A Fork in the Road

This is the term paper I submitted for the course on The Rebel, by Albert Camus. It was my second semester and probably overall the most compelling course I took throughout my university career. Hopefully my writing doesn't offend me and I'll be able to copy it here without too much editing.

_______________________________________

A Fork in the Road:

Tension in Camus' Rebel

Some people will create their own system of values while others will blindly accept the ideologies impressed upon them. The articulation of dissent from presupposed norms is the initiating agent of change in the structure of society. For Albert Camus, rebellion is the central issue facing all humans. It is reflected in every aspect of life; from birth to death each person is faced with the opportunity to accept of deny the conditions of their existence. The rebel is therefore in constant tension because of a paradox inherent in rebellion itself: in order to prevent suffering, one must inadvertently cause suffering to others. Initially, the rebel's intention was to communicate the limitations of suffering to an oppressor who ignored the agony of humanity. Instead, the rebel's codification of equality and solidarity asserts a particular conceptual structure that inevitably leads to the marginalization of all opposed people and ideas.

A rebel decides to confront an oppressor when no further offense of justice can be tolerated. 'Camus has located the origins of rebellion in the feeling of outrage' (Sprintzen 124). If people experience or witness excruciating pain and misery, either they will endure it till death or risk their lives to make it stop by challenging the perpetrators of harm. This renunciation of the oppressor's ideology acknowledges that suffering and oppression can be tolerated to a limit, and not beyond. Here, Camus shows the progression of rebellion from the 'No' that the slave declares to the master, to the 'Yes' in the recognition of a value 'that somewhere, and somehow, one is right' (Camus 13). The rebel sees a positive value in humanity when he refuses any further humiliation of himself or others. 'Injustice creates unhappiness, to which Camus' answer was rebellion and the freedom to pursue happiness. It was in this action that people developed solidarity with their fellows' (Tarrow 148).

As the rebel identifies a value common to all people, he recognizes the need to enact a code by which the goal of attaining that ideal becomes possible. 'The affirmation of a limit, a dignity, and a beauty common to all men only entails the necessity of extending this value to embrace everything and everyone and of advancing toward unity' (Camus 251). The assertion of the owrth of human life and the commitment to uphold it is the true spirit of rebellion. The sufferer questions the oppressor's motives and searches himself for guilt. He has not, however, committed any crime worthy of such intolerable punishment, and therefore finds himself innocent. Repulsed by the way he or others have been treated, it is presumably logical that he would not want anyone to be treated the same way. He is a rebel; he has identified the existence of a common bond between all people insofar as they are innocent of their condition, and is willing to risk his life to uphold the dignity of the human race. This commitment requires the solidarity and sense of unity found in the values that rebellion represents. The rebel will try to find a new, promising idea that will enable him to achieve the institution of a universally acceptable ideology based on justice, truth, and reason. 'The freedom he claims, he claims for all; the freedom he refuses, he forbids everyone to enjoy' (Camus 284). In making the distinction of what is best for all humanity, the rebel claims to understand an interpretation of the appropriate style of life to which society ought conform.

In order to protect the New Utopia he has created, the unfaithful rebel will need to eliminate all opposition. He believes this will achieve unity, but will only create a new and limited totality, much in the same way that the ideology rebelled against previously had been. When the rebel places 'an abstract idea above human life...at the ultimate limit, it is no longer worth anything at all' (Camus 170). Naturally, as the rebel deviates from the original spirit of rebellion by expressing an absolute truth, there will be disapproval from those who do not agree with the new tyrant. A new revolution is on short order to dispose of the now unfaithful rebel.

If the rebel expresses an ideology that absolute truth, no dialogue or disputation is possible. If others do not agree with his ideas, they will be enslaved, murdered, or otherwise marginalized to that the unfaithful rebel's perfect ideal is not lost. The 'Truth' expressed by the ideology is comparative to the initial act of rebellion only in that it was an effort to assert the validity of all humanity; it has now changed to include parameters that categorize people according to their complacency with the new truths. Seeking unity, the rebel creates totality. The slave has become the master.

"Totality for Camus is simply the ontological need for unity transformed into a destructive-oppressive metaphysical demand for a transexperiential salvation...We are then embarked upon the destructive path of the logical elaboration of an ideology and the practical imposition of that ideology, no doubt personally experienced as the necessary condition of meaningfulness and sincerely believed to be legitimately imposed upon others as essential to their salvation. (Sprintzen 243)

The unfaithful rebel will kill all those who are opposed to their eventual prospective transcendence in the name of a political ideology that undermines the success of the initial campaign for unity. Rebellion against this seemingly new ideal, the violent face of revolution that leads to injustice and oppression, is as inevitable as the original rebellion that brought it about. 'Man's solidarity is founded upon rebellion, and rebellion can find its only justification in solidarity. We have then the right to say that any rebellion which claims the right to deny or destroy this solidarity simultaneously its right to be called rebellion and becomes in reality, the acquiescence to murder" (Camus 22).

Now, if we know that rebellion can ultimately lead to injustice, revitalized by new idealistic fury, then it is most important to understand why: for exactly the same reason that rebellion initially occurred: lack of practical communication forced one human dogma on other humans with no hope of compromise. The rebel originally needed only to plead his case to the dominator, but after seizing control in the struggle for power turns a deaf ear to any criticism of his 'truth' and dominates in his own turn. "The contradiction is, in reality, considerably more restricted. The revolutionary is simultaneously a rebel or he is not a revolutionary, but a policeman and a bureaucrat who turns against rebellion...Every revolutionary ends by becoming either an oppressor or a heretic" (Camus 249) The rebel must, in order to remain true to the spirit of rebellion, respect the solidarity between humans and realize that no person has any monopoly on truth.

Dialogue is the event that characterizes rebellion. The original rebel pleads for the sanctity of human life to those who perpetuate injustice. He is confronted, however, with a stone wall. The oppressor either does not hear or does not care about his ideas. The unfaithful rebel claims to have special access to an authoritative and undeniable truth, and will not consider the opinion of anyone who disagrees. He creates a new fortress of ideology and is prepared to use violence and terror to enforce his control.

"The equation seems to be between the forces of terror and the commitment to a definitive metaphysical truth. Ideology, as we have seen, involves just such a commitment...If we insist upon the right of that truth t prevail politically, we are then compelled to deny the values of any 'erring,' contrary opinion insofar as it seeks to assert itself. Ultimately, we are led to the denial of value of the bearer of such an opinion. The destruction of dialogue becomes complete in the destruction of the person." (Sprintzen 253, my italics)

In order to recognize the solidarity of all humans, it is necessary for everyone to hear, appreciate, and value the opinions of others. It is not Camus' intention to de-value the importance of believing in one's own conceptions of truth, but rather engage in open dialogue with other people. This is an attempt to achieve the mutual understanding that in our ultimately absurd human condition, no one can claim to have the correct and exact directions to the fantastical realm of absolute truth.

What Camus is saying about rebellion is that in search of unity, it will find itself expressing totality, thus defeating the purpose of having rebelled at all. What Camus does not provide explicitly in The Rebel is a feasible solution to the paradox, although he does present his opinion on what might be done. Camus' ultimate goal, as developed and presented by David Sprintzen, is 'the achievement of an integral meaningfulness, however partial, which is an essential constituent of happiness for a reflective animal' (Sprintzen 243). This integral meaningfulness must reside within the experience of cohesion among people with similar values. The path Camus saw leading to unity began with respect for human life; it must necessarily be continued into the future by the development and growth of dialogue through persuasion. So many rebels were misguided because they ignored their option to esteem the value of other people's ideas in addition to their own. 'The skill [of persuasion] is in identifying what matters to the people being persuaded, shaping one's argument to guide the thinking of those persons, presenting oneself in a credible manner, and encouraging people to see one's perspective without setting them up as in manipulation or backing then into a corner as in coercion' (Reardon 2) In order for this operation to function, both parties must have equal consideration for each other based on a feeling of solidarity with fellow humans, and independent but open trade of thoughts. 'Persuasion requires curiosity. It demands a willingness to explore the mind-sets of other...In interpersonal persuasion [there is] something done 'with' rather than 'to' people' (Reardon 209) Therefore, rebellion is also something done 'with' others who understand that camaraderie and harmony originate with respect. 'The mutual understanding and communication discovered by rebellion can survive only in the free exchange of conversation' (Camus 283). If this practical application of rebellion was cultivated, that is, recognizing the importance of persuasion, only positive results would ensue.

For a practical example of culture developed and developing from the spirit of rebellion, Rastafarianism shows some very positive and very negative aspects. Although the official history of the Rastafarian movement begins around 1930 with the birth of Hallie Selassie I, King of Ethiopia, its roots in Jamaica date back to the time of colonialism and slavery. The Africans were originally introduced to the island by the Spanish as slaves, but not on the plantation size scale that the English established later. The only option that the slaves had for independence, under Spanish rule, was to escape and brave life among the unwelcoming Natives and inhospitable terrain of the dense jungle in the Blue Mountains. These deserters, called maroons at the time, eventually merged with the waning Native population, reinforcing their interdependences. 'The rebel slave communities, the longer they survived, the common Afro-Amerindian features subsumed initial differences. But in general, as all maroon communities developed, they melded militarily, politically, socially, and culturally' (Craton 62). In order to protect what they felt most valuable to themselves and each other, the runaway slaves and Natives compromised their values to stay alive.

Once the British institutionalized the slave trade in plantations, organized resistance became possible. With some slaves in positions of leadership and cooperation with the plantation owners, certain liberties were given to those who would control and direct the actions of the other slaves. 'Accordingly, the key figure on each plantation was the black slave driver, chosen by the planters as policeman and mediator, but, being himself the quintessential slave, potentially and ultimately a rebel leader too' (Craton 54). Since there were 'reliable' slave drivers to control the general population, they were in positions to communicate between different plantations; coordinated uprisings and information networks became possible. The increasing momentum of the emancipation movement all over the world instilled further feelings of injustice in volatile and oppressed human communities. Many rebellions throughout the West Indies occurred, sometimes simultaneously or sporadically, but the general attitude was that the time of slavery was nearing its end. 'The slave resistance, not only rising to a crescendo but increasingly publicized, gradually drove home the realization of the falsity of the assertion that the slaves were contented,' (Hayward 125) which was previously assumed. Emancipation of slavery led to the next form of oppression to be forced upon the newly 'freed' slaves, economic exploitation.

The purpose of abolishing slavery was seen by some as an effective political move rather than a morally motivated action. 'The response of British liberals was to ameliorate the slaves' condition and to guide them towards the Christian more of 'civilization,' perhaps thereby fitting them to become effective wage labourers rather than slaves' (Hayward 125). Although the slaves were against the authoritative rule of the plantation model, they appreciated the sense of community developed by shared toil in work and suffering in bondage. They identified the benefit of living in a group with common goals, interests, and beliefs. 'In Marxian terms, they wanted to relate to the larger market as small commodity producers. In their special context, they did not aim to destroy the plantations; they were even prepared to work for them, as long as they themselves could determine when, for how long, and for what returns in the way of wages' (Hayward 127). What they wanted, ultimately,was to live with dignity and the freedom to develop their own lifestyle.

After the Emancipation Act of 1834, a soceity of ex-slaves, free to do what they please within the confined parameters of capitalism and Christianity, find themselves in a similar type of oppression that their ancestors had experienced. This time social and economic inequality rather than slavery was the proposed form of exploitation. A provisional feudal system was established, the ex-slaves working for four days of the week on the plantation and three on their provisional grounds. 'The response of the blacks was to leave the sugar and coffee estates and go to the hills...The movement of the slaves to the hills to form free villages was a clear example of the quest to have some control over labour' (Campbell 31-4). This is one form of social rebellion which will later characterize Rastafarians, withdrawal from the conventional method of life that the colonizers had in mind for the rural poor of Jamaica.

The Rastas have developed a style of living that embraces the values they share as well as the issues where they disagree. Albert Camus' ideas on rebellion and the ideal Rastafarian model of society are similar in their expression of the ommon interest in the solidarity of human kind and the importance of open dialogue with mutual understanding that respect needs to be shared among all. 'Rastas withdrew from the dominant society, sqatted on land they called their own, named their homesteads in 'Zion' and became self-sufficient' (Lewis 128). Faced with the option of living a life of economic, cultural, political, and legal inequalities, the Rastafarians set out to create their own communitarian system in which everyone actively participates and cares one another's needs and beliefs. [Later addition: the previous sentence does not apply if you're a woman or a 'batty-man,' one pernicious side of Rastafarianism.]

The Rastas recognize that people coming from different circumstances will have dissimilar opinions and outlooks, so the desired goal in the perspective of economic and social progress of humanity,

'must be at least the following: development of a popular culture and of all positive indigenous cultural values; development of a national culture based on the history and achievements of the struggle itself; constant promotion of the political and moral awareness of the people, of the spirit of sacrifice and devotion to the cause of independence, of justice and progress; development (on the basis of a critical assimilation of man's achievements in the domains of art, science, literature, etc.) of a universal culture for perfect integration into the contemporary world, in the perspectives of its revolution; constant and generalized promotion of feelings of humanism, of solidarity, of respect and disinterested devotion to human beings' (Campbell 243).

This interpretation of culture suggests that our shared experience, based on individual contributions to society, will be constantly revitalized by the communication, education, and edification of the human race.

In terms of Camus' ideas of rebellion, this notion of shared experience and development is eloquently expressed by David Sprintzen; referring to the dynamic of rebellion, 'Camus is echoing the most profound need of a culture that has lost its roots in the eternal and not yet found them in the finite...In facing the absurdity of the situation he has insisted that only integrity is the possibility of any viable 'solution'...Only in communal experience can isolated individuals at grips with an inescapable destiny come together in common activities in view of shared meaning and goals by which to overcome the anguish and loneliness which is the legacy of an impenetrable eternity' (Sprintzen 270-271). The possibility of living a life where the significance is created rather than imposed is recognizable [to a degree] in the Rastafarian culture.

In searching for the viable 'solution' to a social or economic situation, new ideas will always emerge if the people involved, that is providers, dependents, and beneficiaries, have their voices heard. The is evident in a typical Rasta rasoning session, 'a communal undertaking in which one shares beliefs about liberation and justice and relates them to the black experience of slavery, colonialism, and racism' (Lewis 25). The rural Rastas gather at each others' compounds, the urban Rastas in the street. When together they share ideas to educate and enlighten one another, such as those in William Lewis' book Soul Rebels: The Rastafari. 'All are brothers, black, white, yellow...The earth is for us, our home...A man is what he is...Our wisdom breaks the chains of white slavery. Here in Zion we are free of Babylon's evils...We are not like the churches. These are the people who define God and life from written laws. Here there are no laws. Be and say what you like' (Lewis 28-29) In a culture that has necessitated rebellion and even revolution in order to affirm their inherent value as well as their oppressor's, there has developed exactly the idea of constructive dialogue and persuasion that Camus thought to be integral to maintaining the original rebellious spirit.

'Thus the rebel can never find peace,' (Camus 285) and does not finish the saga. 'He knows what is good,' (ibid.) because he located it in rebellion, the necessity of persuasion. However, the rebel is adamant in maintaining his convictions, and this is where the possibility that 'despite himself, does evil.' (ibid.) He will never have solely his own beliefs held as correct, and must moderate his impulse to dominate. As long as everyone respects that others' ideas are of equal value to their own, the impetus to command others to accept 'Truth' diminishes significantly. It is the responsibility of all people to uphold the defense of egalitarianism.

The tension of rebellion bade clear, the aspiring rebel has two paths to choose from. One is necessarily evil, as it leads to a finite end in destruction by ever effacing ideologies. The other route, implied but not explicit in The Rebel, is neither good or evil; the absurd man recognizes the need for compromise and cooperation with fellow human as they construct the path to unity with respect for each other, into eternity.