The Poetic Way of Resistance to Western Hegemony: Where Fanon’s Anti-Imperialism and İsmet Özel’s Spiritual Resistance Meet?

Frantz Fanon offers in-depth studies of the emancipation processes of postcolonial societies and emphasized that these processes are not limited to physical independence but require a cultural and psychological transformation. So, according to Fanon, what form should this transformation take? Fanon argues that the identities of individuals shaped by colonialism must be reconstructed not only through external pressures, but also through an internal process of liberation. He argues that Western hegemony often destroys the cultural identities of colonized peoples and that resistance must be developed against this destruction. In this context, liberation is possible through both a physical and psychological revolution. Fanon not only rejects colonial society, but also argues that this rejection must be transformed into a cultural and psychological liberation.

Ismet Özel’s poetry has a similar theme of resistance. Özel questions how Western hegemony transformed the social structure in Turkey and the effects of this transformation on Turkey’s identity crisis. How is this question of identity addressed in Özel’s poetry? Using the concept of “Turkey’s Blacks,” Özel discusses the impact of Western-imposed ideologies of modernization and capitalism on marginalized groups. He defines resistance to the West not only as a political struggle but also as a spiritual and cultural resistance. What kind of cultural transformation does this resistance against the capitalist and secular ideologies of the West bring about? For Özel as for Fanon, resistance against the West is treated as a process of cultural rebirth. However, Fanon’s resistance is not limited to physical independence as a process of decolonization. The cultural resistance affirmed by both Fanon and Özel takes shape in the poetry of the latter as a spiritual revolution against the West.

There are similarities between Fanon’s anti-imperialist stance and Özel’s Islamist resistance in terms of an ideological stance against the West and the struggle for liberation. Fanon argues that a cultural transformation must take place behind and beyond political independence, one made possible through the construction of an identity capable of countering the hegemonic force of the West. Özel presents a similar view, but on a different cultural ground. In Özel’s poetry, the resistance against the West is shaped by a spiritual violence, that is, a cultural and ideological rupture. How does this cultural rupture transform identities shaped by Western hegemony? Özel argues that the liberation of marginalized groups under the oppression of the West is possible as a result of a spiritual resistance against the West. In Özel’s poetry, this resistance is expressed not only as an ideological resistance but also as a process of spiritual rebirth based on the values of Islam. The ideas of both thinkers are important theoretical tools in the struggle for liberation and identity construction against Western hegemony.

İsmet Özel: A Very Brief Introduction

İsmet Özel is one of the most influential figures in Turkish poetry and thought after 1960. In his poems published from 1963 onward and in his essays written in the following years, he questioned the effects of Western modernization on Turkish society.

İsmet Özel was born in Kayseri on September 19, 1944, and spent his childhood years in different cities due to his father’s civil service. After completing his primary school education in Kastamonu Abdülhak Hamit Primary School, he moved with his family to Çankırı, where he attended secondary school and part of high school, and then graduated from Ankara Gazi High School in 1962. In the same year, he enrolled in Ankara University Faculty of Political Sciences, but left before completing his studies at this faculty. During his university years, Özel joined the Workers’ Party of Turkey and adopted a socialist worldview. He was interested in poetry from a young age and began publishing his first poems in 1963. In 1966, he published his first book of poetry, A Run at Night, followed by Yes, Rebellion in 1969. During this period, while he dealt with individual and social issues together in his poems, he also formed his poetics.

In the early 1970s, Özel underwent an intellectual transformation, adopting a Muslim worldview and reflecting this new perspective in both his poetry and essays. His poem “Amentü,” published in Sezai Karakoç’s Diriliş magazine in 1974, is an important indicator of his transition to this new period. In 1975, Özel published his third book of poetry, The Book of Murders, and graduated from Hacettepe University, Department of French Language and Literature. In his first book of prose, Üç Mesele (Three Issues)—published in 1978—the poet criticized the moral decadence caused by Westernization and technology, focusing on the concepts of technique, civilization, and alienation. While Özel’s writings generally followed an anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist line, he defended the idea that the unifying force of Turkey was Islam. He systematized his understanding of poetry with his “Poetry Reading Guide” published in 1980 and played an important role in the development of modern Turkish poetry (Tüzer, 2007).

İsmet Özel ‘s intellectual journey can be divided into three main periods that can be summarized as “poet, communist, Muslim.” Focusing on the concept of Turkishness in his later years, Özel defined Turkishness as “the comprehension of a historical role” and “the way to be a good Muslim” rather than an ethnic or biological element. According to him, being a Turk means “being a Muslim who is willing to clash with the infidel” and Turkishness is nothing other than being the flag-bearer of Islam. With this approach, he positions Turkishness as a historical and ideological position, not a biological or cultural one. Özel’s poetry and ideas have had a profound impact on Turkish literature and the world of thought. He received various awards, his works have been translated into different languages, and he has been active in both academic and intellectual fields for many years (Yıldız, n.d.).

Fanon and Özel: Intersections in the Critique of Western Hegemony

An initial point of comparison between Fanon and Özel emerges in terms of the importance of naming and self-definition. Born in Martinique in 1925, Fanon analyzed the psychological effects of colonization on individuals and societies throughout his life, an analysis extended through his psychiatric career in Algeria and subsequent active participation in the Algerian struggle for independence. Central in his analysis is the social construction of “black,” “white,” “native,” and “settler” identities, which are invented and instrumentalized in colonial relations. Questioning the mentality behind the West’s claim of superiority, Fanon argues that the redefinition of the colonized individual by the colonizer results in the loss of identity and the internalization of a sense of inferiority.

Fanon’s first major work, Black Skin, White Masks, explores in depth the psychological trauma of colonized societies and individuals. Here, he argues that colonialism constructs the Black and the white, such that to be healthy is to be white, producing “aberrations of affect” among Black people as “health” would demand they pursue an unachievable whiteness. In Fanon’s other most well-known work, The Wretched of the Earth, he shows that the colonial system alienates the individual from his or her own values and uses tools of naming and identification in this process. For Fanon, the first step in establishing dominance over a person or society is to rename and define it. In this process, a claim of ownership over the defined object—here the “Black”—is established: “I have defined it, therefore it belongs to me.” As Nimet Karadağ notes, by opposing such external definitions, Fanon argues that a self-definition and resistance must be developed against the identity crisis created by the colonial perspective.

In Özel’s poetry and works of thought, a critical attitude toward Western efforts to redefine the concepts of “nation” and “Turk” comes to the fore. Especially in his work “Not an Evening Excursion, but an Independence March,” he radically differentiates the concepts of Turkishness and Turkish nationalism from Western-centered definitions. According to him, Turkishness can be limited to neither an ethnic nor a cultural category; it is defined primarily by the “realization of a historical role” and the consciousness of being a “Muslim who dares to clash with the infidel.” Özel’s approach is a rejection of Western-centered definitions of modern Turkish identity. Arguing that in the process of Westernization, the Turkish intellectual has turned into a “named” and “defined” object, Özel emphasizes the necessity of constructing one’s own self-definition and system of values in order to break this process. In this context, using Cemil Meriç’s metaphor of “Saxon slaves,” he argues that the intellectuals in Turkey have submitted to the definitions of the West.

Fanon and Özel thus both emphasize the necessity of self-definition and resistance against external definitions in the construction of identity. While Fanon advocates self-definition and cultural resistance against the identity crisis created by colonial logic, Özel emphasizes his own definition and value system against Western interventions on Turkish identity (on this point, see Durmuş, 2022 and Fedai, 2018).

Another point of convergence between Fanon and Özel is on the question of the active agency necessary for genuine liberation. In Wretched of the Earth, Fanon argues that freedom and true independence can only be achieved through active resistance, even violence, against the colonizer. According to Fanon, rights granted “by the grace” of the colonial power do not confer true freedom; such rights can be revoked at any time, and freedom must be won through struggle. Fanon’s analysis highlights not only physical colonization but also cultural and psychological colonization. For him, even if the “white man” removes the chains of the black individual, he replaces them with new and invisible bonds, which prevent the full realization of freedom. Fanon argues that freedom can only be meaningful and lasting when it is won through the individual’s own struggle and sweat. According to Fanon, rights granted from the outside with “tolerance” cannot be a substitute for real freedom, because these rights depend on the will of the colonizer and can be revoked at any time.

İsmet Özel, too, argues that modernization and social rights in Turkey have often been granted through external pressures or favors, thus social liberation has remained superficial. As in Özel’s example of the “right to the headscarf,” rights that are not won through struggle can easily be taken back. Fanon’s metaphor of the “slave allowed to eat at the white man’s table” is similar to Özel’s criticism of the Westernization process in Turkey. Both thinkers emphasize that freedom and identity must be constructed through a subjective consciousness and struggle, not dependent on external definitions and favors.

Likewise, both Fanon and Özel arrive at conclusions about the necessity of struggle against the broader (neo-)colonial capitalist world-system, beyond simply an articulation of local conditions for liberation. İsmet Özel’s criticism of modernism and modern society in his poetry and prose constitutes one of the main elements of his clear stance against the world system. Especially in his work “The Thick Turk,” he emphasizes that modernism and its result, capitalism, is not only an economic model, but also a tool of mental siege and social transformation. According to him, the shaping of minds with capitalist values in the modern era has led Muslims and society in general to adapt to the system. The processes of modernity and modernization have pushed the question of what capitalism means into the background, making all other issues secondary. Özel argues that the attitude of Muslims towards capitalism and whether Islam can be reconciled with this system is a vital issue; in an environment where minds are kept under control, ideas about capitalism ensure the continuity of the system.

In many of his works, including “Three Difficult Issues,” Özel states that the world system is not only an economic and political order, but also a structure that transforms the human search for meaning and social relations. According to him, the capitalist system is based on the chain of production, distribution and consumption, and this chain leads individuals and societies to alienation by distancing them from their own values. The freedom and individuality offered by modernity is actually an illusion that enslaves people and detaches them from meaning.

IÖzel frequently addresses in his poems the desire for the overthrow of the capitalist order and the hope for the birth of a new world. In the poem “The Gates of Rain are Dark,” images of the rebirth of nature and human beings with the destruction of the capitalist order draw attention. For the poet, the act of destruction is a sign of sacred anger and courage; only when this destruction takes place will a space of freedom emerge where people can look at the sky without shame. (For discussion, see Çağman, 2024 and Yılmaz, 2020).

In Özel’s works, the stance against capitalism is not only an economic opposition, but also a struggle for identity and existence. The attitude of Muslims toward this system is not only a reactionary rejection, but also a desire to establish a new social and moral order. In his poetry and prose, this critical view of capitalist modernity is presented as one of the main reasons for the alienation of human beings from their own essence and social values. In this framework, Özel’s criticism of capitalism and consumer society is considered as one of the biggest obstacles to liberation and the search for meaning on both individual and collective levels. In his poems and essays, there is a strong hope and call to struggle that with the collapse of the capitalist system, man will be reconciled with himself and his society.

Conclusion

Frantz Fanon and İsmet Özel demonstrate that post-colonial liberation requires revolutionary struggle through their forms of resistance against Western hegemony. Fanon analyzes the psychological destruction of colonialism on the individual and society, arguing that liberation requires not only a physical but also a cultural and mental revolution. His critique of the processes of naming and identification exposes the colonial powers’ strategy of objectifying identities. For Fanon, becomings subjects is only possible through the courage to redefine one’s own identity. Similarly, İsmet Özel criticizes the erosion of Turkish identity by Western modernization in “Üç Mesele and Bir İstiklal Yürüyüşü” (“An Independence March, Not an Evening Excursion”). Turkishness, which he defines as “the Muslim who dares to clash with the infidel,” represents an Islamic consciousness of resistance rather than an ethnic or cultural category. Özel’s poems such as “Amentü” transform this spiritual resistance into an aesthetic manifesto. 

By advocating identity construction through self-definition against external definitions, both thinkers elevate cultural resistance to a struggle for existence. These visions of resistance take on a new meaning in the so-called “post-truth” era. Fanon’s vision of the “new man” and Özel’s ideal of the “Bold Turk” may find resonance in digital activism platforms. By amplifying the voices of marginalized communities, social media can bring Fanon’s project of universal humanity and Özel’s narrative of Islamic resistance into a global discourse. For example, hashtag campaigns and online manifestos allow for the synthesis of these ideas with contemporary resistance movements. In this context, Fanon and Ozel’s ideas can guide struggles for identity and freedom not only in the past but also in the present. It is both an academic and social necessity that non-Western forms of resistance take their rightful place in the global intellectual discourse. Fanon and Özel’s works offer a universal ethics of resistance based on local contexts. Therefore, their thought should be reconsidered in order to expand the boundaries of postcolonial theory and build alternative epistemologies against hegemonic narratives. Recognizing that identity construction is not only a struggle but also a process of creation, a collective effort is essential to elevate non-Western perspectives to a central position in global discourse.