Rachel Carrig 20 December 2012 GOVT 413 J. Glass Final Essay Identity is the most important aspect of a person.

Collective identity found in societies is equally the most important aspect of them and tof their survival. This identity bonds the members of the culture together through a common union, creating a collective soul. Collective identity can apply to groups as small as simple clubs to ones as large as states and political regimes. Indeed, without this common identity, the society loses all sense of culture and self. When this identity is threatened either by external societies or internal dissidents, the group must do all it can in order to protect it, even if that includes acts of violence. The colonized people of Frantz Fanons The Wretched of the Earth and the Nazi regime both felt their identities were threatened and responded with violence in order to counteract that threat and keep their identity secure. Political actors who fight to protect such an identity, even through such violent means, should be admired because they put the core values of the group above all else. Plenty Coups of the Native American Crow tribe as described by Jonathan Lear in Radical Hope, in contrast, allowed for the destruction of the identity of the tribe by succumbing to the oppression of the U.S. government rather than taking up arms and fighting against them. Such leaders should not be commended for compromise and negotiations in order to keep the physical entity of the tribe alive and together as Lear suggests, but rather should be condemned for the abandonment and simultaneous degradation of these societal identities.

Carrig 2 Groups must work to maintain their identities in order to survive. Attacking a groups identity is attacking the very fabric of its being, the soul of the society. It is threatening its very core and thereby its continued existence. Because the identity represents the central component of the life of the group, it must be protected against such attacks at all costs. If other methods of protection fail, or if the situation necessitates the use of violence, violence and force must be implemented in order to reclaim the true nature of the society. As such, groups can and should use violence to combat an attack against their identity in order to eradicate the threat and preserve the integrity of that society. Fanons examination of the anti-colonial movement in Africa in the 1950s and early 1960s demonstrates this use of unrestrained violence to regain the identity of the colonized from the colonizers. He explains, colonialism is not a machine capable of thinking, a body endowed with reason. It is naked violence and only gives in when confronted with greater violence (Fanon 23). The colonialists oppressed the indigenous peoples of Africa with violence, and as such the only way for these people to counteract the colonialists was with just as much, if not more, violent retaliation. This violence meant to rid Africa of the oppressive colonizers and start states anew without their tyrannical influence. The soul of the colonized needed to be revived, and violent acts were the only way to do so; indeed, Fanon explains the arrival of the colonist signified syncretically the death of indigenous society, cultural lethargy, and petrifaction of the individual. For the colonized, life can only materialize from the rotting cadaver of the colonist (Fanon 50). As such, the violent uprisings by the colonized signified their determination to reclaim the true nature of their society, that being their identity. Further,

Carrig 3 this identity that these oppressed people fought for was a new one, away from both the identity of the colonized and of that of the distant African past. It represented the rebirth of the colonized to the creation of an identity surrounding their common bond of strength and survival. Ultimately, their struggle demonstrates the importance violence plays in eradicating the poison within the society and uncovering its authentic identity, independent from the oppressive nature of the colonizers. Similarly, the Nazi regime also utilized violence in order to protect its identity from the perceived threat of those they considered to be inferior, most notably the Jewish people. The Nazi identity stemmed greatly from the notion that they were part of a master Aryan race, and any other races were inferior to them. This racism allowed for them to treat those who were not part of this identity as a threat that needed to be eradicated. As such, they used violence much like the anti-colonialists in Africa in order to protect their cultural identity. In contrast, however, rather than the intense violence and struggle involved with revolution and warfare, the Nazi violence was calculated, scientific, and methodical. The eradication of inferior races through violence began with deaths only occurring when certain people within the group were deemed too unfit for any societal needs; their mere existence was perceived as useless to them, and therefore a threat to the identity of the clean, utilitarian master race. However, as World War II intensified, threats to the Nazi identity began surmounting from outside the German state. They retaliated against these threats by first attempting to completely eliminate the threat to identity within the state, and began killing on a wide scale not only those deemed useless to society but also those who they viewed as a threat to the cleanliness of the Aryan race. The Nazis implemented such violence to literally cleanse the identity of the

Carrig 4 German nation from what they viewed as a sullied, degraded people who infected their country. While they ultimately failed in this endeavor, and the ethical ramifications of ethnic cleansing are monumental and should not be ignored, from the perspective of preserving the Nazi identity alone, this violence was necessary to remove the threat of the perceived inferior people from degrading their identity. As such, in the case of the Nazis as well as the colonized Africans, the violence used to thwart the attack on their identities was necessary to protect and purify them from these insecurities. Political actors who fight to protect the identity of their culture no matter what the costs or the means deserve admiration. Leaders of societies should first and foremost protect the identity of that society, as it is the common bond that all members share within it. When this identity is broken or degraded, the bond between members collapses and the society shatters. As such, it is the leaders duty to ensure the survival of the group and thereby the survival of the group identity. Despite the argument of Jonathan Lear in Radical Hope, Plenty Coup, the leader of the Crow tribe, does not deserve any admiration for abandoning the traditional identity of the tribe in order for his people to avoid death. Fighting was the core of the longestablished Coup identity. The ceremonial coup sticks demonstrate the tremendous importance placed on both the act of battle and the defending of the Crow land. The coup sticks marked the boundary to the Crow land, and any non-Crow person who crossed it would face Crow warriors. The men fighting and counting coup were valorized for their bravery and protection, and were given the highest status among the society. As such, when Plenty Coup agreed to give Crow territory to the U.S. government without a fight, he directly contradicted the core values of the Crow. Further, when he agreed that

Carrig 5 the Crow would move onto a reservation and resign from fighting with other tribal communities, he shattered the Crow identity. The Crow society that remained was one void of meaning, held together by a past that no longer existed. Rather than surrendering to the U.S. government, Plenty Coup should have encouraged his people to fight valiantly against the oppressive outsiders even if the likelihood of success was bleak. Ultimately, the identity and the soul of the Crow disintegrated with their fighting way of life, and the degraded, half-life existence the nation was subjected to after succumbing to the U.S. government was, for them, a fate worse than a valiant death of the Crow nation. Thus, because the identity of a society is the most important aspect of its being, it must be protected at all costs. Violence may be necessary, and indeed may be the only way to ensure the security of this identity. Losing the identity is a fate worse than losing the regime in its entirety, because what is left is merely an empty shell of the previous society. Political leaders must avoid making the mistakes of Plenty Coup, and must use violence when necessary to fight for the survival of the society as the anti-colonialists and the Nazis did.

Carrig 6