Research Paper Example: Roles of Violence and Non-violence in Revolutions

In his multiple texts including The Wretched of the Earth and Toward The African Revolution, Fanon discusses the multiple roles of violence in social revolutions. By assessing  colonialism and its effect on the colonized and their behaviours, Fanon showcases that through violence the colonized free themselves from ties of colonial society, become nationalistic and regain their cultural pride. On the other hand in Hind Swaraj, Mahatma Gandhi advocates for a non-violent and passive form of resistance rooted in self-sacrifice, which he believes is the superior, morally just and most effective form of resistance in attempt to achieve home rule. Analysis of the philosophers’ views and their justifications attributes the differences between them to religion, spirituality and morals in regards to violence.

For the colonized, violence is the only plausible resistance to colonial society. Fanon claims that “In the colonies, the official, legitimate agent, the spokesperson for the colonizer and the regime of oppression, is the police officer or the soldier.” These institutions of brutal force are how the colonists and their systems represent themselves to the colonized. As a result, the colonized are conditioned to associating colonization with these institutions and this forms a direct correlation between colonialism and violence. Through continuous mass-killings and displays of violence, it becomes evident that violence is the only counteraction to a society whose representation and communication tactic is brute force. As soldiers and  police exert force and utilize inhuman practices to maintain the established systems of colonization, aggression and anger builds up in the colonized. 

The maltreatment from the colonists and their insistence on the superiority of not only their systems but their persons, coupled with their relentless coercion of colonial culture on the colonized cause on the one hand, inferiority complexes and on the other, anger that fuels the commencement of revolutions. The colonist knows that brutality and violence are forces not powerful enough to suppress the colonized; it is essential that they make the colonized envious of not only the economic and social stance of the colonizer, but his being. Thus in their desperation to keep the colonized under foot, they target their minds. The colonist tells the colonized that their systems of government are inferior, that their people are unbecoming, their ways of life savage and primitive. They tell the children of the colonized that their food, clothing and culture are to be discarded. The colonist ceases to recognize the colonized as human and “in his endeavors at description and find the right word, the colonists refers constantly to the bestiary”. In cases, the attempts of the colonists are successful and the colonized begin to adopt western ways of living; they look up to the colonists and the colonists applaud and praise them. And thus a class of colonized that Fanon refers to as ‘the civilized colonized’ emerges. They are aware of the cruelty of colonialism but they have been attending the colonists’ sermons, they have been educated in their schools, they have been envious of the colonists and have therefore decided to participate in colonial society. They see the cruelty of the colonists toward their people however, “the colonized intellectual has invested his aggression in his barely veiled wish to be assimilated to the colonizer's world.”They become the aide to the colonists. The anger and aggression of those who do not suffer the fate of the civilized colonized fuels change, and “after years of unreality, after wallowing in the most extraordinary phantasms, the colonised subject, machine gun at the ready, finally confronts the only force which challenges his very being: colonialism”. 

Violence is the tool by which the colonized make demands, remove themselves from colonial society and by which they regain their unity, comradery, and national pride. Once the restless spirit has been aroused in the colonized, they begin to run out of patience, they gradually commence with the processes of reclaiming their nation; “What they demand is not the status of the colonist, but his place…There is no question for them of competing with the colonist. They want to take his place”. They recruit the masses, mobilize forces and reclaim their identities to empower their people and reinstill in them the national and cultural pride that had been repressed by colonialism. Fanon elaborates that “At the individual level, violence is a cleansing force. It rids the colonized of their inferiority complex, of their passive and despairing attitude”. They revive the spirit of camaraderie and brotherhood that was broken by colonizers in an attempt to conquer and divide their people through violence. The colonized form nationalist groups dedicated to the cause. Through violent initiations, members of these groups uproot themselves from colonial society and cut all ties by committing murders and destructions. They make themselves enemies of the colonial state and ensure no easy re-entrance into colonial society. Through this their lives are ultimately dedicated to the repossession of their country. These nationalists form violent attacks on the colonists because they have learnt that “ life can only materialize from the rotting cadaver of the colonist”(99). 

Conversely, Mahatma Gandhi is of the opinion that violence has little to no beneficial role in revolutions. Whilst Fanon expresses that the only solution is to speak to the colonist in a language they understand: violence; Gandhi thinks utilizing the methods of the oppressors to retaliate or make demands renders you no better than the oppressor themselves. That by using force on the colonizer, the colonized would coerce him to do what he doesn’t want and therefore it would be justified when the colonizer reliates with force on the colonized: “To use brute force, to use gunpowder is contrary to passive resistance, for it means that we want our opponent to do by force that which we desire but he does not. And, if such a use of force is justifiable, surely he is entitled to do likewise by us”. He believes that “those who hold the sword will perish by the sword”.

Gandhi believes that passive resistance or ‘soul force’ is the morally  just form of resistance. He defines it as “a method of securing rights by personal suffering; it is the reverse of resistance by arms”. With this method, Gandhi implores the citizens and colonized to resist by way of  disobeying the law of the law-giver rather than to commit violent acts toward the law-giver. Gandhi believes that soul force is  attainable to all people and that they must sacrifice in order to escape the shackles of colonization and start revolutions. One who is willing to serve their nation must be prepared to sacrifice because “those who want to become passive resisters for the service of the country have to observe perfect chastity, adopt poverty, follow truth, and cultivate fearlessness”. Self sacrifice is an essential part of employing passive resistance through soul force and it is superior to the sacrifice of others. 

Passive resistance is not only morally just, it is also efficient. In using non-violent ways of protest, Gandhi believes that pathways of communication open as a result. Soul force and sacrifice are essential to a nation that wants to achieve hind swaraj or ‘home rule’ because hind swaraj in its true form  “is possible only where passive resistance is the guiding force of the people. Any other rule is foreign rule”. Passive resistance is also more efficient because it changes the nature of a revolution into a negotiation between two equals: the colonizer and the colonized. However, the condition for achieving this state of equality is that the colonized obtain manpower. Gandhi states that “a petition from a slave is a symbol of his slavery” whereas  “[a] petition backed by force is a petition from an equal…”. The status of equality then established between the colonizer and the colonized allows for discussion and negotiation between the two parties; which are methods more effective and efficient than violence.

The contrasts between the views of Fanon and Gandhi are clear and the differences vast. It is undebatable that they are almost at opposite ends of the spectrum. What is up for debate however, are the possible causes behind the opposing views of these philosophers whose life circumstances and backgrounds should implore them to have similar views. In reading Hind Swaraj, one can gauge that the opinions and values of Gandhi are heavily influenced by religion and spirituality. His views and their justifications lean on morals and on there being a ‘right’ and a ‘wrong’ way of doing things. He is heavily influenced by the prevalent Hindu religion in Indian society. In Hind Swaraj, Ghandi refers to God and ancestors more than several times.  Fanon, on the other hand, has  more pragmatic views that center only the colonized. His views do not attempt to cater to morals and to ‘right’ or ‘wrong’; they cater only to the end goal: the liberation of the colonized. 

Through observing events of history, one could argue for the efficacy and moral just-ness of either of the philosopher’s views; however, because decolonization is an ongoing and seemingly endless process, seeking the wisdom and knowledge of historical figures and applying it to current events in our society could only serve as beneficial to us.