by Julie Nxadi
Contemporary theory, in principle, should be informed by
nuanced accounts of historical events that form the current political and philosophical
climate. It has, however, been informed by persistent trends that have been
formed and have gone unchallenged in history, these trends are of course
informed by the zeitgeist in which they are formulated. One such trend is that
of the particularization and negative connotations correlated to the black
body. An action that has coddled and indeed protected this trend is the single
narrative in the telling of history which safeguards carefully formulated
ideologies and informs contemporary theories. In the following essay I seek to
illustrate how the omission of the Haitian Revolution from common political
discourse has retarded global tolerance, perpetuated racial dichotomies and
provided a historical narrative devoid of nuance and an understanding of
subjects surrounding race that is sorely lacking. I will also undertake to
illustrate how this has influenced the trajectory of contemporary discourse and
the implications that have persisted in contemporary theory as a direct result
of this omission.
That which cannot be measured
The Haitian Revolution took place in a time when people of
colour where in fact not considered people. Michel-Rolph Trouillot writes that
"The lexical opposition Man-versus-Native (or Man-versus-Negro) tinted the
European literature on the Americas from 1492 to the Haitian Revolution and
beyond" (1995: 82). This is to say; there existed a barrier between what
was considered to be a human being and what was considered to be a native, the
latter being the lesser of the two beings. The "Declaration of the rights
of man" signed on August 26th 1789 following the French Revolution,
unearthed the notion of equal human rights amongst human beings. This gave the
intensely oppressed slaves of Haiti hope that they might have access to and might
finally be allowed to exercise these rights. With time, however, it became
clear that the term 'man' was by no means an inclusive one “For indeed, in the
horizon of the West at the end of the century, Man (with a capital M) was
primarily European and male” writes Trouillot. It is thus that the French
Revolution became the myth that informed the Haitian revolutions actions, and
though the French Revolution had theorized and conceptualized the idea of human
rights and equality, it was the Haitian Revolution that put these theories and
concepts into practice and pursued them relentlessly. Let it then be considered
that the revolution staged by these Haitian slaves was not in pursuit of
liberty, but rather it was an announcement and reclaiming of humanity which
would inevitably result in equal treatment, therefore liberty. Considering the
discourse that existed (Man-versus-Native), against which the Haitian slaves
had to rage , one has to attempt to understand two things: firstly, what might
be the basis of this type of discourse (I.E how is it beneficial) and secondly,
what might be the implication of the maintenance of said discourse.
Let us begin with the basis of the discourse. Atrocities such
as slavery and colonialism cannot be justified if those being enslaved and
colonized are recognized as being equal to those enslaving or colonizing them,
the consideration for basic human rights would not allow for such. In order to
justify the actions taken against an entire race of people for capital gain,
the discourse had to be arranged to suit the agenda. Trouillot writes that
"colonization provided the most potent impetus for the transformation of
European ethnocentrism into scientific racism" where the "ideological
rationalization of Afro-America slavery relied increasingly on explicit formulations
of the ontological order inherited from the renaissance" (1995: 77). What
Trouillot is telling us here is that the agenda informed the zeitgeist and the
zeitgeist informed the discourse. The agenda, capitalist at its very core,
sought maximum returns, slavery and colonialism could aptly provide this. In
order for slavery and colonialism to thrive, racism had to be entrenched in
common discourse and consiousness. Capitalist endeavours, or the agenda, inform
research and investigations veered towards the confirmation of ideologies that
feed into it. Thus the movement from racist ideologies to scientific racism
served to reaffirm and legitimate the treatment dealt out to the people of
colour in the name of capital. Those ideologies are of course those of the
native being a tame type of beast. Only
against the backdrop of the tame beast can the concept of ownership,
punishment, discipline and ill treatment of people of colour be tolerated by
the global community, or in this case, the West.
Functioning off of the premise that slaves were not human
beings meant that traits of humanity could not be acknowledged by planters and
managers; there is no such thing as a disgruntled dog. Slaves, according to the
popular discourse at the time, did not possess the cognitive capacity to
strategize, or in fact recognise the need for a strategy that veered towards
liberty. Incidents of revolt were considered isolated and not acknowledged to
be anything but insolence. When considering the agenda, one might be inclined to
understand the dismissal of the humanity of slaves in pursuit of capital gain.
It is in fact not uncommon, even in the contemporary political landscape, for
whole groups of people in communities to be relegated to the status of
sub-human in pursuit of what are considered to be societal ideologies. The
confusion lies in the persistence of this flawed notion of dehumanization even
after the very group that was said to have little to no cognitive ability,
stages a successful revolution. How, one might ask, was this not a turning
point in the discourse surrounding race?
Imagine, for a moment, that one evening all the dogs in
Grahamstown gathered and staged a revolt. After having liberated themselves
from their owners, the dogs occupy a piece of land and call it Dogtown where
they endeavour to live dignified lives without being anyone’s property. If
“that was strange” is the only response that the community can provide without
once considering a rethinking of the discourse that surrounds dogs, it is not
the revolt that is bizarre but the response to it. By not acknowledging that
the dogs are more than we thought they were, we cast the dog-owner discourse in
amber, one must then wonder if that is not the point.
Trouillot states that “The Haitian Revolution did challenge
the ontological and political assumptions of the most radical writers of the
Enlightenment…They were “unthinkable” facts in the framework of Western
thought” (1995: 82). Essentially, what is being said is that the Western
framework of thought lacked the apparatus to understand the revolution. I have
problems with elements of this assertion.
I am inclined to concede on the idea that the West had invested so much
time and energy into the dehumanization of the slaves and black body that they
had reached a point of not having the apparatus to predict the revolution and were
thus baffled by it, it may thus have been “unthinkable” prior to its
occurrence. However, if we consider
Pierre Bourdieu’s definition of the unthinkable where he states that “In the
unthinkable of an epoch, there is all that one cannot think for want of ethical
or political inclinations that predispose to take it into account or in
consideration, but also that which one cannot think for want of instruments of
thought such as problematics, concepts, methods, techniques”, we begin to see
that the concepts, methods and techniques were provided. The revolution was the
point of departure that could inform a rethinking and reimagining of racial
dichotomies. The fixation with theory preceding practise is one element that
retarded this progression, however, I think it naive to underestimate the power
of the commitment the West had to domination. It is thus that we must consider
the implied agenda of not acknowledging the Haitian Revolution as a significant
historical and political event, I put forward that it is to cast the
‘pet-owner’ dichotomy in amber.
Implications and effects of the
erasure
Trouillot emphasises two points of reference towards
understanding the Haitian Revolution and its erasure from world history, the
first being the unthinkable nature of the event considering the context in
which it took place and secondly, the segregation of Haiti from the rest of the
world not only inflicted by the ‘west’ but also self-inflicted in pursuit of a different
type of state. Trouillot writes “As Haiti declined, the reality of the
revolution seemed increasingly distant…the revolution that was unthinkable
became a non-event” (1995: 98). Indeed, the conundrum for Haiti became that of
being self-sustaining but at the same time not turning around and being
dependent on the very people that they sought to liberate themselves from,
however that saw the state becoming ostracized from the rest of the global
economy and spiralling into a state of political and economic decline.
More unsettling, however, is the implication of this erasure
from world history and the affect it has in the black person’s self-concept.
Trouillot speaks of the erasure of the Haitian Revolution as fitting “the
relegation to a historical backburner of the three themes to which it was
linked: racism, slavery and colonialism” (98). The suggestion here is that the
silencing of the Revolution served in the interest of downplaying the atrocious
essence of these three themes that so strongly informed the zeitgeist. If we
are to acknowledge the implications put forward by Trouillot, which I am
suggesting we do, it becomes clear that the tether between theoretical freedom
and a practical liberation that exists and can be measured is frayed and on the
verge of breaking. Theoretically, post Revolution, the Haitian slaves were
free. Having liberated themselves from their oppressors they could enjoy the
liberties of free human beings as a result of fighting for their human rights.
However, since there was such an active effort to ignore their struggle for
equality and thus freedom, and effectively, an erasure of that struggle from
the history books; one cannot help but wonder why the success of the Haitian
Revolution could be seen as problematic.
Surely, the conversion of theories and concepts of the French
Revolution into practical actions in reality in the Haitian Revolution would
serve to prove the power of theory and conceptualisation. However, as aforementioned, it would also
dismantle the preconceived ideas about the black body and its capabilities and
would have destroyed the capitalistic endeavours of the West. Harrowing as that
may be, there is a more profound impact of this erasure that needs to be
acknowledged and that is the impact that the celebration of the Haitian
Revolution would have had on contemporary discourse surrounding Africa and the
black person not only external discourse about the black person but internal
discourse.
Lest we forget, many of the slaves that staged the revolution
were ‘fresh off the boat’. Due to the terrible manner in which slaves were
treated in St Domingo especially, there was a constant influx of new slaves
pouring into the colony. The slaves, having come straight from Africa, were considered
to be wild animals with limited cognitive abilities which further fed into the
inability to comprehend their behaviour. However, they did in fact strategize,
plan and mobilise themselves with an overarching idea of what they sought to
achieve. This denied the ahistorical view held of them and spoke to sophistication
and a dignity that they had been denied. The slaves were rebutting the notion
of them being animals and by ignoring that rebuttal, the west essentially
ignored the idea in itself. This decision to ignore the possibility of there
being more to the Negro than that which was assigned to him is a denial of
humanity. Toni Morrison once wrote:
Whitepeople believed that whatever the manners, under every dark skin was a jungle. Swift unnavigable waters, swinging screaming baboons, sleeping snakes, red gums ready for their sweet white blood. In a way, he thought, they were right. The more coloredpeople spent their strength trying to convince them how gentle they were, how clever and loving, how human, the more they used themselves up to persuade whites of something Negroes believed could not be questioned, the deeper and more tangled the jungle grew inside. Toni Morrison
The legacy of the animal is thus woven into
both histories. The animal that is informed by fear; that acts out, that
dismantles, that coerces violently, and the animal that is informed by that
violence; that is consumed and enraged, that is assumed and thus flattened.
These are, understandably, nuances to the legacy of slavery that both sides
would sooner forget. Indeed, it would be more pleasant to remember slavery as
the back bone of the American economy and the black backs that formed that back
bone as strong, wise and pious. Intense dichotomies of the Negro’s obscenely
hard physicality and sturdiness paired with the childlike naivety and loyalty
that borders on other worldly in its persistence, speaks directly to the need
to avoid the legacy of centuries of torture.
However, this is a denial
to the African and indeed black narrative that is worrying. The narrative that
holds true is that of the docile animal that, though acknowledged as human now,
is still denied a certain degree of humanity and thus limited their concept of
agency. The erasure of the Haitian Revolution helped to feed into that
narrative. The revolution became an isolated incident that spoke nothing to the
notions and ideas held regarding the black body. Having taken back the humanity
that black people were denied in the form of a successful revolution, seeing
that erased from history and dismissed as a fluke further stamps the notion of
social paralysis and lack of agency. The black person has assimilated these
traits into their consciousness as there has been a systematic editing of
history to suit and soothe the consciences of the oppressor.
Lewis Gordon writes that
“the people who can most afford giving up reality are those who are already
supported by a system that would make such a turn an inconsequential one”
(2006: 20). This is the power of universality. This universality is one that
the particularised black cannot permeate and I believe that the denial of such
histories as the Haitian Revolution have contributed directly to that social
paralysis. I am by no means denying the agency held by the black person in the
global sphere in contemporary discourse. However, it is counterproductive to
deny the impact of history on contemporary understandings of the racial
dichotomy. The mind has been the biggest tool in racist themes and I believe
that acknowledgment of the Haitian Revolution would have dismantled the
dismissive nature of the discourse surrounding the African continent and black
people.
I believe that theory can only grow from nuance.
To have a single narrative is a form of tyranny. It is thus that I assert that
the denial of the Haitian Revolution for the many years it was ignored was
detrimental not only to theoretical progression but also to the progression of
a people who, in essence, had assimilated superimposed notions of them into
their consciousness and continued to be particularised in a system that sought
to hold power in a certain rung and deny it in another.
Reference:
Trouillot,
M-R., 1995, Silencing the Past: Power and
the Production of History,Boston Massachusetts: Beacon Press Books.
Gordon,
L. and Gordon, J., 2006, Not Only the
Masters Tools: African-American Studies in
Theory and Practice, Colorado: Paradigm Publishers.
Morrison,
T., 1987, Beloved, New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
