engaged with his writings to examine how colonialism intersects with patriarchy, using his analysis to explore the colonisation of women’s minds by patriarchal beliefs. Fanon’s exploration of how colonised peoples internalise the values of the coloniser offers a framework to understand how women, especially in patriarchal societies, are psychologically conditioned to accept oppression based on their sex. Although Fanon himself did not emphasise gender as centrally as race in his analysis, his work remains a powerful tool for feminist critique of the psychological and cultural impacts of colonialism on women.
The sweeping claim about "colonised minds" in the Islamic world is not only xenophobic but misrepresents Fanon’s broader critique of colonialism’s psychological effects. Fanon examined colonisation as a dehumanising force across cultures, avoiding simplistic or essentialist judgments.
Finally, the assertion that the West upholds free speech is absurd. Our minds in the west are colonsied by the way the west frames debate to support colonisation e.g. Israel's apartheid regime committing genocide against the people of Gaza. Cases like Julian Assange how the west seeks to destroy the lives of those who disagree. Criticising Fanon while ignoring such contradictions reflects your selective outrage.
Your dismissal is shallow and fails to engage with Fanon's contributions to revolutionary thought. You claim to be progressive and yet clearly, in all you say, show no evidence of being a progressive.
Ramzy Baroud is a Palestinian-American journalist who is a strong advocate for Palestinian rights and self-determination. Why should he waste his time replying to such a shallow reply to his article. His work highlights the ongoing struggle for justice, human rights, and a just solution to the conflict. Many in the west are not tired of his critique why do you think you can speak for the whole of the west? Outside of the west Israel and the US (plus France, Germany and the UK) are being seen for the imperialist monsters which, to my mind, we are. This genocide has opened my eyes to the nature of the USA's forever wars - there is nothing to choose between Biden and Trump when it comes to this.
Every time a woker uses the word Decolonise, and every time they cite Fanon - an absurd idealist who spouted violence but, like most leftists, couldn't handle actual conflict without crying or leaving his upper class privilege and study for the streets - a million working class people sign up for X and then join Trump and his rightwing allies worldwide. And a hundred people who actually understand the context of colonization laugh until they think, f$$k it, I give up on the Left. They are so simple.
As if Algeria represents any kind of enlightenment. And a racist, sexist person from a century ago matters?
There are no more colonized minds than 99% of Islamic men, then and now.
Go live in the Middle East please. The West is tired of your critique. See if you can write freely there.