What do you think?
Rate this book
Colonialism and Neocolonialism
Colonialism and Neo-Colonialism is a classic critique of France's policies in Algeria in the 1950s and 1960s and inspired much subsequent writing on colonialism, post-colonialism, politics, and literature. It includes Sartre's celebrated preface to Fanon's classic Wretched of the Earth. Colonialism and Neo-Colonialism had a profound impact on French intellectual life, inspiring many other influential French thinkers and critics of colonialism such as Jean-Francois Lyotard, Frantz Fanon, Pierre Bourdieu and Jacques Derrida.
224 pages, Hardcover
First published September 29, 1965
About the author
Jean-Paul Sartre
875 books11.8k followersJean-Paul Charles Aymard Sartre was a French philosopher, playwright, novelist, screenwriter, political activist, biographer, and literary critic, considered a leading figure in 20th-century French philosophy and Marxism. Sartre was one of the key figures in the philosophy of existentialism (and phenomenology). His work has influenced sociology, critical theory, post-colonial theory, and literary studies. He was awarded the 1964 Nobel Prize in Literature despite attempting to refuse it, saying that he always declined official honors and that "a writer should not allow himself to be turned into an institution."
Sartre held an open relationship with prominent feminist and fellow existentialist philosopher Simone de Beauvoir. Together, Sartre and de Beauvoir challenged the cultural and social assumptions and expectations of their upbringings, which they considered bourgeois, in both lifestyles and thought. The conflict between oppressive, spiritually destructive conformity (mauvaise foi, literally, 'bad faith') and an "authentic" way of "being" became the dominant theme of Sartre's early work, a theme embodied in his principal philosophical work Being and Nothingness (L'Être et le Néant, 1943). Sartre's introduction to his philosophy is his work Existentialism Is a Humanism (L'existentialisme est un humanisme, 1946), originally presented as a lecture.
Sartre held an open relationship with prominent feminist and fellow existentialist philosopher Simone de Beauvoir. Together, Sartre and de Beauvoir challenged the cultural and social assumptions and expectations of their upbringings, which they considered bourgeois, in both lifestyles and thought. The conflict between oppressive, spiritually destructive conformity (mauvaise foi, literally, 'bad faith') and an "authentic" way of "being" became the dominant theme of Sartre's early work, a theme embodied in his principal philosophical work Being and Nothingness (L'Être et le Néant, 1943). Sartre's introduction to his philosophy is his work Existentialism Is a Humanism (L'existentialisme est un humanisme, 1946), originally presented as a lecture.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
June 13, 2016
Acknowledgements
Preface, by Robert J. C. Young
Introduction: Remembering Sartre, by Azzedine Haddour
--From One China to Another
--Colonialism is a System
--Albert Memmi's The Colonizer and the Colonized
--You are Wonderful
--A Victory
--The Pretender
--The Constitution of Contempt
--The Frogs Who Demand a King
--The Analysis of the Referendum
--The Sleepwalkers
--The Wretched of the Earth
--The Political Thought of Patrice Lumumba
Preface, by Robert J. C. Young
Introduction: Remembering Sartre, by Azzedine Haddour
--From One China to Another
--Colonialism is a System
--Albert Memmi's The Colonizer and the Colonized
--You are Wonderful
--A Victory
--The Pretender
--The Constitution of Contempt
--The Frogs Who Demand a King
--The Analysis of the Referendum
--The Sleepwalkers
--The Wretched of the Earth
--The Political Thought of Patrice Lumumba
October 8, 2015
If Fanon is the oppressed's guide to decolonization, Sartre is the oppressor's. Some excerpts from his narrative of colonialism's rise and fall:
"When we talk of the 'colonial system,' we must be clear about what we mean. It is not an abstract mechanism. The system exists, it functions; the infernal cycle of colonialism is a reality. But this reality is embodied in a million colonists, children and grandchildren of colonists, who have been shaped by colonialism and who think, speak and act according to the very principles of the colonial system."
"There are neither good nor bad colonists: there are colonialists. Some among them reject their objective reality: carried along by the colonial apparatus, they do each day, in deed, what they condemn in their dreams, and each of their acts contributes to maintaining oppression. They will change nothing, be of no use to anyone, and find their moral comfort in their malaise, that is all. The others--and they are the majority--sooner or later accept themselves as they are. ... How can this elite of usurpers, conscious of their mediocrity, justify their privileges? Only one way: diminish the colonized in order to exult themselves, deny the status of human beings to the natives, and deprive them of basic rights. That will not be difficult as, precisely, the system deprives them of everything: colonialist practice has engraved the colonial idea on things themselves; it is the movement of things which designates both the colonist and the colonized. Thus oppression justifies itself: the oppressors produce and maintain by force the evils which, in their eyes, make the oppressed resemble more and more what they would need to be in order to deserve their fate."
"We already feel prey to a vague malaise. It is not yet horror but a feeling that horror exists, very close by, all the more threatening because we cannot and will not look it in the face. And then, all at a flash which makes it blindingly obvious: 'What if it were true?' ... Everyone keeps quiet, everyone looks at their neighbor who keeps quiet, everybody wonders: 'What does he know? What does he believe? What has he decided to forget?' Except among people on the same side, we are afraid to speak. What if I were to find a criminal acquiescence in the man who has just shaken my hand? This man says nothing: he who says nothing consents. But I do not say anything either. What if, on the contrary, it were he who reproached me for my spinelessness? Mistrust teaches us a new solitude: we are separated from our fellow citizens by the fear of having to despise or of being despised. It is one and the same thing, moreover, since we are all the same and are afraid of questioning people because their response might well reveal our degradation. If, for example, one of them, without violence, to rid himself as quickly as possible of his anguish, says to us, under his breath, 'And what about the fellagha, then? Have they not carried out atrocities?' We understand at once that fear, denial, silence have made us return once more to the barbaric times of an eye for an eye. ... And that is what makes us guilty: the turmoil in our minds, the game of hide and seek that we play, the lamps that we dim, this painful bad faith."
"We must ... face up to that unexpected spectacle: the strip-tease of our humanism. Here it is, completely naked and not beautiful: it was nothing but an illusory ideology, the exquisite justification for pillage; its tenderness and its affectation sanctioned our acts of aggression. The non-violent are looking pleased with themselves: neither victims nor executioners! Come on! If you are not victims, since the government for which you voted, since the army in which your young brothers have served, carried out a 'genocide' without hesitation or remorse, then you are unquestionably executioners. And if you choose to be victims, to risk one or two days in prison, you are just extricating yourself while you can. But you cannot extricate yourself: you must stay in to the bitter end. Understand this for once: if the violence had started this evening, if exploitation or oppression had never existed on earth, perhaps this display of non-violence could settle the dispute. But if the entire regime and even your non-violent thoughts are a condition born of an age-old oppression, your passivity only serves to place you on the side of the oppressors."
"We were human beings at their expense, they are making themselves human beings at ours. Different human beings, of better quality."
"When we talk of the 'colonial system,' we must be clear about what we mean. It is not an abstract mechanism. The system exists, it functions; the infernal cycle of colonialism is a reality. But this reality is embodied in a million colonists, children and grandchildren of colonists, who have been shaped by colonialism and who think, speak and act according to the very principles of the colonial system."
"There are neither good nor bad colonists: there are colonialists. Some among them reject their objective reality: carried along by the colonial apparatus, they do each day, in deed, what they condemn in their dreams, and each of their acts contributes to maintaining oppression. They will change nothing, be of no use to anyone, and find their moral comfort in their malaise, that is all. The others--and they are the majority--sooner or later accept themselves as they are. ... How can this elite of usurpers, conscious of their mediocrity, justify their privileges? Only one way: diminish the colonized in order to exult themselves, deny the status of human beings to the natives, and deprive them of basic rights. That will not be difficult as, precisely, the system deprives them of everything: colonialist practice has engraved the colonial idea on things themselves; it is the movement of things which designates both the colonist and the colonized. Thus oppression justifies itself: the oppressors produce and maintain by force the evils which, in their eyes, make the oppressed resemble more and more what they would need to be in order to deserve their fate."
"We already feel prey to a vague malaise. It is not yet horror but a feeling that horror exists, very close by, all the more threatening because we cannot and will not look it in the face. And then, all at a flash which makes it blindingly obvious: 'What if it were true?' ... Everyone keeps quiet, everyone looks at their neighbor who keeps quiet, everybody wonders: 'What does he know? What does he believe? What has he decided to forget?' Except among people on the same side, we are afraid to speak. What if I were to find a criminal acquiescence in the man who has just shaken my hand? This man says nothing: he who says nothing consents. But I do not say anything either. What if, on the contrary, it were he who reproached me for my spinelessness? Mistrust teaches us a new solitude: we are separated from our fellow citizens by the fear of having to despise or of being despised. It is one and the same thing, moreover, since we are all the same and are afraid of questioning people because their response might well reveal our degradation. If, for example, one of them, without violence, to rid himself as quickly as possible of his anguish, says to us, under his breath, 'And what about the fellagha, then? Have they not carried out atrocities?' We understand at once that fear, denial, silence have made us return once more to the barbaric times of an eye for an eye. ... And that is what makes us guilty: the turmoil in our minds, the game of hide and seek that we play, the lamps that we dim, this painful bad faith."
"We must ... face up to that unexpected spectacle: the strip-tease of our humanism. Here it is, completely naked and not beautiful: it was nothing but an illusory ideology, the exquisite justification for pillage; its tenderness and its affectation sanctioned our acts of aggression. The non-violent are looking pleased with themselves: neither victims nor executioners! Come on! If you are not victims, since the government for which you voted, since the army in which your young brothers have served, carried out a 'genocide' without hesitation or remorse, then you are unquestionably executioners. And if you choose to be victims, to risk one or two days in prison, you are just extricating yourself while you can. But you cannot extricate yourself: you must stay in to the bitter end. Understand this for once: if the violence had started this evening, if exploitation or oppression had never existed on earth, perhaps this display of non-violence could settle the dispute. But if the entire regime and even your non-violent thoughts are a condition born of an age-old oppression, your passivity only serves to place you on the side of the oppressors."
"We were human beings at their expense, they are making themselves human beings at ours. Different human beings, of better quality."
May 23, 2008
The last time I read Sartre, it involved "No Exit" and hell and lots of insane, awful people. This time? It was kind of the same thing. Except with history. And I must say, written in a much more coherent and understandable manner. Sartre takes sides against the 1960s French establishment on Algeria, war, and the state of mind in France. He also trashes De Gaulle thoroughly (and deservedly). He has such thoughtful, incisive things to say about the government at the time. He was excommunicated from many circles for writing what he wrote in this book, and in a France reeling from the shock of losing their world power, the devastation of WWII, and in a state of denial that I believe has lasted up to the present day that makes some sense.
Recommended for students of colonialism and French history, and Sartre fans who want to see a different side of their hero.
Recommended for students of colonialism and French history, and Sartre fans who want to see a different side of their hero.
December 20, 2019
'Sartre is a true post-colonial pioneer. His ethical and political struggle against all forms of oppression and exploitation speak to the problems of our own times with a rare courage and cogency.'
Homi K. Bhabha.
Homi K. Bhabha.
December 23, 2015
A nuanced and often overlooked examination of colonial ethics and politics and anti-colonial struggles. Another user summed it up well, calling it something like the colonizer's guide to anti-colonialism. Worth reading as a complement to Fanon, though I also recommend reading this text in conjunction with Camus' often (and rightly) decried writings on Algeria. Doing so really drives the old mantra home: "Camus can do, but Sartre is smartre."
October 17, 2019
Sartre is such a strong writer, and his articles provide a damning critique of our (first worlders) complacency in colonial systems.
"We are not wonderful. No more than we are naive."
"We are not wonderful. No more than we are naive."
December 23, 2018
"Some among them reject their objective reality: carried along by the colonial apparatus, they do each day, in deed, what they condemn in their dreams, and each of their acts contributes to maintaining oppression. They will change nothing, be of no use to anyone, and find their moral comfort in their malaise, that is all.
"The others -- and they are the majority -- sooner or later accept themselves as they are.
"Memmi has provided a remarkable description of the sequence of steps which leads them to 'self-absolution'. Conservatism engenders the selection of mediocre people. How can this elite of usurpers, conscious of their mediocrity, justify their privileges? Only one way: diminish the colonized in order to exult themselves, deny the status of human beings to the natives, and deprive them of basic rights. That will not be difficult as, precisely, the system deprives them of everything; colonialist practice has engraved the colonial idea on things themselves; it is the movement of things which designates both the colonist and the colonized. Thus oppression justifies itself: the oppressors produce and maintain by force the evils which, in their eyes, make the oppressed resemble more and more what they would need to be in order to deserve their fate. The colonist can absolve himself only by systematically pursuing the 'dehumanization' of the colonized, that is by identifying a little more each day with the colonial apparatus. Terror and exploitation dehumanize, and the exploiter uses this dehumanization to justify further exploitation. The machine runs smoothly; impossible to distinguish between idea and praxis, and between the latter and objective necessity. These moments of colonialism sometimes influence one another and sometimes blend. Oppression is, first of all, hatred of the oppressor towards the oppressed. Only one limit to this enterprise of extermination: colonialism itself. It is here that the colonists meet their own contraction: along with the colonized, colonization, the colonizers included, would disappear. No more underclass, no more exploitation: they would fall back into the normal forms of capitalist exploitation, wages and prices would come into line with those in France; it would mean ruin. The system wants the death and multiplication of its victims at the same time; any transformation will be fatal to it: whether the natives are assimilated or massacred, labour costs will rise constantly. The heavy machine keeps those who are compelled to turn it between life and death -- always closer to death than life; petrified ideology applies itself to considering men as animals that talk. In vain: in order to give them orders, even the harshest, the most insulting, you have to begin by acknowledging them; and as they cannot be watched over constantly, you have to resolve to trust them. Nobody can treat a man 'like a dog' if he does not first consider him as a man. The impossible dehumanization of the oppressed turns against the oppressors and becomes their alienation. It is the oppressors themselves who, by their slightest gesture, resuscitate the humanity they wish to destroy; and, as they deny it to others, they find it everywhere like an enemy force. To escape from this, they must harden, give themselves the opaque consistency and impermeability of stone; in short they in turn must dehumanize themselves" (59-61).
"The others -- and they are the majority -- sooner or later accept themselves as they are.
"Memmi has provided a remarkable description of the sequence of steps which leads them to 'self-absolution'. Conservatism engenders the selection of mediocre people. How can this elite of usurpers, conscious of their mediocrity, justify their privileges? Only one way: diminish the colonized in order to exult themselves, deny the status of human beings to the natives, and deprive them of basic rights. That will not be difficult as, precisely, the system deprives them of everything; colonialist practice has engraved the colonial idea on things themselves; it is the movement of things which designates both the colonist and the colonized. Thus oppression justifies itself: the oppressors produce and maintain by force the evils which, in their eyes, make the oppressed resemble more and more what they would need to be in order to deserve their fate. The colonist can absolve himself only by systematically pursuing the 'dehumanization' of the colonized, that is by identifying a little more each day with the colonial apparatus. Terror and exploitation dehumanize, and the exploiter uses this dehumanization to justify further exploitation. The machine runs smoothly; impossible to distinguish between idea and praxis, and between the latter and objective necessity. These moments of colonialism sometimes influence one another and sometimes blend. Oppression is, first of all, hatred of the oppressor towards the oppressed. Only one limit to this enterprise of extermination: colonialism itself. It is here that the colonists meet their own contraction: along with the colonized, colonization, the colonizers included, would disappear. No more underclass, no more exploitation: they would fall back into the normal forms of capitalist exploitation, wages and prices would come into line with those in France; it would mean ruin. The system wants the death and multiplication of its victims at the same time; any transformation will be fatal to it: whether the natives are assimilated or massacred, labour costs will rise constantly. The heavy machine keeps those who are compelled to turn it between life and death -- always closer to death than life; petrified ideology applies itself to considering men as animals that talk. In vain: in order to give them orders, even the harshest, the most insulting, you have to begin by acknowledging them; and as they cannot be watched over constantly, you have to resolve to trust them. Nobody can treat a man 'like a dog' if he does not first consider him as a man. The impossible dehumanization of the oppressed turns against the oppressors and becomes their alienation. It is the oppressors themselves who, by their slightest gesture, resuscitate the humanity they wish to destroy; and, as they deny it to others, they find it everywhere like an enemy force. To escape from this, they must harden, give themselves the opaque consistency and impermeability of stone; in short they in turn must dehumanize themselves" (59-61).
September 8, 2017
Unbelievably fresh and relevant. Everyone should read this.
August 5, 2024
A great collection of essays that shows a window into the transition period from Existentialism to Marxism of Sartre. All written accessibly, this is a great primer if one wants to dive deeper into the later works of Sartre that are quite difficult because of the amount of background knowledge one would need to read them (Search for a Method, Critique of Dialectical Reason). Also, it shows the idiosyncrasies of Sartre's anti-Stalinism, which funnily he was labeled a Soviet apologist during his book The Communists and Peace, that shows strains of political Marxism, Anarchism, Leninism, and early Maoisms that he was working through. The last essay on Lumumba is fascinating because of his ardent criticism but also appraisal of the Congo figure that shows Sartre's dialectical approach politically par excellence. This includes his critique but desire for centralism, and his belief in socialism and vanguardism. Also, the famous preface to Wretched of the Earth is here (which is amazing) and throughout the essays you see the deep influence of Fanon on his work. Overall, great, but some essays just feel forced into this collection and sound repetitive with the rest. I wish something like "Black Orpheus" was included.
September 18, 2022
A l’origine du pittoresque il y a la guerre et le refus de comprendre l’ennemi : de fait, nos lumières sur l’Asie nous sont venues d’abord de missionnaires irrités et de soldats. Plus tard sont arrivés les voyageurs — commerçants et touristes—qui sont des militaires refroidis:le pillage se nomme «shopping »et les viols se pra¬ tiquent onéreusement dans des boutiques spécialisées. Mais l’attitude de principe n’a pas changé : on tue moins souvent les indigènes mais on les méprise en bloc, ce qui est la forme civilisée du massacre; on goûte l’aristocratique plaisir de compter les séparations. (p. 7)
July 2, 2023
Acaban de estallar protestas en la capital por el trato a las comunidades provenientes de las antiguas colonias africanas. Eso ocurría en el país de Sartre en la época en que escribió este ensayo y sigue ocurriendo a 23 años de haber comenzado el nuevo siglo. Algunos radicales de opinión , críticos de Sartre por su objeción al stalinismo,omitieron su voz en sus asuntos actuales y tan puntuales de su época.
May 18, 2022
Texts from current events usually do not age very well. Sartre is more Leninist than I was wishing he is. He is more oaccepting of Jacobinist repressions in South than North.
October 3, 2024
Read sections for Fall 2024 Orientalism course. ILL READ THE WHOLE THING WHEN I HAVE THE TIME BCS WHY IS SARTRE SO GOOD AT WRITING
October 24, 2008
snarky as hell anticolonialism from sartre--heavy rhetoric and decision shutdowns of colonial arguments. sartre covers stereotyping, the economics of colonialism, its inevitable end, as well every citizens' responsibility and benefitting from colonizing another country, and our unfortunate choice NOT to learn about our own state's atrocities--has a strong resonance with our current position in iraq
June 15, 2014
A very informative collection of essays about political events during the 50's, particularly Algeria's struggle for independence from France, and the Congo's independence from Belgium. Throughout the essays, he offers insight into the system of colonialism, and how it manifests itself in modern times, through economic dominance and exploitation. It was a bit over my head, as it is a bit cerebral and difficult to read, but very interesting, nonetheless.
July 15, 2016
This book is a collection of essays which offer a French perspective for those pursuing colonial studies. Sartre's perspectives on post-colonialism written in 1967 have relevance even today.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews