Add new comment

I don't think any of the 60s/70s stuff was much like today's idpol TBH. The 60s/70s stuff was mostly Marxism-literate and psychoanalysis-literate, and had a politics of desire of some form. And if someone was feminist, black lib, gay lib etc back then this usually meant they were anti-system, anti-establishment, pro-autonomy in practice even if their ultimate agenda was statist. The current stuff is infested with cybernetics, Third Way, and kitsch-postmodernism and most of them know nothing about desire. If they have any psychology at all then it's behaviourist or pop-psych. I often use the parallel with what happened to socialism in the 30s. If you look at socialism roundabout 1910 or 1920 then it's a diverse movement with a lot of radical and anarchic content, but then it gets turned into a monolith of either Stalinist hyper-orthodoxy or social-democratic technocracy.

Most of the 50s-60s movements succeeded at the minimum level of the colonial states leaving. A lot of the time the coloniser just decided to switch strategies to neocolonialism and installed a pliant elite before a movement could even form. A few places the colonisers hung on and eventually lost long guerrilla wars. In these places the subsequent regimes were usually Soviet-allied, but the long-term trajectory is the same. And you're right, it was only so successful because the colonial powers were already in decline and overstretched, though TBH even the Americans and Soviets lost guerrilla wars in that era. Post-independence there's basically a corrupt, authoritarian elite taking over the colonial state structures just about everywhere, then in the 80s-90s the ones who weren't helping core capital accumulation were forced to do so using structural adjustment policies/debt crisis. You'd be surprised how many of these regimes are still spouting anti-colonial, pan-Africanist, anti-west, nationalist and populist stuff even while enforcing neoliberalism and cozying up to the west. These days it's either sheer rhetoric or moralistic culture-policing (banning miniskirts, alcohol, porn, gay sex, skin lightening, whatever). Quite a few of the scholars spewing "decolonial" babble are just mainstream scholars in countries which still have official nationalist ideologies.

Fanon recounts particular emotional experiences of standing-up, which were part of the anti-colonial movement, and this is found a number of places, there's a similar vibe in Freire for instance. Most places it turned sour pretty quickly though. That only happened in Algeria because they had a real independence war, and the resultant regime lost a lot of its legitimacy in the 80s-90s due to structural adjustment. These days a lot of the social movement force is with the Islamists, and Algeria had another big war in the 90s plus a belated Arab spring in 2019. I guess political Islam is a variant anti-colonialism, but a lot of the social movements nowadays are about precarity, democracy or corruption... anti-colonialism and white privilege are not all that salient.