5. What is the weakness of spontaneity?

Put most elegantly by Fanon: “Tactics are mistaken for strategy.” As previously described with the lumpenproletariat, the spontaneous eruption of resistance within the cities may change the nature of the national struggle as forces of coercion in the form of colonial military forces or colonial police focused on cracking down on dissent in rural districts are forced to retreat to the cities (regions where compradors and colonial administration are centered) to restore the order of colonial rule, yet Fanon states that this is not enough:

“They [leaders of popular revolts] discover that the success of the struggle presupposes clear objectives, a definite methodology and above all the need for the mass of the people to realize that their unorganized efforts can only be a temporary dynamic. You can hold out for three days—maybe even for three months—on the strength of the admixture of sheer resentment contained in the mass of the people; but you won’t win a national war, you’ll never overthrow the terrible enemy machine, and you won’t change human beings if you forget to raise the standard of consciousness of the rank-and-file.” [Emphases mine.]

This gets back to Fanon writing that decolonization is a act that dismantles the material and ideology structures of the colonizers. One cannot rely solely on spontaneous reaction to the atrocities of the colonizing force (though their atrocities are many) to push the colonized into opposing the colonizers, because colonizers has in the past, and will, recruit among the compradors and opportunist lumpenproletariat to tamp down on anti-colonial movements.

Decolonization requires political education of the masses, (“the political education of the masses is seen to be a historic necessity”), of self-critique and improvement on past shortcomings to improve in future programs and decision-making (“The leaders show their power and authority by criticizing mistakes, using every appraisal of past conduct to bring the lesson home, and thus insure fresh conditions for progress,”) and it requires the an organizational framework to facilitate the transmission of shared experiences and understandings, directing mass action, and establish communicative ties of solidarity between colonized people of all backgrounds in opposition to colonialism:

"All this taking stock of the situation, this enlightening of consciousness, and this advance in the knowledge of the history of societies are only possible within the frame work of an organization, and inside the structure of a people [emphasis mine]. Such an organization is set afoot by the use of revolutionary elements coming from the towns at the beginning of the rising, together with those rebels who go down into the country as the fight goes on. It is this core which constitutes the embryonic political organization of the rebellion. But on the other hand the peasants, who are all the time adding to their knowledge in the light of experience, will come to show themselves capable of directing the people’s struggle. Between the nation on a wartime footing and its leaders there is established a mutual current of enlightenment and enrichment. "

A really great chapter, and while I’d like to answer the other questions, my understanding of every point Fanon is making for this chapter is from cursory reading and I don’t feel confident enough to answer some of the other questions for fear of completely misconstruing the points of the chapter (hopefully I didn’t misconstrue his points or miss context from some of the things I took away from the questions I did answer.) Fanon’s analysis on the lumpenproletariat in a exploited colonial/neocolonial society is really interesting and from some of the theory that I have read, lines up with Mao’s 1926 Analysis of the Classes in Chinese Society as a class of revolutionary potential but with caveats: “Apart from all these, there is the fairly large lumpen-proletariat, made up of peasants who have lost their land and handicraftsmen who cannot get work. They lead the most precarious existence of all. […] One of China’s difficult problems is how to handle these people. Brave fighters but apt to be destructive, they can become a revolutionary force if given proper guidance.” I haven’t read much theory but the analyses of the lumpenproletariats and discussions on their revolutionary potential are always interesting, especially if Mao in the previous quote is like ‘uh we’re still going over our approach with the lumpen, everybody.’

I spent a good bit of time reading the chapters (I missed the ping when this was first posted, sorry Othello) and it kept me way into the night and a bit in the morning so I hope this discussion response wasn’t better in my mind than posted. The analyses of class in any theory always pulls my interest and Fanon’s viewpoint of class structures within the framework of a colonial/neocolonial society is a new perspective to add to my existing understandings of class. Overall a great chapter, but one that I need to read over again (and with an exhaustion-free brain) to fully understand Fanon’s points. Thanks again Othello, looking forward to the discussion for this chapter from others, and with future chapter discussions!

(Apparently Hexbear is not happy with my post in 1 block so I had to split it up into 2 posts)