Every human problem must be considered from the standpoint of time. (Fanon 1967a: 12)

The dialectic models the ontological basis of a philosophy of becoming – of the formation and transformation of being – which privileges the roles played by difference in the practices of critique and negation. The dialectic also gives a model of human interdependence in the form of one's reliance upon others with respect to subject formation and social harmonisation. Oriented and structured by the (temporary or teleological) goal of ontological synthesis and the resolution of conflict, the dialectic is driven both by a final cause (ideal unity) and by an immanent cause (real difference), which together define a motivating force of causal desire. These concepts of causation ground a clearly defined concept of agency – both subjective (towards others), and collective (towards the process of history-making and social transformation).

However, the model of dialectical process is problematic from a postcolonial perspective, since the trajectory is driven simultaneously by difference, conceptualised negatively as lack or opposition, and by the desire to negate this difference in the movement towards unity and recognised presence. This structuring dynamic results in a mode of agency shaped by an imperial motivation: the desire to negate external difference by its appropriation or elimination. As we saw in Chapter 2, this motivating desire seriously complicates postcolonial theory and constrains post-imperial transformative practices, such as reconciliation. Postcolonial theory needs an alternative, positive notion of difference as a basis for thinking about critical and creative agency.