Black Radical Tradition

The black radical tradition has been heavily influenced by the work of Frantz Fanon and Aime Cesaire. What I find most compelling is the different ways in which the main ideas of these post-colonial theorists have been articulated by the leaders of the black radical tradition in the mid to late 21^st century in America.

In ‘Black Skins White Masks’ Fanon makes a case for the disintegration of identity markers. He wishes to not be seen as merely a black body, with all the burdens and expectations that come with such a label. This is inherently opposed to Cesaire’s propagation of the idea of Negritude – in which he champions blackness as something that is different from whiteness, but turns the usual denigration on its head in favour of exalting blackness, and what black people offer to the world. In Fanon’s view, this is not revolutionary as it merely relies on the same metric that has been used to colonize, enslave and oppress black people. For Fanon, the question is whether blackness can exist outside of being recognized in relation with, and in opposition to whiteness. To him, ‘man is a yes’ and that means embracing all the limitless potential that lies at the feet of humanity once these dualities are done away with. In my understanding, this conflict has been in some ways the central theme of this course on decolonization. It is evident that the formal independence of colonized states and the abolition of slavery did not put an end to oppression, both in tangible, material terms but also in psychological terms. The question that then remains is ‘where do we go from here?’

Black radical thinkers in the US attempted to answer this question through various lenses, of which one of the most, if not the most significant to me was the idea of intersectionality as conceived by black feminists, and the understanding that oppression lies across multiple axes. I think of intersectionality as an extension of Cesaire’s ideas, as it propagates the idea of fighting oppression based on our identities – black, female etc. Audre Lorde’s reflections on the idea of difference were perhaps the most compelling, as she articulated on the need for collective action while emphasizing the need for difference as an articulation of unity. I find Audre Lord to be an almost perfect amalgamation of Fanon and Cesaire, and therefore she offers perhaps the most complete and balanced notion of decoloniality. Her insistence on the using differences as a strength rather than a weakness harken back to Cesaire and his dream of how there was “room for everyone at the rendezvous of victory.” On the other hand, she insists on the avoidance of using colonial tools to build an anti-colonial movement, and in this she mirrors Fanon who believed that the movement was brought down by its hyper-focus on the same divisive tactics used by the colonizers. Lorde firmly argues against homogeneity, but also believes that the answer to it is not as simple as heterogeneity. It is not a question of answering duality with another duality. The answer to the supremacy of whiteness cannot be an articulation of the supremacy of blackness. The answer lies in plurality, and in expanding the idea of what it means to be human and what it means to occupy a part of this world. It is to argue against the tools of oppression and build a movement that emancipates all rather than just a few.

In the contemporary world bogged down with identity politics and a poor imitation of intersectionality, I believe that an amalgamation of the ideas of Fanon and Cesaire, as articulated by Lorde in her own unique way are what we need. To me personally, it has been difficult finding a place in the seemingly endless spectrum of leftist politics and belief, with an internal conflict regarding these very ideas, and so to find an articulation of these concerns in the writings of two black men from former French colonies and a black American woman from North America, spanning across decades, has been comforting, and also empowering. These struggles are real and I fear that the only solutions being advanced today are too extreme or not extreme enough. There seems to be a poor understanding of the historical root of these problems and a lack of exposure to the writings and ideas of radical thinkers who came before us. Perhaps we have been too preoccupied in the quest for new ideas and solutions. The problems have unfortunately not changed in a significant manner. There are no new ideas – only new articulations, and so it is imperative to study what has been written and discussed before if we are to make any significant strides forward in the fight against all systems of oppression. In the words of Fanon: “I want the world to recognize, with me, the open door of every consciousness,” and to make of me always a man who questions!”