Postcolonial Studies - Science topic

Sure. I'll contact you.

If 'othering' is treating people as different / outside the 'norm' then the opposite might be 'normative acceptance'.

As in - 'the othering of group is compared to the normative acceptance of group b'.

Have you checked the respective papers:

Black feminist disability frameworks have already been suggested and developed, e.g.:

Speaking as an early career academic from the Global South, Africa to be specific, I think characterizing decolonial (decolonisation/decoloniality) scholarship as a fashion is very simplistic. Decolonial scholarship is a war/struggle for epistemic freedom. It is a struggle to have multiple centres of knowledge. It is about unlearning the predominantly Eurocentric forms of knowledge and methodologies in order to learn inclusive methodologies, to be able to have our own styles of writing and framing our knowledge perspectives. A lot of our knowledge and scholarship is sidelined in the knowledge industry that follows a Eurocentric script. We need to be acknowledged as centres of knowledge instead of exporters of raw data and importers of theories.

The biggest challenge we have is that we were produced by the very same Eurocentric system that has taken away our epistemic freedoms. That is why we have to continuously unlearn in order to learn. So there is agency in the decolonial scholarship, it is not fashion at all.

This is quite a controversial topic. It has its own advantages and disadvantages, but neocolonialism makes it all negative.

To all those interested to know more on concrete ways to decolonize research, a themed issue on that topic has been published (open access) in ACME An International Journal for Critical Geographies:

https://www.acme-journal.org/index.php/acme/issue/view/110

Have not seen it....

The obvious difference is that while both theories criticize colonial rule on the so-called "Third-World" countries, each theory emerged in different socio-historical contexts. But the more important difference is that Decolonial Theory takes on a more profound approach to Colonialism than Post-colonial Theory. Among other things, Decolonialism proposes that "Coloniality of power" (Quijano, 2000) did not end with Colonialism, that is to say,  the Modern capitalist World-system imposes a racial/ethnic classification of people around the world as a basis of its power structures, and that directly relates to the international division of labor where places like (what is now called) Latin-America take on the roll of exporting primary resources. This process goes on long after direct Imperial rule (political rule) is abolished.

Capitalism is viewed as a system that only came to exist thanks to the colonization of (what is now called) Latin-America and the exploitation of its natural resources that served as the material basis of Europe’s industrial revolution, and also thanks to the construction of an “otherness” different from the white European subject that came with colonization, interpreting capitalist power structures as a "heterachy", not like a base/superstructure system in classic Marxist Theory, nor like a cultural significance system, like in Post-structural/colonial Theory. Here, Decolonialism is influenced by, on one side, Latin-American Marxist Dependence Theory and World-system Theory, and, on the other, by Post-colonial/Post-structural discourse critique, while at the same time challenging them for being rooted in Cartesian dualism that draws a binary opposition between discourse/economy and subject/structure. Culture and political economy are always intertwined, one is not derived from the other (Castro-Gomez, 2007).

Decolonialism also proposes that Coloniality is "the other side of the coin” of the European Modenity proyect, that territories like what is now called Latin-America are not “premodern”, but rather have been included in that same Modernity proyect but in a “subalternized” (not sure if that’s the correct word for it in English) position. Modernity cannot exist without Coliniality, just like in Capitalism there cannot be a wealthy class of people without a simultaneously empoverished class, and that happens at both the national and international level.

From the critique of European Modernity from this position, emerges a critique of political, economic, social and cultural thought constructions influenced by European epistemic criteria and a call for the construction of a new epistemology "from the South". Post-colonial Studies are challenged by Decolonialism for maintaining European points of reference (the above mentioned Cartesian dualism) even though they also criticize Modernity, with authors like Santiago Castro-Gomez calling for the need to “decolonialize postcolonialism”.

There are a lot more things to say about the differences between Decolonialism and Postcolonialism (for example, Decolonialism's roll on the critique of Development Theory as a whole) but I think these are, more or less, the main elements.

PS: Rajamanickam's comment (with all due respect) is a very good example of what Decolonialism criticizes. It also shows a fair amount of ignorance of Latin-American history, or better yet, a very colonialized knowledge.

Here are two other sources: https://newleftreview.org/article/download_pdf?id=894

I think consepts like Diaspora and hybridity can help you. Generally, post colonial theories give you good idea to analysis your subject or problem.

Instead of talking about postcolonialism its better if we talk about neocolonialism. The times have changed and this postcolonialism does not have much effect. Rather it has taken a new form which is more required to be explored. The brain drain, diaspora, east west encounter, hybridization of culture have become more important with the changing scenario. These can also be found in Indian English drama. 

I hope it 's not too late but I suggest   that you read Miguel Vale de Almeida: 

Portugal's Colonial Complex: From Colonial Lusotropicalism to Postcolonial Lusphony. Link : http://miguelvaledealmeida.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/portugals-colonial-complex.pdf

Magnus,

Thank you for the references. I will examine them for inclusion. I frequently work with a AmeriCorps volunteer in Tucson, Arizona  who faces this issue daily with migrants,  and graduated from your academic institution; so appropriate that we are further informed by good works from that institution.

Over the past decade, three researchers (using different regime and demographic measures) have determined  that the timing of the ascent to stable liberal democracy is statistically associated with the age structure of the population.  In fact, using this theory, I published two papers in 2008/09 that predicted the rise of "one, maybe two liberal democracies" in North Africa between 2010 and 2020. Although I was laughed off the podium for making that prediction in a US State Department-sponsored event in 2008, that prediction came true this year, with Freedom House's assessment of Tunisia as "Free".  

Each author has his own narrative, yet the statistics are (I feel) very convincing.  The method is being introduced (in trials) as an early warning and planning tool.  I've attached two early publications. One is in press in J. Intel. Analysis. 

Hello Diego,

Since I live in Brazil, which was a Portuguese colony until 1922, I can only comment about what I know about how Portugal dealt with the locals and what was Portugal's policy in regard to the recently discovered lands which she occupied in the 1500s.

It is beyond any doubt that after Pedro A. Cabral discovered the Brazilian territory, all Portuguese expeditions sent here had the sole purpose of exploiting the new lands' natural resources. Brazil was rich in mineral ores and precious stones. The so-called "bandeiras" had the only function to discover where they existed. Once found, specially in what became the Minas Gerais state (General Mines, the name itself says a lot), for several centuries the Portuguese court explored them and hauled that immense richness back home.

Furthermore, before the trafficking of slaves from Africa, the Portuguese colonizers enslaved the local Indians, ill-treating them as later they did the same to the black slaves brought by force to the Brazilian "fazendas" in Portuguese hands.

In fact, Brazil's independence happened because the locals, descendants of Portuguese people, but having already acquired their own national identity as "Brazilians," revolted against Portugal's exploitation, taxation and political-military occupation. And, ironically, a Portuguese ruler - Don Pedro I - declared that independence as he congregated with the locals' feelings.

Similar abuses happened in all territories (terras d'além mar) that Portugal colonized. Just as a more recent example, the Mozambican independence revolution last for 10 years (1964-1974), as a result of the frustration amongst many Mozambicans, who saw the foreign rule as a form of exploitation and mistreatment, which sole purpose was to advance Portuguese economic interests. And the Mozambican independence was reached mainly because of the Carnation Revolution in 1974, which finally ended the Salazar era and created democracy in Portugal.

Therefore, if Margarido is very critical about Lusophony, he has good reasons and many similar examples to base his criticism. I recommend you read this paper, which speaks about Angola and clarifies why Margarido is so critical about the Portuguese dealings with colonized lands:

Les Porteurs : forme de domination et agents de changement en Angola (XVIIe-XIXe siècles)

Full text found here:

Interestingly, along the last two centuries, Brazilians kept no demurs in regard to Portugal and maintained very friendly relations with the Portuguese people an attitude which persists to our days. Subliminally though, the typical Brazilian jokes about the Portuguese seem to evoke some hidden bad feelings. Something for social psychologists to study and explain :-)

Be well and good luck in your research

Tom

Hi! The adequate answer to your question depends on how narrow your understanding of the concept is. If you mean its intellectual use in social scientific literature, it may be a quite modern term that - in its current understanding - was coined in the first half of the 20th century, for example in the francophone négritude movement (Fanon, Césaire, and others). As a political term, however, it is much older; that does not necessarily mean that the English concept itself (i.e., "decolonization") shows up literally, but that its meaning shows up as an essential part of political argumentation, reflexion, and stretegy. In this latter sense, you can find the topic  treated in early Greek and Indian political texts (e.g., Thucydides' "Peleponnesian War" or Kautilya's "Arthashastra"). Of course, there are many more ancient contributions of various cultural origin.

I am adding this remark because one central aspect of decolonization is the critical reflection not only of the colonization of territory but also - and even more - of the minds of the colonized people. Part of this "mental" colonization might be our tendency to start with "Western" concepts and look for their origins that are then "miraculously" found in "Western" traditions of thought, which are by the way indigenous themselves. In order to work on the decoloniszation of our minds, it might be helpful to look into non-Western contributions and into contributions of times past when there was no "West" as we know it today.

By the way, I think that the political writings of Mohandas K. Gandhi reflect most of what I would like to convey here.

Post colonial theory enables to unearth the reasons behind current social reality. Be it democracy, politics, relationship between countries (like commonwealth) etc. Everywhere we can observe the impact of colonial residue. Since, decolonization has remained a 'unfinished agenda' in various aspects. This includes language, ways of knowledge generation, understanding of the reality, definitions of development, socio-economic parameters and such many more. Hence, post colonial theory can definitely be applied to examine such interactions between post colonial states.

Ngugi and Fannon's voices have become part of the postcolonial discourses. Even as we look at Africa, a simple factor strikingly stands out:

1. Uganda, known atrocities not investigated

2. Rwanda - ICTR

3. Sudan - Special Chamber investigations

4. Sierra Leone - Special Chamber investigations

5. Chad - Special chamber investigations

6. Liberia - Part of Sierra Leone process

7. Congo - not yet investigated

8. Somalia - perhaps the world is too scared even to talk of investigating Somalia

9. South Sudan - at the present rate, the Tribunal is just a call away

10. Egypt - there are enough trials going on inside and peculiar precedences like death sentence for 683 persons for killing one man are being set. It may not be out of place to think of a tribunal at some point of time.

11. South Africa - the role model for Africa managed the affairs with its own Truth and Reconciliation Commission - a kind of localised tribunal.

12. Nigeria - with Boko Haram working over time, Au/UN Peacekeepers may actually bring in a Tribunal for parallel prosecution.

I do apologise for the loose wording above. But the point that I am trying to make is about Africa - half the continent is either tried or about to be tried for genocide, mass violation of human rights, unspeakable atrocities on women and abuse of children as child soldiers. If collective African will is not exercised to look into all these and learn their lessons quickly, Africa may become dependent on IMF and WB to fund their Tribunals instead of developmental projects.

The sane voices of AU are drowned in the noise behind all these occurrences in Africa. It does beg understanding.

There a several intents to install some kind of post-colonial or de-colonial view in certain German cities - by criticizing monuments of leaders of colonialism or their names as street names, always pointing out the crimes of colonialism. For instance them: http://www.berlin-postkolonial.de/cms/ There is a similar group in Hamburg - I don't remember their name.

Those experiences try to put on the agenda a discussion over how imperialism and colonialism -as something that already happened 100 years ago as well as a now-a-days structure- work today, influence German society and its view on the "other" or the Global South.

Hi. You want to get in touch with anthropologist Harjant Gill at Towson University, the filmmaker of "Roots of Love" about Sikh conflicts of modernity vis a vis hair cutting. He is very knowledgeable and accessible.

How very eloquent and insightful an answer, Dr. Kamal. You have gone far beyond tumor and surgery! I shall certainly go thru the "Handbook of Post-colonial Archaeology. Jane Lydon (Editor); Uzma Z. Rizvi (Editor)" to learn more about the subject!

Those comments above are good ones. As far as Deleuze goes, he defends positive signs of hope next to the deterritorialized character who does not comply to the mainstream; and in that situation maybe classified as a traitor, for his visionary opposing view. This standpoint of isolation from the mainframe provides the "traitor" a better view, more critical, with deeper understanding of the symbolic signs in the conflict in social situation which may lead to a higher level of aprehention and transformation: namely, a better or different world. And here there is hope of a new linguistic frame to describe and conceive a new domain. Not being offuscated by the mainstream ideas offers the individual the possibility of dreaming and creating a better world; though being deterritorialized may isolate him to the degree of a dream (utopia).