Thanks. Fanon’s endorsement of violence is problematic, but he does give justification for it in response to colonialism’s dehumanization of native peoples. I think that’s the point on which the discussion needs to be had on whether MLK or Fanon’s approach is more justified in a given situation: can the misrecognition of subaltern peoples be transformed through peaceful means or does it require violence?

But that’s a big part of why I don’t think we can remove “colonizers” from the discussion, after reading Fanon.

https://medium.com/politically-speaking/frantz-fanon-on-being-black-2373c50bf92a