Why did Fanon believe recognition from an oppressor could not bring genuine liberation?

Frantz Fanon argued that seeking recognition from an oppressor cannot lead to genuine liberation because such recognition is granted only on terms established by the oppressor. By accepting these predefined conditions, the colonized remain trapped within the power structures of colonialism rather than dismantling them.1

Fanon believed that true liberation requires the colonized to reclaim their own self-conscious agency, a process he often associated with the necessity of overcoming the psychological and physical impositions of alien rule. Because the colonial relationship is fundamentally defined by violence and the reordering of the indigenous world, Fanon posited that the colonized must move beyond merely reacting to their oppressors. Instead, they must construct a new identity and national consciousness that is independent of the binary oppositions and colonial mindsets imposed upon them.12

Ultimately, Fanon’s critique suggests that genuine freedom cannot be gifted or validated by the colonizer; it must be forged through the active, transformative process of decolonization, which involves both the colonized and the colonizer shedding the dehumanizing effects of the imperial system.1