The Colonial Dialectic
Clement Henry Moore, Politics in North Africa, Boston: Little, Brown 1970 CHAPTER II THE COLONIAL DIALECTIC The French presence did indeed transform North African segmentary society, subject it to new and more efficient centralized administrations, and create an alien political space, territorially defined, which indigenous elements could subsequently capture. In North Africa, as in much of the Third World, colonizers planted the seeds of their own destruction by restratifying indigenous society, educating new elites, creating discontented urban and rural proletariats and lumpen proletariats, and undermining political structures without being able to replace them with new ones subservient to the colonial order. But no colonial dialectic - only conflict was inevitable. THE DIALECTICS OF EMANCIPATION Dialectic in the Hegelian sense assumes a constructive confrontation, one of "identity in opposition," between master and slave (or colonizer and colonized). Unfortunately colonial situations have rarely justified Hegel's faith in the "vast power of negation," his assumption about world history that conflict ultimately leads to higher synthesis. In North Africa anti-colonialism, through which indigenous elements reappropriated the political space defined by the colonizer, generated a new political foundation only in Tunisia, not in Algeria where the conflict was most intense and the French presence most overwhelming. As Frantz Fanon might have agreed, violence alone was not enough to restructure Algeria.1 In North Africa, as more generally in the Third World, the critical intervening variable was the nationalist elite, the leaders of the confrontation with the colonial power. Depending partly on the colonial situation, partly on their own sense of purpose, they could be the motor of "dialectic," of "positive" confrontation - or the perpetrators of unreasoning violence or the passive inheritors of the colonial order.
[Show full text]