David Chia Jun Weng November 30 2014 Modern Social Thought Prof. Jessica Ratcliff

Fanon or Gandhi: perhaps, Butler can help.

Clad in yellow, amidst a cacophony of roaring Malaysians, I was standing in one of the

largest rallies in Malaysia: the Bersih rally of 2012. Under the scorching sun, the Malaysian

national anthem was juxtaposed by protesters chanting “Long live the People!” The ‘Bersih’

rally (clean in Malay) argues that an electoral system has long privileged the governing

coalition Barisan Nasional since independence in 1957. What otherwise began a weekend of

peaceful theatrics rallying for “Clean Elections” by about 250,000 Malaysians ended in tear 1

gas and water cannons . Such performance, in my opinion, shares some similarities to an 2

event about 100 years ago on December 21 1913 when Gandhi appeared at a meeting in

Durban, barefoot, in ‘coolie’ dressed with his moustache shaven off . The political was 3

embodied in the personal; and the “act” or “performance” destabilised a system - be it a

gender or colonial system - that has been deemed natural through the awareness of the

“performance.”

In many ways, Judith Butler’s performativity undercurrents much of the social

theories of both Mahatma Gandhi and Frantz Fanon, despite having been written many years

after. As such, both works of Gandhi and Fanon, while differing in methodology, are

grounded in Butler’s Performativity where the individual is empowered through bodily

decolonization as a way to subvert colonialism and achieve cultural supremacy. In this paper, I

would like to compare and contrast both methodologies (violent/non-violent) of Fanon and

The actual number remains ambiguous. Bersih organizers report 250,000 during the year 2012, while Malaysian police 1

estimated 40,000 to 50,000 people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=linnq9sZeVc2

Gonsalves, Peter. '‘Half-Naked Fakir’ The Story Of Gandhi’S Personal Search For Sartorial Integrity'3

of 1 9

Gandhi in relations to Butler’s performativity as a way not only to understand rallies

(protests) in the 21st century such as the Bersih Rally in Kuala Lumpur, but also to explore the

integral similarity between both colonial thinkers of awakening individual agency through a

self-aware performance. Both methodologies, I would argue, are a product of an instrumental

desire to decolonize specific contexts: a violent India and a non-violent Cold War-trodden

Algeria and Africa. As such, I disagree with the notion of Fanon’s violence as being Ends-

driven while Gandhi’s non-violence as being Means-driven; essentially, both are driven

towards formal independence as an End using the Means of performance, but differ in the

way in which the moral relationship between Mean and Ends is viewed.

Methodically, “decolonization,” to Fanon “is always a violent phenomenon. ” He 4

examines the walk to liberation as one that violently “replaces a certain ‘species’ of men by

another ‘species’ of men.” Echoing the Marxist conflict theory, in which “struggle”

determines history, Fanon dichotomously views the colonial world as being “cut in two ” or 5

“Manichean ” wherein “colonial or white powers” are to be “expelled” and “abolished” from 6

the country. In contrast, Gandhi views resistance as being embodied in satyagraha (derived

from the Hindi word sat ‘truth’ and agraha ‘force’). Unlike Fanon who perpetrates violence as

a Mean to independence, Gandhi preaches for non-violence and passive resistance. Using the

metaphor of people doing foolish things when in rage, Gandhi implies that fights are

“foolish” . Unlike Fanon’s advocacy of violence, to Gandhi, only through a strict adherence to 7

ahimsa (non-violence) can independence be achieved.

At first read, although both colonial thinkers differ methodically, it is important to

note that Gandhi and Fanon agree on the same Goal - that is of a certain “cleansing,

expulsion (or bersih)” - eventually leading to a the same End of a collective national culture.

Page 35. Gerhart, Gail M., and Frantz Fanon. 'The Wretched Of The Earth'.4

Page 38/40. Gerhart, Gail M., and Frantz Fanon. 'The Wretched Of The Earth'.5

Page 41. Gerhart, Gail M., and Frantz Fanon. 'The Wretched Of The Earth'.6

Page 71 Gandhi, and Gandhi. Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule7

of 2 9

Underlying this cultural purgation is a desire to return agency back to the colonized. In doing

so, Gandhi renounces all traces of British culture: hospitals, railroads, lawyers, Modern

medicine, machines and industrialisation. Instead, he resorts to revive the culture of spinning

handlooms to provide an “Indian” alternative to British mechanisation. Similarly, Fanon saw

such cultural cleaning to be central in achieving independence. In order to “escape the

supremacy of the white man’s culture,” the native may need “to turn backwards into his

unknown roots to loose himself at whatever cost in his own barbarous people.” A direct fight

towards national culture through individual agency (be it violent or non-violent) was integral

in both Fanon and Gandhi’s path to a collective culture i.e. Negritude or Indian culture.

As seen both social theorists acknowledge that cultural supremacy can be regained by

awakening individuals and returning agency and self-awareness to the personal. Here we see

an intersection of both Fanon and Gandhi with Bulter’s performativity where the personal is

implicitly political . In a sense, the awakening of individuals, returns awareness and agency 8

into the colonized, thereby a native, indigenous identity. As David Arnold notes referring to

Gandhi’s meeting in Durban, “by decolonising his body, he was symbolically ridding himself

physically, as well as mentally, of dependence on the West.” Indeed, Gandhi’s performance of

the Indian identity, in a Bulterian manner, subverts an other natural “essence” of colonial

power, and by extension the “inferiority complex” that pervades the natives of India and 9

Africa. Underlying Gandhi’s ahimsa and Fanon’s violence is a performative aspect of liberating

the individual into a position of agency - a performance not only for “forward” against

colonial powers but “backwards [for] his own barbarous people.”

Butler’s essay - too - introduces the idea of theatrical acting to contrast the actor’s act

and the performative act. Unlike actors being aware of their acting, Butler reminds us using

the analogy of the transvestite that in not being aware of performing gender, we take our

Page 522. Butler, Judith. 'Performative Acts And Gender Constitution: An Essay In Phenomenology And Feminist Theory'.8

Page 66. Gerhart, Gail M., and Frantz Fanon. 'The Wretched Of The Earth'.9

of 3 9

gender as natural, and forget that it is naturalised through performative acts. In a similar

fashion, such awareness of “acting” akin to the “awakening” of individuals subverts the

naturalization of colonial culture. Like one in theatre saying “this is just an act” and de-realize

the act, making acting into something quite distinct from what is real , the awakening of 10

individuals allow them to de-realize colonial powers, thereby giving both the individual and

the nation back the individuality, identity, and freedom that had been striped by colonialism.

The step towards national culture in both Fanon and Gandhi share more similarities than

cursorily assumed otherwise in that individual agency through performance destabilises

naturalized colonial powers, leading towards a purging of colonial culture through a self-

aware performance, eventually leading to a national culture i.e. negritude or Indian culture.

The chart above summaries thus far our discussion on Gandhi and Fanon. Violence

and non-violence merely is a performance manifested over a deeper, more profound swaraj or

path towards national culture.

Returning our discussion to the violence/non-violence methodologies, we may begin

to see how they are therefore tied to a certain instrumentalism - that is to say, such methods

are way to achieve individual agency thereby impacting naturalised colonial powers. Fanon

may not necessarily disagree with Gandhi’s view of violence being rage-driven. In fact, he

views violence under instrumental terms, seeing it as “a historical process” important in the

Page 527 Butler, Judith. 'Performative Acts And Gender Constitution: An Essay In Phenomenology And Feminist Theory'.10

of 4 9

Non-Violence

GandhiIndividual Agency through performance

Judith Bulter’s Performativity “Cleanses” and

purges colonial cultureFanon

Violence Destabilizes natural colonial powers

Collective National Culture i.e. Negritude & Indian Culture

{

“creation of new men.” As to how the instrumentalism of a performance is determined by its

audience, the performance of individual agency is not one independent of its context. Gandhi

believed that in the Indian context, violence would be “futile ”; whereas in the context of 11

Cold War Algeria and Africa, where colonial powers could no longer sustain military

prowess, violence seems to be most instrumental.True enough, Fanon was writing in 1950s

and 60s, a period that has witnessed the worst violence of modern warfare; while Gandhi

wrote in the early 1900s of conflict-trodden India incognisant two large upcoming World

Wars. David Arnold insightfully notes that “non-violence in a non-violent world might

achieve little, but in a society ruled through sporadic violence its impact could be immense. ” 12

The Post-World War world in which Fanon was writing was certainly one with little

violence — reinforcing Fanon’s method of violence as an instrumental solution to liberation.

On the other hand, the sporadic violence by the British in India during the early 1900s made

non-violence a lot more instrumental. The contrast in performance of violence amidst non-

violence and non-violence amidst violence, like the climax in a tragedy, creates an impact

large enough to shake up an audience. This reinforces not only the context-specificity of both

methods driven by instrumentalism but its self-awareness of its context in performing the

best method to achieving the most impact. As Judith Butler would comment, such

instrumentalism, like the Bersih rally in Kuala Lumpur, is manifested under a self-

consciousness, or self-awareness, of it being a performance - which results to its power.

Gandhi chose to wear a ‘coolie’; Fanon chose to demonstrate violence; Malaysian protestors

chose to wear yellow; and Hong Kong protestors chose to bring umbrellas. This performance of

choice is too a demonstration of agency that is manifested from a self-aware instrumental

means to an End.

Page Iii. Gandhi, Anthony Parel, and Gandhi. Hind Swaraj And Other Writings.11

Page 112. Arnold, David. Gandhi.12

of 5 9

While Fanon and Gandhi’s notion of violence and non-violence is one grounded in

instrumentalism, they differ in the way in which the Mean-Ends relationship is viewed.

While Fanon clearly distinguishes between the “Means of resistance” and its “intended

Ends” , Gandhi views this relationships as interchangeable and a lot more “organic. ” In 13 14

other words, the moral quality of Ends is casually depended on that of Means. Gandhi’s

organic view of Means and Ends is different from that of Fanon’s, who demonstrating

Marxist thought, views the destructive process as the generative and creative force that

incites national culture into rebirth. Here, Fanon - like Marx - views history as being real,

and a product of struggle; violence is working within a teleological framework wherein the

Ends are not related to the means. In contrast, Gandhi views this spiritual and personal

liberation as the generating force behind cultural regeneration. This notion differs from

Fanon’s deployment of Marxist realpolitiks but instead ventures into a form of moralist, high-

ground deployment. Gandhi’s ahimsa becomes a means of struggle that is a tactic to bring

about change. To Fanon, the colonist are the enemy; but to Gandhi, violence is the enemy. In

so saying, struggle ought to be constructive not destructive as Fanon views. To achieve

cultural purgation, Gandhi suggests that the purging of even too should come from within

hence the purging of violence. In simple words, Gandhi’s ahimsa constructively purges the

means of violence undertaken by colonial powers while Fanon strives for a state of “tabula

rasa” through destruction of colonial powers. The former views its people as agents of

construction, while the latter views its people as victims that need to destroy repression. The

latter views power as Marxist while the former somewhat Foucaulist and complex.

While the way in which mean-ends is perceived (or not perceived) differs, deeply

linked within Gandhi’s and Fanon’s notion of cultural liberation was the need for a more

structure, Marxist Base-like, economic revolution, freeing people from economic dependency

Page 120. Jefferess, David. Postcolonial Resistance.13

Page. 348. Iyer, Raghavan. The Moral And Political Thought Of Mahatma Gandhi.14

of 6 9

and exploitation. Fanon writes that Marxist analysis should be “stretched” when addressing a

“colonial problem”, stating that “the economic substructure is also a superstructure.” He

exemplifies this relationship in “whites being rich because they are white” and also “being

white because they are rich.” Similarly, Gandhi acknowledges such relationship when he

advocated the boycott of British goods, and machines, returning to traditional method for

machines alienate the spirit of labor. More than a break from cultural dependency,

decolonization was too a break away from British economic domination. “In this ideal,” he

declared, “there is no room for machines that displace human labour. . . Machinery is bad. We

shall then be able to gradually do away with it. ” Ultimately, both Gandhi and Fanon are 15

striving towards the same ultimate end of Formal Independence. Both acknowledge that

changing the collective national culture alone will not result it true formal independence but

form a cutting of all economic dependencies. As Fanon writes, “proof of success” lies in the

“change of the social structure from the bottom up. ” In the similar vein, Gandhi, advocating 16

home-spinning and control over our body and the means of our own production, views

independence as resulting from the “bottom-up. ” Arguably, this relationship between a 17

national culture is inextricably tied with an economic structure; to rid just one is inadequate

to gain total and formal independence.

Page. 348. Iyer, Raghavan. The Moral And Political Thought Of Mahatma Gandhi.15

Page 35. Gerhart, Gail M., and Frantz Fanon. 'The Wretched Of The Earth'.16

Page 348. Gandhi, and Raghavan Iyer. The Essential Writings Of Mahatma Gandhi.17

of 7 9

Karl Marx’sRelationship betweenSuperstructure and Economic Structure

Economic Structure Change

Ultimate End: Formal Independence

Collective National Culture i.e. Negritude & Indian Culture

{

That said, Gandhi and Fanon hold different images of a post-colonial India and

Algeria respectively. The former views an India where every village independently manages

its own affairs while the latter subscribes to a Marxist communistic society. Indeed,

colonialism as I have visualized in the chart dominates in three related but different levels:

moral & cultural, economic, and political. More than a removal of physical presence and

political, both Fanon and Gandhi dwells into all these three realms by first regaining

individual agency through performance, into creating a collective culture, and eventually

formal independence. While only Fanon used the term “tabula rasa” (a return to blank slate),

Gandhi was arguably more ‘extreme’ in his advocacy of a cultural purgation. Butler’s

performativity is manifested in both violence and non-violence methods as instrumental to

performing under specific contexts. The performance’s impact is accentuated not only by its

contrast but by its self-awareness.

Fast forward many years after to the Bersih rally in another post-colonial nation

Malaysia where independence was granted instead of fought for, many of these

methodologies still echo. The collective singing of the national anthem in yellow tees was a

performance of a national culture, of a self-conscious performance of choice and control.

Given that the Malaysian electoral system and constitution are remnants of British

colonialism, is the Bersih rally one that is addressing deep-rooted, naturalistically assumed

post-colonial systems? Is Malaysia working on a trajectory towards “formal independence”

reversed from that of Gandhi and Fanon, seeing as to how we have received formal

independence before performing a national culture? Interestingly, with political

proclamations such as 1Malaysia, the People of Malaysia are undergoing a performance of

national identity, and modernity similar to that of Colonial India and Algeria. And with the

advent of the internet and Youtube, are performances taking a virtual form? These questions

are ones that perhaps warrant more research.

of 8 9

References

Arnold, David. Gandhi. Harlow, England: Longman, 2001. Print.

Butler, Judith. 'Performative Acts And Gender Constitution: An Essay In Phenomenology And Feminist Theory'. Theatre Journal 40.4 (1988): 519. Web.

Gandhi, and Gandhi. Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule. [S.l.]: Pothi.com, 2009. Print.

Gandhi, and Raghavan Iyer. The Essential Writings Of Mahatma Gandhi. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1993. Print.

Gandhi, Anthony Parel, and Gandhi. Hind Swaraj And Other Writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Print.

Gerhart, Gail M., and Frantz Fanon. 'The Wretched Of The Earth'. Foreign Affairs 76.5 (1997): 236. Web.

Gonsalves, Peter. '‘Half-Naked Fakir’ The Story Of Gandhi’S Personal Search For Sartorial Integrity'. Academia.edu. N.p., 2014. Web. 29 Nov. 2014.

Gooch, Liz. 'Protesters In Malaysia Demand Electoral Reforms'. Nytimes.com. N.p., 2014. Web. 30 Nov. 2014.

Iyer, Raghavan. The Moral And Political Thought Of Mahatma Gandhi. New York: Oxford University Press, 1973. Print.

Jefferess, David. Postcolonial Resistance. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2008. Print.

The Economist,. 'It’S That Time Of Year'. N.p., 2014. Web. 30 Nov. 2014.

of 9 9