An Understanding of Settler Colonialism
As human beings, we need to own something, may it be a name, a personality, or land. We do so because we assume that by having something attached to us, we could have some anchor in the world. Throughout history, different people experienced differently this idea of owning. The Twa were attached to their forest and felt a connection that went beyond ownership. They felt like being part of the forest. On the other hand, the Tuaregs, great travelers, did not feel a strong attachment to the land, but their belongings and camels were other parts of their identities. From the North to the South, from East to West, different people had those different understandings. Clashes would occur when one group does not take into consideration the ideas of the other. Recent history showed some of the extremes of these clashes, with the sophistication of settler colonialism.
Settler colonialism is the ideology that a group of people can leave their land and go to another land claiming that it is theirs. There is an important materialistic element to it because settler colonialism is inscribed in one of the phases of European capitalism and Imperialism. There are two main ways settler colonialism manifests and justifies itself. The first is when the settlers pretend that the territory they are occupying is free and does not belong to anyone. This was the justification of colonialists who were the ancestors of modern-day white US Americans. They took advantage of the fact that the idea of ownership was completely different for the Natives and Indigenous people, hence violating principles that have been governing human societies and maintaining balance for centuries.
Indeed, the natives were attached to their land but they understood it to belong to everyone. When the Settlers arrived they prevented the natives from accessing the land because of the capitalistic mindset that allows some people to own means of production (the land included). They achieved that by dehumanizing the Natives, which then allowed them to argue that there was no other human there. This, of course, came from a fallacy that the humanity of a person can be confirmed by another person. By maintaining itself for other centuries, this type of settler colonialism can elaborate an entire history that would then reinforce their ownership of the land. The case of the United States may seem difficult to characterize because where so many other people have come (by choice, circumstances, or by brutal force), and so much mixing of culture and people happened. However, the structures are still very explicit, and there is a tremendous number of lived experiences of the dehumanization and dispossession of the land.
The same type of settler colonialism was carried mainly in South Africa by Boers (with its final stage being the Apartheid), or in Australia by the British. A close analysis shows if one looks at the economic aspect, it can be seen that settler colonialism goes hand in hand with the exploitation of the new land.
The second type is when the settlers pretend that the territory they occupy is historically theirs. In this case, they acknowledge that there are people on it, but they go on a campaign to chase them out, because they believe they are the rightful owners of the land. This can be well illustrated in Zionism, through which European Jews went to colonize the land of Palestine. This type of settler colonialism has also a material motive, but it primarily focuses on culture and identity (often for propaganda purposes). Indeed, it justified itself by connecting to the historical elements that would legitimize their occupation. However, like other settler colonialisms, it ultimately dehumanized the natives to maintain itself and then replicate the capitalistic structures of exploitation.
A close analysis would show that the first type of settler colonialism justifies and supports the second one. One could even add that the second is the sophisticated version of the first. Indeed, the State of Israel (the result of Zionism) was established and supported by the UK which was the main leader of settler colonialism around the globe (in Canada, Kenya, Australia, and the US, to cite a few). Recent history has shown how the US supports Israel's occupation of Palestine and the dehumanization of Palestinians because it would be a threat to US legitimacy as a settler colony if they condemned another settler colony.
An interesting nuance to add would be the case of Liberia and Sierra Leone, where former enslaved Africans (Black) came back. In Liberia, they separated themselves from the Native Africans and established a form of US colonialism. Like the Zionists, they would justify their new occupation by claiming their historical roots in the place. However unlike Zionism, the timespan was not very large, they eventually reconnected to their true identity as Africans and could live in peace with the native Africans. The case of Sierra Leone is far from settler colonialism because the former enslaved Africans did not have the US colonial mindset. So, their reunion with the Native Africans was truly a return home.
It is important to mention that any type of settler colonialism relies on the number of settlers. For instance, the United States, Australia, and Canada are still standing because of their large majority of so-called white people. In the first stage, they could overwhelm the natives with brutal and violent actions. In the second stage, they could establish a nation based on democracy that would give political and economic power to the majority (surprisingly, the settlers). Although it would be overgeneralizing to associate democracy with colonialism, it would be foolish to ignore or downplay its role in maintaining the status quo of settlers. In the third stage, they could control every single aspect of the occupied land, from the culture to the socio-economic interaction between individuals.
However, in the case of South Africa, the native Africans were many (more than 70%), hence by uniting and gaining consciousness they became a greater threat to Boers. That is why in the early stages of the Apartheid, it was so important to create and maintain the Bantustan. They were small pieces of land, scattered in South Africa, where the native Africans were concentrated. Hence, it was not surprising that a leader supported by all native Africans would win any free election in which all the people were participating. Nevertheless, it is necessary to remember that the structures and systems from the Apartheid are still affecting the native Africans. This is because the apartheid was overthrown only politically and not economically.
Settler colonialism like Zionism has developed ways to go around that weak point. For example, the State of Israel gives a right of return to anyone who can identify and be identified as a Jew. With the help of former colonial countries (Europe and the US), they invite more settlers, to fully occupy the territory of Palestine. Moreover, they prevent Palestinian refugees from having the same rights. It can even be added that no confusion can be made with that move because for a time they refused that right to Ethiopian Jews or some Eastern European Jew. Eugenic and racist motives are another characteristic of settler colonialism. Through that, however, the Zionist entity (state of Israel) hopes to achieve an overwhelming majority that would make its occupation permanent and “legitimate”.
Settler Colonialism is a danger to the balance of the world and the harmony with nature. It is one of the highest expressions of the capitalist ideology, but it is very different from the natural principle of ownership. Settler colonialism, just like capitalism, can only exist through exploitation, dehumanization, and the killing of innocent lives. Hence it must be dealt with the same energy as capitalism. Only a true revolution led by the people (native to the land) can break it and overthrow it.
A true revolution is one where the oppressed people are conscious of their status and their true identity. It is the one where all the oppressed people on the globe understand that settler colonialism somewhere is a threat to everyone else. A true revolution is one governed by true love that rejects any form of the capitalistic sense of ownership. It is the one that abolishes the individualism of capitalism and establishes a new system. A system where everyone owns and everyone belongs because everyone is part of nature and the cycle of life.
Although the revolution in South Africa was stopped amid progress, lessons about unity can still be learned from it. These lessons, with others from history, have given the Revolutionary Movement for the Liberation of Alkebulan (RMLA) a framework to organize and mobilize for the revolution. The RMLA is committed to fighting and resisting any form of settler colonialism around the globe because we understand that the revolution can only be achieved in a world where balance is re-established. While we know our role in history and the stages of our revolutionary journey, we offer our full support and solidarity, with any means necessary, to all our people and comrades around the globe already resisting Settler colonialism (from Palestine to New Caledonia passing by Hawaii).
Although the revolutionary process is long, we stay strong and motivated, because we are longing to be able to love one another again, without any restraint from this oppressive system.
And until then, we will keep fighting and resisting.
