An idea keeps resurfacing: decolonization doesn't arrive politely.
Reading Frantz Fanon reminded me why.

I'm not here to summarize his Wretched of the Earth (Chapter 1). The chapter just jolted the idea loose again: Fanon frames decolonization as a rupture—a total reordering—not a policy tweak. That word, rupture, has been sitting with me.

Two worlds, one wall

In Fanon's telling, the colonial world is not one blended space but two. Settlers live in the paved, shoe-and-steel world. The colonized survive in scarcity.

That split isn't only material. It's moralized. The colonizer casts themselves as "good" and the native as "evil," justifying control as virtue. It's not just who has roads and who doesn't. It's who is called civilized and who is named a problem.

The result: a wall. One side lives with abundance and assumed legitimacy. The other lives with lack and constant suspicion.

This post is for subscribers only

Sign up now to read the post and get access to the full library of posts for subscribers only.

Sign up now Already have an account? Sign in