As part of my research for an essay on African writer Chinua Achebe, published in The Federalist this past February, I reread Albert Memmi’s monograph The Colonizer and the Colonized (1957) in order to refresh my memory on some of the finer philosophical points of that seminal anti-colonialist treatise. Since my essay was arguing that Achebe, in his novel Things Fall Apart, had produced a remarkably balanced perspective on the incursion of the English into Nigeria despite being himself an ardent anti-colonialist, I thought I might benefit from reminding myself of some of the more trenchant points of that position from a writer who had laid significant groundwork for that now canonized critique.
No one has any reason to carefully enumerate these points any longer because the critique of the Western colonizer has been a three-quarter-century long project culminating in its being enshrined as intellectual gospel. And certainly no academic in his or her right mind would ever consider questioning even a small part of the argument that has led so definitively to the conclusion that the white man is objectively guilty of crimes against humanity for having colonized vast swaths of the earth and its inhabitants.
And that judgment may be correct. However, there is nothing under the sun that should be permanently shielded from examination. That’s religion, not intellectual inquiry, and not even all religions at that.
As I read Memmi’s small but incredibly influential book, I found that I had no arguments with his analysis and condemnation of the colonizer per se in its general formulation. Most reasonable people in the civilized world believe that one sovereign nation invading another is an act of war; that subjugating its peoples physically and psychologically is the behavior of a conquering force; and that outside of some specific deadly provocation there exists no justification for such an act. That people have engaged in such depredations for the entirety of human history is simply a miserable and unjust fact of life in this mortal coil.
However, as I read further I began to see a rather glaring problem with Memmi’s analysis that I’m sure was noted long ago but still needs mentioning now for reasons I’ll get to further on. His analysis of the degraded state of the colonized focused, reasonably enough, on the particular historical moment with which he was familiar—the French colonization of North Africa, specifically Tunisia where he was born—and focuses exclusively on that pairing without including any broader historical framework. And his treatise goes into great detail describing the myriad ways the Arab population was subjugated by their French overlords, physically, economically, and psychologically.
So what’s the problem with this? It’s the classic problem in argumentation of specific instances versus the generalities that support them. The claim that the Arab people’s humiliating oppression was wrong rests on the general notion that oppressing people is—wrong. Otherwise, there’s no support for the specific claim of injustice. And yet nowhere in his text is there any indication that Memmi is aware of the fact that the dehumanized objects of colonial disdain—in his lifetime Arabs—had themselves performed the self-same physical incursion into the region in the seventh century and the self-same psychological depredations on the Roman inhabitants of North Africa who lived there prior to the arrival of the Arabs.
Why is this important to note? After all, that incursion took place so long ago it’s as if the Arabs are the original inhabitants of all the countries of North Africa, as I’m sure many of them believe despite archeological evidence to the contrary. (El Djem, anyone?)
Well, it’s important to point this out because people in our age have been so brainwashed into equating “colonizer” with “white people” that it is doubtful that even academics are able to discern the severely truncated version of history required to make the argument that Europeans are exclusively agents of colonization. Most of us are aware that the university has replaced learning about subjects and history with meditating ad nauseam about power relations. It’s an idée fixe, and subsumes all of the cramped space in the minds of those who are supposed to be enlarging the intellectual horizons of others. But this particular idée fixe has had enormous consequences for all of Europe.
Muslim migrants to France, for instance, see themselves as “getting back” at the French colonizer by colonizing France themselves, and there are plenty of videos showing young migrants testifying to this intent. They’re issuing, in their minds, a historically justified payback and no one is calling them out on the irony.
That irony, to those who actually read history, extends far beyond the Mediterranean shores of North Africa, of course. The list of countries that were overrun by Arabs is long, as is the list of countries that are now nearly exclusively Islamic that weren’t prior to invasion. And that rather glaring historical fact needs to be trumpeted at those who are now invading Europe and those who are enabling it as if it is some sort of cosmic retribution for past wrongs.
Let’s get things straight, shall we? Very few cultures can escape the accusation of having once had imperial ambitions. And Islam most assuredly has since its inception–and still does.
Jocelynn Cordes is an author, essayist, and literary critic. She has published literary criticism and book reviews in scholarly journals as well as short fiction in anthologies. Her essays have appeared in The Federalist as well as her local newspapers. Under the pen name Plum McCauley she has produced two award winning novels, “It All Started with a Bicycle” and “Worthy of Prometheus.” Jocelynn has a B.A. and M.A. in English Literature and completed the coursework for the Ph.D. in modernism and critical theory. She is currently working on her third novel.
Michael Copeland says
Invade, destroy, subjugate.
This blueprint has been Islam’s imperative and track record since its beginning, in other words, hostile colonisation.
It has not changed.
“Muslims in the past conquered, invaded, and took over countries…”
Shiekh Huwayni
“Islam is under obligation to gain power over nations.”
Ibn Khaldun
“Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the
face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam.”
Maududi
“Islam will return to Europe as a conqueror and victor.”
Yusuf al Qaradawi
“We shall conquer their countries … like it or not.”
Mohammed Ayed, Al Aqsa
“Islam will invade Europe and America, smashing Western
civilisation and replacing it with Islam”
Mohammed Mahdi Akef
“The Islamic movement … must take power as soon as it is morally
strong enough … to destroy the non-Islamic power.”
Alija Izetbegovic
See https://gatesofvienna.net/2020/02/islams-agenda-muslims-speak/
Jocelynn Cordes says
I agree. And yet we will allow this travesty as if it is somehow a just retribution. That’s BS!
(Thank you for reading my essay. I read your essays at GoV all the time.)
bewhitebarry says
The photo shows the army. They have come without their uniforms and I see no women in that column. All they need are the guns.
Kepha says
The time has come for a searching and thorough criticism of the “anti-colonialist” meme.
How interesting that Albert Memmi, whose whole status as an educated individual and participant in the political life of his community was made possible by European colonialism, should be famous for his attack on that same colonialism. As a Tunisian Jew, he and his people would have been 3d class denizens of their state had it not fallen under the French boot; and the Muslim majority of the same state would’ve lived in a far more degraded state, too.
“Well, it’s important to point this out because people in our age have been so brainwashed into equating “colonizer” with “white people” that it is doubtful that even academics are able to discern the severely truncated version of history required to make the argument that Europeans are exclusively agents of colonization”–excellent, excellent point, Ms. Cordes; and may many voices rise up to echo it, and carry that ball a lot further.
Jocelynn Cordes says
Thank you, and those details about Memmi are so true. And yet he goes further for in his book he states “It definitely appears that the colonizer is a disease of the European, from which he must be completely cured and protected.”
rw says
The author says ‘that judgment may be correct’. it is not; it is quite false, and depending on who did the colonizing it was often substantially a good thing.
Here is what we used to be taught in England about our ‘colonizing with respect to India. The British did not set out to ‘colonize’. What we did was establish trading stations, if you like, ‘colonies,’ but with no intent to invade.The only immediate goal was trade. Slowly however a network of trading relationships was built which meant gradually exercising more and more control; the growing power was more a historical accident than anything else. There were elements among the British who were rapacious and to begin with the East India Company had only financial gain at heart; however, as established by Vishal Mangalwadi in his excellent books, those elements were reined in and a genuinely philanthropic movement was established which did great good, aiming always to empower the Indian people. It all depends who does the colonizing.
I live in Australia, where the history is a little similar. There were always mixed motives; there were the wicked elements – people who even ‘hunted’ aboriginals; then there were the good guys, who sought for their well being. Again there was no intent to ‘invade’ – they called Australia Terra Nullius – they really thought it was empty. A friend of mine wrote a great M.Ed thesis on experiences helping aborigine children in a metropolitan High School, but his marker wouldn’t pass the thesis until the word ‘invasion’ was included. So the word was added; but while the aboriginal people would undoubtedly have experienced events as an invasion, invasion was not the intent.
Finally, there was a great article from Raymond Ibrahim on FrontPage, Jan 23, featuring the views of Ernest Tigori. The article includes this: “‘Criminal colonization’ was an invention of the Stalinist strategists to get Africans to rise against the Western colonizer.”
To the holy all things are holy; to the perverse, all things are perverse.
Jocelynn Cordes says
Having read many biographies of General Charles Napier re his campaigns in India, I am well aware that there were do-gooders in the English establishment even when its military was quelling (Muslim) uprisings. In addition to his renowned statement prohibiting suttee, Napier had his soldiers building infrastructure before and after the conflict at Sindh.
On a more humorous note, we could consider the sage words of the Monty Python crew: “All right, but apart from sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh-water system and public health–what have the Romans ever done for us?”
However, the loss of culture despite the intent of those intruding is most often a regrettable thing, even when it is an extremely flawed and backward culture. When the English make their appearance in the Igbo tribe in Achebe’s “Things Fall Apart” as a reader I feel it as a terrible rupture. I can only imagine how the individuals within that world felt, even though Achebe took great pains to present all of those positives of civilization you and I both referred to. (Which is amazing, actually.)
And right now, we in the West are about to face the same thing.
gravenimage says
Yes–this from Monty Python is both hilarious and very apt.
Boromir's Horn says
Looking at the picture above, I’m amazed how many women and children their are! Just like the media reported!! Oh, how it tugs the heart stings!!! PFFT
Boromir's Horn says
I meant “strings” the tears must have covered the r
gravenimage says
Good point, Boromir’s Horn. It is notable that that *vast* majority of these “refugees” are single, fit, military-aged men–which have never made up the majority of any refugee stream in the history of the world. Where are the women, children, elderly, and disabled, who have always made up most refugees, and where the few young and middle-aged men are virtually all there with their families?
These are not refugees, but an invading army.
Boromir's Horn says
+1
SAFI says
This “newsflash” should be adressed elsewhere. .. to those who are trying to abuse our empathy and guilt-trip europeans often though lies (and always through omitting facts)… and those are not solely or even primarily the gimmiegrants at the border.
mortimer says
Superbly written article by Jocelynn Cordes. Islam is possibly the greatest colonizing force in history. That point, however, is lost on many people who consider themselves thoughtful and educated.
What held Islam back from taking the whole planet was Islam’s inconsistent, fatalistic approach to everything, and that two civilizations (China and Romanized Europe) still had the organization and determination to protect their empires from Islam’s chaotic and somewhat undisciplined Muslim armies.
The West is still wracked with post-colonial guilt to the extent that it cannot recognize the existential threat of Islam to its advanced and caring societies.
Islam will simply drag everything back to the 7th century, unless a great Western awakening occurs to the retrograde viciousness of this obscurantist Death Cult.
Western people are generally unaware that Islam’s primary source texts are 51% about politics, 18% about Allah and the rest about Mohammed whose vicious 7th century ways must be imitated by Mohammedans.
Dr. Johnson said that many great errors in thought may be avoided merely by counting. Counting the text shows that Islam is primarily an imperial, colonizing, political ideology.
Jocelynn Cordes says
Thank you, and so true. Islam is a totalitarian, expansionist ideology. No matter how advanced and free a Muslim society may become (Iran in the 70’s, Turkey so recently) because it must always adhere to its foundational texts, it will always hold the possibility of severe reversion. (I think that’s the real meaning behind Churchill’s description “retrograde.”)
John Annicchiarico says
As Professor Gad Saad has stated, the gold medal of the oppressive colonization Olympics belongs to Islam.
The aboriginal religions of the Middle East and North Africa were Judaism & Christianity. The indigenous religion of Iran was Zoroastrianism. The native religion of Afghanistan & Indonesia was Buddhism. The first peoples of India were Hindus. I wonder if, at the graduation commencement of Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt, the master of ceremonies begins with this statement “We would like to acknowledge that this event is taking place on the unceded, traditional territory of the Coptic Christian People, and we thank them for use of this land”. I highly doubt it.
gravenimage says
News Flash for the Muslim Migrants Demanding Entrance to Europe: Europeans are Not History’s Sole Colonizers
…………………..
Fine piece by Jocelynn Cordes.
It is quite right that Islam has been a colonizer–and a far more brutal one in almost all cases than has Europe.
But Muslims don’t care about that–they know that many Europeans experience guilt over their past colonial enterprises, even in cases where there is little reason for it. If Muslims are able to exploit this often unearned guilt, they are happy to do so.
Even here at Jihad Watch, we often find apologists for Islam implying that Westerners have no right to oppose the Muslim invasion of Europe and the rest of West because of injustices done to Native Americans or Australian Aborigines or with Western colonialism abroad.
As though any of these people would be better off under the horrors of Shari’ah.
But the sole purpose of this is not concern over indigenous peoples at all, but just to further enable the Islamization of the West.
And welcome to Jocelynn Cordes–I believe this is her first article for Jihad Watch–I hope there are many more.
James Lincoln says
gravenimage,
A very well written – and very balanced post, my compliments.
Interestingly, muslims NEVER experience ANY guilt regarding their OWN invasion of the West…
Woke Infidel says
Yes, of course not, James. A people who truly believe that they are “the best of all…,” according to their holy book, are careful to impress this truth on their young from as early an age as possible. (Witness Caliphate Cubs performing executions, and imagine – if you can – the mindset already established in children trained to perform such righteous deeds.) But even ordinary Muslim youth are raised in homes and communities where a Koran-based upbringing assures them that they are indeed superior to all others. Sadly, there is no guilt in a mind where there is only holy righteousness; as far as they are concerned, THEIR invasions are just, with Allah supporting them every step of the way.
Jocelynn Cordes says
Thank you very much.
gravenimage says
Thank you, James and Jocelynn.
PRCS says
“Let’s get things straight, shall we? Very few cultures can escape the accusation of having once had imperial ambitions.”
From the time our long ago ancestors first realized they could, they did.
Jewcat says
Islam is perhaps the greatest colonising force the world has ever seen. It swept out of Arabia and invaded and colonised Christian and Jewish Syria, North Africa, Afghanistan which was Buddhist (the Taliban knocked off the last of the Buddhist treasures) Iran which was Zoroastrian, Spain, Sicily etc and now is colonising Europe with a ‘soft’ invasion.
No Muzzies Here says
Looks like the “migrants” are mostly able-bodied men. Things can’t be that bad back home, if they left behind the wives and children.