Quote from The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon
Ch. 8 By Way of Conclusion
Fanon begins the last chapter of Black Skin, White Masks with a quote from Marx calling for a new beginning in order to achieve emancipation. This made me think of what the professor mentioned in class about Audre Lorde’s The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House. Fanon calls for a break from the past, from being a “fixed” entity, that is, from being a black man. I think this call to freedom can, actually should, apply to all whose humanity is being denied.
True revolutionaries are not stuck in the past, and do not use “the master’s tools.” Fanon says that the worker comrades he met in Paris knew they were black but did not care about discovering a black past. They were too involved with the present to care too much about the past. What do you think of this? Do you think that we should move past racial identities?
Fanon says, “The discovery that a black civilization existed in the fifteenth century does not earn me a certificate of humanity. (p. 199-200)” In my post about Fanon, I mentioned that I sometimes hear white people laying claim to some European accomplishment in the past as if it were their own. It is as if these people think they have a direct IV-drip from the past, which infuses them with worth, and makes them man par excellence! When I hear craziness like this, I just refuse to play the game. Like Fanon, I will not “sing the past to the detriment of my present and future. (p. 201)”
Fanon goes through a list of things he has not the right nor duty to do (p.203) and says he claims only one right for himself: the right to demand human behavior from the other, and one duty: to never let his decisions renounce his freedom (p. 204).
Can we (and if we can, should we) renounce “race” or “color” while at the same time acknowledge the racialized nature of exploitation? How do we do this without reifying race?
Thanks again Liz for starting the conversation. On the last page, 206, Fanon writes, “Before embarking on a positive voice, freedom needs to make an effort at disalienation.” I think this is in regards to race, which has resulted in alienation. We need to regard ourselves as a human race in order to “create the ideal conditions of existence for a human world” (206).
Exploitation has not always been about race. People exploit one another within their own race all the time. I think the nature of exploitation has a lot to do with power and our desires. However, race and racialization now almost goes hand in hand with power and exploitation.
On a scientific/molecular level, we can renounce race. There is no DNA that says, “he is black, she is white.” But science is a lot of theory too. I mean to say that we cannot let scientific theory have power over our desires, and it cannot solely be relied on to determine what ‘should’ or ‘should not.’
I think we can be self-conscious of a human race, but also self-conscious that human race has a past, present, and future. I’m Japanese, but didn’t attack Pearl Harbor; I’m American, but didn’t bomb HIroshima. But, as a human race, we did that. On page 203, when Fanon talks about duty and rights, “Is it my duty to confront the problem of black truth…?” “I have not the right as a man of color to be preoccupied with ways of trampling on the arrogance of my former master.” It is not his duty, nor his right as a black man to do those things, but it is his freedom as a human to pursue that if he desires.
Back to page 206, it is “through a permanent tension of his freedom, that man can create the ideal conditions of existence for a human world.” Our freedom as humans to move past race and history, and into the future of humankind is the key to revolution and humanity.
As we have already seen from past classes and discussions on Marx , he stressed the importance of the present conditions. This is why he thought religion a distraction and in this current context the past is a distraction as well. Just like the white men that Liz mentioned who like to look to the past and make accounts of their ancestors accomplishments, the black man can not do the same. In doing so he is a “slave to the past”. By trying to find black accomplishments that have occurred in the past in no way is the black man changing his material conditions. The damage has already been done.
Fanon makes it a point to say that he must not blame the present white man for the conditions of his race and at the same time he must no longer look at the members of his race as victims. They must all move forward and see each other as “men”.
As for the final question that Liz presented, I believe is very difficult to answer. I do not know of any way to fix the present conditions of the black man without involving race. In order to move forward we have to address race and not act like it is invisible. as Miwata said, The DNA of everyone is similar and thus race is a social construct, but it is a construct with real world implications that are not invisible.
How I interpreted this chapter Fanon emphasized that the issue among blacks and whites is that they both are prisoners of their past. “Both have to move away from their inhuman voices of their respective ancestors so that a genuine communication can be born” (206). Fanon does not want to be a “black man” just a man. He claims that alienation develops when the black man takes the European culture as a mean to detach himself from his own race; alienation is also a creation of the bourgeois society. For Fanon the Antillean man conceives his life as nothing more than a fight against exploitation, poverty and hunger (199). Fanon is not concerned with making whites feel guilty, not concerned with shouting his hatred towards whites and not concerned with black history. He says “I do not want to sing the past to the detriment of my present and my future.” By partaking in the things Fanon claims he is not concerned with he would prove that the black man is prisoner of his past, color and most importantly a prisoner of racism. Fanon believes he over all has one duty which is to never let his decisions renounce his freedom. Overall from what I perceive whites and blacks must move away from the foundations their ancestors have left and their history in order for each side to form a “genuine communication”
It actually made me giggle when Liz mentioned how white people “think they have a direct IV drip from the past which infuses them with worth” because I think she actually quite correct. I too have seen this sense of righteousness and superiority among the white race where they feel like they are the ones to thank for European accomplishments. They have this sense of pride which is too much too handle and is simply annoying when they aren’t the ones who have made the accomplishments they tend to claim. Pertaining to Liz’s mention of the fact that black individuals don’t care to much of the past because they are too involved in the present, I think this occurs when black individuals want to detach themselves from the idea of racism and oppression that is attached to their past, their history. Therefore they are more concerned with “achieving a white existence”, meaning that they are concerned with pursuing their desires. Like Fanon said a black man can achieve anything he wants to the only thing he “lacks is opportunities”. Possibly these black men in Paris are more worried with overcoming this lack.
As Mitsue mentioned I also believe that exploitation has not always been about race. But I do believe it has partaken as an important factor in the formation of the existence of exploitation. Exploitation occurs when one race wants to exercise power over another race and as fanon says a “civilization” that considers itself superior to another. I find it rather interesting how in evolution everyone evolved to a human from an ape, there were no blacks, no whites, there was no distinction among race or color because we were all apes with the same DNA. It’s sad to see that now things are solely based on color, on ethnicities, about being superior or inferior when in essence we are all the same inside. As Katherine says race is a social construct with implications that are not invisible. Oppression, exploitation, poverty, and hunger are connotations that go hand in hand with race and are the implications we can see.
Thank you all for such thoughtful comments. I hope you’re all doing okay post-hurricane.
I agree with Mitsue that exploitation has not always been about race, and I think it is worth mentioning that race wasn’t always around, and its definitions and boundaries have been and still are shifting. Plus I think different kinds? of exploitation tends to be interrelated. Mitsue said that we can be self-conscious of a human race, but also self-conscious that human race has a past, present, and future. I think it is up to us how much of the past we want to include in our present and future. The tension of freedom and facticity is played out every day of our lives in the choices we make, in who others think we are, and how we choose to respond to how the world treats us.
Kimberly and Katherine also mentioned the difficulty in dealing with exploitation without involving race. It’s a really frustrating, confusing thing because as Katherine said, race is a social construct, but with real world implications.
ps
Kimberly, I’m glad you thought that IV-drip thing was funny. The whole notion of it is absurd, isn’t it?
Hi guys, sorry for chiming in kind of late. The power / Internet have been really unreliable lately. I’m currently mooching Internet and power in a cafe trying to catch up on work and schoolwork!
Whether or not we think we should move past racial identities, I think that it’d be ideal to move past racial identities, but there’s so much pride placed in identifying with a certain race or a certain ethnicity now that to move past that would be a little offensive to some. And there’s just no way that society can look past your racial identity. There are so many times, and I’m sure that a lot of people can agree and sympathize – where the first time I meet someone, they’ll instantly ask me “what” I am. As if “what” is an adequate word to represent racial identities. Racial identities are necessary, as unfortunate as it may be – for people to read you, for people to get a sense of who you are and where you come from. For us to move past that would be an amazing step for humanity, but I just don’t see that happening anytime soon in the future.
What do you guys think? I feel like this is more of a modern interpretation or a more recent example of what Fanon is trying to touch upon, because I’m sure that back then, diversity wasn’t as prevalent.
Kristen, I can relate to being asked about ‘what’ I am. I think the other way to size people up in terms of their ‘racial identity’ is by asking them apropos of nothing, where they’re (really) from. I really hate that!
Kristen and Liz, I can def. relate to what you girls are saying. When first meeting someone it’s almost automatic that I get asked “so what are you.” And as Kristen stated “what” is not an appropriate manner of addressing racial identities, therefore
I am one of those individuals that would sarcastically answer “well I am human can’t you see” or “I’m a girl” –____– But when I respond “I am American”, forget about it; that annoying response “No, what realllllly are you” always follows my response. I am definitley not denying my heritage or ethnicity, but what is it that causes individuals to be so concerned about “what” someone really is? We are all humans, individuals, why must race be so prevalent in a conversation you may be having with a complete stranger. Is it not possible to have a conversation with someone as two humans, not as two individuals with a particular ethnicity, race, etc….is it really that important to know when having a simple conversation like “what is your favorite color? what food do you like? Yet it’s one of the first things people ask…. I feel like Im ranting, but I certainly find this situation rather frustrating.
Anyways Happy Sunday ladies :]
Hi guys, I thought I’d join in on this discussion. I really like that you guys took Fanon’s work and directly applied it to everyday occurrences. I can relate to almost everything you ladies mentioned. Its sad to see this whole “white supremacy” thing going on and spreading throughout western cultures as ignorance towards those who are unlike them. It doesn’t just stop at white supremacy, it has grown into this whole western superiority complex. Its obvious to pick an American out of pack of tourists in foreign countries. Western “righteousness” has kind of grown into its own kind of subliminal culture that institutions go a long with.
I’ll admit that when I first started reading Fanon, I sort of laughed and found it hateful. And then I realized that these issues haven’t disappeared from society today and in fact are widely accepted and seen as normal.
Ps. I was checking out the rest of your blog and I must say you guys write up some great discussions. 😀
First, I think this is a really thoughtful post that draws out the complications really well!
I think some people take this aspect of Fanon’s theory a little too far and try to claim that they don’t see race or that we live in a post-racial society. I think that ignores the role of ideology, ignores the role historic racism plays in current circumstances, and just leads to further racism that is even more difficult to have a social discourse about.
I don’t think that is what Fanon is trying to do, but I do think I think knowledge of the past is important. I think it is somewhat required for understanding present systems of power and finding ways to actually break out of them. I think it’s possible and helpful to draw on the knowledge and experience of others, but be able to think beyond and outside of it.