Decolonization in the Heart of Empire
confine post-colonial subjects and their—reified and gendered—bodilyrelationships to the world in a patchwork of segregated territories. Inresponse, MIR proposes a politically and ideologically
form of anti-colonial practice which does justice to the temporal andspatial disjunctures between the situation of post-colonial subjects andwhite political space. To address the complexities of post-colonialconditionsinthemetropole,theprincipleofautonomymustbemodifiedthrough a practice of
. This implies linking anti-colonial concernswith broader anti-capitalist forces, on the one hand, anti-colonial formsof
, on the other. Of acute importance in this project of autonomy/mixity is
. The goal of “post-colonial anti-colonialism” is a form of emancipation with universalimplications.While influenced by Frantz Fanon, Albert Memmi, Aim´e C´esaire,Otto Bauer, Malcolm X, and James Baldwin, the texts by MIR andsome of its leaders are selective appropriations, not interpretationsof these intellectuals. They do however constitute responses to post-colonial conditions in the metropolitan core which resonate well withthe counter-colonialism defined by Fanon and some of his French-speaking contemporaries. This becomes evident provided one treatsFanon as an advocate of
informed by radical Black, Marxist-Hegelian, and proto-materialist phenomenology, not as a precursorof the post-structural linguistic turn, as is common in post-colonialtheory.
The proposals by MIR reverberate with a Fanonian perspectivethat, first, puts forward an
understanding of colonization as amulti-dimensional process incorporating macro- and micro-dimensionsof reality; second, analyzes racism as a crucial
of wider,political-economic dynamics of colonization; third, treats colonizationas a multi-scalar
that begs for strategies of territorialre-appropriation linking national liberation to spatial transformations atvarious scales; fourth, sees gender and patriarchy as crucial to analyzecolonial rule and differentiate between “true” and “false” forms of de-colonization; and, finally, ushers in a new, dialectical, and cautiouslyuniversalizing
to transform the subjectivities of colonizerand colonized alike. Adapting these Fanonian insights, the proposalsby MIR attest to the relevance of counter-colonial analyses of post-colonial situations. They are of interest to anyone concerned about thetension-fraught relationships between anti-colonial and other strugglesin imperial metropoles today.
Mouvement des Indig`enes de la R´ epublique
We are the indigenous of the Republic!”
. . .
France was a colonialstate
. . .
. . .
Thetreatmentofpeoplefromthe colonies prolongs (but is not reducible to) colonial policy
. . .
2011 The AuthorAntipode
2011 Editorial Board of