Noelle Hanrahan: Four questions for Mumia. In Fanon, how to dialectize the relation between subjectivity and objectivity.
Mumia Abu-Jamal: Hmm, well, when I think about Fanon, he speaks of subjectivity from the context of colonial subjects. This is kind of a colonial projection of colonized people, and it is not who they are. It is who the colonizers would like to project as the subject people. So this is a projection of colonial power on the colonized. You know, objectivity is really the colonized using their own minds and interpretation, not just of how to understand the world, of how to comprehend it, but of how to interact with it and transform it. Fanon uses that quote from Marx, but not in quotes. He uses it to kind of remind us that the objective is not to understand the world, but to transform it. So every objective that he points to is about how the colonized can be agents of decolonization, and by so doing, act against the colonial state. And even after, I should say, the colonized people are freed from colonialism, they are not freed from colonization or coloniality because our minds were formed, and I should say deformed, by the colonial process. And it is Fanon who tells us that the job of all of us, and I think it’s the continuing job of all of us, is to decolonize the institutions and the consciousness in former colonial states.
Noelle Hanrahan: Two. How can we reflect Fanon’s fundamental dual dimension of revolutionary anti-colonialism and decolonial humanism?
Mumia Abu-Jamal: I think if anybody unites those two concepts, it truly is Fanon because he is, at heart, an internationalist and a revolutionary humanist. And he believes deeply in his consciousness that all people have it within them, the wherewithal, the power, to rebel against colonial institutions and ideas and consciousness, but also to wage revolutionary resistance and battle against those forces. He unites those ideas because he understands, of course, as a psychoanalyst, as a psychiatrist, that how we think influences how we act in the real world. Fanon used to say that colonized intellectuals have to practice what he calls combat literature, and that is writing from a new perspective, a perspective of new nations being born amidst the colonial wreckage that was imported with the colony. This is again like war, but this time war with words, and that without that, culture is but petrification. And a lot of times the colonized intellectuals, the poets, the writers, you know, write endearingly and affectionately about the departed past. What they don’t write about is the present. And because they don’t write about the present, they perform the act of petrification, right, because you’re looking backwards but you’re not looking forwards. Write about the present, because the present is the doorway to the future. That, I think, is central to Fanon’s thinking.
Noelle Hanrahan: Three. What do you think are the relevant lessons we can learn from Fanon and other revolutionaries of his time, including Lumumba and Malcolm X, to advance our liberation struggles today?
Mumia Abu-Jamal: Interesting choices, when you think about Fanon, when you think of Malcolm X, and when you think about Patrice Lumumba. I don’t recall Fanon writing about Malcolm. Maybe I’ve missed that. But I know he did write about Patrice Lumumba, who was a dear friend of his and one of the African leaders that he admired. But even if he admired him, Fanon, you know, being a revolutionary and decolonial thinker, was not afraid to criticize Lumumba. It’s true what happened to him was a terrible tragedy, and the colonialists, you know, really used him and destroyed him because they feared what might come from him opening up what was once called the bread basket of Africa, the Congo. However, I think he loved him and admired him as a brother, but, you know, human beings make mistakes, and human beings make fatal mistakes when they fail to adequately analyze and understand the role of the colonialists, right?
Noelle Hanrahan: And how would you see that as a relevant lesson? What can we take from those examples?
Mumia Abu-Jamal: Well, when you study Lumumba’s life and, I think, read The Wretched of the Earth, where he talks openly about Lumumba, you can learn about the errors of Lumumba, and learn that you cannot make errors with the colonialists because they will capitalize on those errors, and they will eliminate you. It’s as simple as that. What Fanon and Malcom, I think represent, are beings who are endlessly in transition. That is, they are transforming themselves when they get new information about how the world works, about history, about personality, about psychology, about politics, about world issues. You know, Malcolm was that to a T. He never stopped developing. And he never ever stopped studying. People who knew him, who was around him when he was a Minister in the Nation in New York, said you never saw the brother without a book in his hand or in his briefcase. When he sat down on a bus or on an airplane he did a lot of his reading. He continued to study, and he continued to expand his understanding of the world.
The same can be said in many ways of Fanon. And even though he formally studied, of course, to be a psychoanalyst and psychiatrist, he also studied revolutionary sciences, the human sciences as they call it. Why? Because he wanted to know how to apply a revolutionary science to a colonial situation. So he read Marx and he read many other thinkers who gave him ideas and ways of looking at the world, you know. He read and critiqued Jean Paul Sartre and he, again, used what he learned to further analyze the world and understand the world and try to transform the world. Both of those fellows were beings of tremendous self-transformation, and they were becoming, I think, better thinkers, better beings, and better revolutionaries in their own way. Please give Mireille my love, and tell her she is in my heart always.
These commentaries are recorded by Noelle Hanrahan of Prison Radio.
Moderator: Four questions for Mumia. In Fanon, how to dialectize the
relation between subjectivity and objectivity.
Mumia Abu-Jamal: Hmm, well, when I think about Fanon, he speaks of subjectivity
from the context of colonial subjects. This is kind of a colonial projection of
colonized people, and it is not who they are. It is who the colonizers like to project
as the subject people. So this is a projection of colonial power on the
colonized. You know, objectivity is really the colonized using their own minds and
interpretation not just of how to understand the world, of how to comprehend
it, but of how to interact with it and transform it. Fanon uses that quote from
Marx, but not in quotes. He uses it to kind of remind us that the objective is
not to understand the world, but to transform it. So every objective that he
points to is about how the colonized can be agents of decolonization, and by so
doing, act against the colonial state. And even after, I should say, the
colonized people are freed from colonialism, they are not freed from
colonization or coloniality because our minds were formed, and I should say
deformed, by the colonial process. And it is Fanon who tells us that the job of
all of us, and I think the continuing job of all of us is to decolonize the
institutions and the consciousness in former colonial states. Moderator: How can we reflect Fanon’s fundamental dual dimension of
revolutionary
anti-colonialism and decolonial humanism?
Mumia Abu-Jamal:I
think if anybody unites those two concepts, it truly is Fanon because he is, at
heart, an internationalist and a revolutionary humanist. And he believes deeply
in his consciousness that all people have within them the
wherewithal, the power, to rebel against colonial institutions and ideas and consciousness,
but also to wage revolutionary resistance and battle against those forces. He
unites those ideas because he understands, of course, as a psychoanalyst, as a
psychiatrist, that how we think influences how we act in the real world. Fanon
used to say that colonized intellectuals have to practice what he calls combat
literature, and that is writing from a new perspective, a perspective of new
nations being born amidst the colonial wreckage that was imported with the
colony. This is again like war, but this time war with words, and without that,
culture is but petrification. And a lot of times the colonized intellectuals,
the poets, the writers, you know, write endearingly and affectionately about
the departed past. What they don’t write about is the present. And because they
don’t write about the present, they perform the act of petrification. Right?
Because you’re looking backwards but you’re not looking forwards. Write about
the present, because the present is the doorway to the future. That, I think,
is central to Fanon’s thinking. Moderator: What do you think are the relevant lessons we can learn from
Fanon and other revolutionaries of his time, including Lumumba and Malcolm X,
to advance our liberation struggles today?
Mumia Abu-Jamal: Interesting choices, when you think about Fanon, when you
think of Malcolm X, and when you think about Patrice Lumumba. I don’t recall
Fanon writing about Malcolm. Maybe I missed that. But I know he did write about
Patrice Lumumba, who was a dear friend of his and one of the African leaders that
he admired. But even if he admired him, Fanon, you know, being a revolutionary
and decolonial thinker, was not afraid to criticize Lumumba. It’s true that
what happened to him was a terrible tragedy, and the colonialists really used
him and destroyed him because they feared what might come from him opening up
what was once called the bread basket of Africa, the Congo. However, I think he
loved him and admired him as a
brother, but, you know, human beings make mistakes, and human beings make fatal
mistakes when they fail to adequately analyze and understand the role of the
colonialists. Right? Moderator: And how would you
see that as a relevant lesson? What can we take from
those examples?
Mumia Abu-Jamal: Well, when you study Lumumba’s life and, I think, read The Wretched of the Earth, where Fanon
talks openly about Lumumba, you can learn about his errors and learn that you
cannot make errors with thecolonialists because they will capitalize on those
errors, and they will eliminate you. It’s as simple as that. What Fanon, and Malcom, I think, represent
are beings who are endlessly in transition. That is, they are transforming
themselves when they get ne information about how the world works, about history,
about personality, about psychology, about politics, about world issues. You
know, Malcolm was that to a T. He never stopped developing. And he never ever
stopped studying. People who knew him, who were around him
when he was a Minister of the Nation in New York, said you never saw the brother
without a book in his hand or in his briefcase. When he sat down on a bus or on
an airplane he did a lot of his reading. He continued to study, and he
continued to expand his understanding of the world. The same can be said in
many ways of Fanon. And even though he formally studied, of course, to be a
psychoanalyst and psychiatrist, he also studied
revolutionary sciences, the human sciences as they call them. Why? Because he
wanted to know how to apply a revolutionary science to a colonial situation. So
he read Marx. And he read many other thinkers who gave him
ideas and ways of looking at the world. You know, he read and critiqued Jean Paul
Sartre, and he, again, used what he learned to further analyze the world and
understand the world and try to transform the world. Both of those fellows were
beings of tremendous self-transformation, and they were becoming, I think,
better thinkers, better beings, and better revolutionaries in their own way. Please
give Mireille my love, and tell her she is in my heart always.
