What's new

Postcolonialism

_NOBODY_

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jan 6, 2016
Messages
3,327
Reaction score
4
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Postcolonialism examines how societies, governments and peoples in the formerly colonized regions of the world experience international relations. The use of ‘post’ by postcolonial scholars by no means suggests that the effects or impacts of colonial rule are now long gone. Rather, it highlights the impact that colonial and imperial histories still have in shaping a colonial way of thinking about the world and how Western forms of knowledge and power marginalize the non-Western world. Postcolonialism is not only interested in understanding the world as it is, but also as it ought to be. It is concerned with the disparities in global power and wealth accumulation and why some states and groups exercise so much power over others. By raising issues such as this, postcolonialism asks different questions to the other theories of IR and allows for not just alternative readings of history but also alternative perspectives on contemporary events and issues.

In analyzing how key concepts such as power, the state and security serve to reproduce the status quo, postcolonialism proposes a more complex view of such concepts than is characteristic of traditional theories. For example, the concept of sovereignty, and with it the contours of the modern state, were imposed on the colonial world by European powers. Yet it is a concept that is usually taken for granted by scholars of realism and liberalism. Postcolonialism also challenges the Marxist perspective that class struggle is at the root of historical change – instead demonstrating how race shapes history. Analyses that focus only on class fail to consider how the identification of the ‘Third World’ (a term developed during the Cold War to describe those states unaligned to the United States or the Soviet Union) as ‘backward’, ‘primitive’ or ‘non-rational’ are linked to persistent economic marginalization. Similarly, while mainstream IR theories see the international system as an anarchy, postcolonial scholars see it as a hierarchy. Colonialism and imperialism fostered a long process of continued domination of the West over the rest of the world and cultural, economic and political domination still characterize global politics.

To better understand postcolonialism we can consider the discourses that make certain power relations seem natural or even inevitable. Postcolonialism views key issues in International Relations as constituting discourses of power. This notion of a discourse allows scholars to utilize a frame of reference for thinking about the world and its problems that does not merely reside in the empirically verifiable and ‘fact’-based inquiry that drives traditional IR theories such as realism and liberalism.

The ultimate goal of post-colonialism is accounting for and combating the residual effects of colonialism on cultures. It is not simply concerned with salvaging past worlds, but learning how the world can move beyond this period together, towards a place of mutual respect. Postcolonialism interrogates a world order dominated by major state actors and their domineering interests and ways of looking at the world. It challenges notions that have taken hold about the way states act or behave and what motivates them. It forces us to ask tough questions about how and why a hierarchical international order has emerged and it further challenges mainstream IR’s core assumptions about concepts such as power and how it operates. Postcolonialism forces us to reckon with the everyday injustices and oppressions that can reveal themselves in the starkest terms through a particular moment of crisis. Whether it has to do with the threat of nuclear weapons or the deaths of workers in factories churning out goods for Western markets, postcolonialism asks us to analyze these issues from the perspectives of those who lack power. While postcolonialism shares some common ground with other critical theories in this regard, it also offers a distinctive approach. It brings together a deep concern with histories of colonialism and imperialism, how these are carried through to the present – and how inequalities and oppressions embedded in race, class and gender relations on a global scale matter for our understanding of international relations. By paying close attention to how these aspects of the global play out in specific contexts, postcolonialism gives us an important and alternative conceptual lens that provides us with a different set of theoretical tools to unpack the complexities of this world.

@ghazi52 @araz @The Eagle @The Accountant @That Guy @Irfan Baloch @PanzerKiel @AgNoStiC MuSliM @Imran Khan @PAKISTANFOREVER @waz @Windjammer @WinterFangs @KaiserX @niaz @farok84 @AZADPAKISTAN2009 @MastanKhan @krash @FOOLS_NIGHTMARE @Bilal Khan (Quwa) @Cookie Monster @Bratva @VCheng @Foxtrot Alpha @Rafael @Rafi @Trango Towers @TNT @Indus Pakistan @Falcon26 @Norwegian @LeGenD @Iltutmish @Beast @IblinI @denel @UKBengali @KAL-EL @Joe Shearer @notorious_eagle @Akh1112 @MMM-E @mingle @Dazzler @AZADPAKISTAN2009 @Tipu7 @dbc @Hodor @Horus
 
Last edited:
. . . .
Even though the colonies were independent, they retained the judicial system, administrative system and enterprises of the suzerain state. The direct consequence is that the suzerain state still enjoys the economic privileges of the colony.

The colonies sacrificed economic sovereignty in exchange for the independence of political sovereignty.

These countries are seemingly independent countries, but the economy is still dependent on the suzerain state, minerals are controlled, exports are controlled, real estate is controlled, universities are controlled, media is controlled, ideas are controlled, and currency is controlled.
 
.
Even though the colonies were independent, they retained the judicial system, administrative system and enterprises of the suzerain state. The direct consequence is that the suzerain state still enjoys the economic privileges of the colony.

The colonies sacrificed economic sovereignty in exchange for the independence of political sovereignty.

These countries are seemingly independent countries, but the economy is still dependent on the suzerain state, minerals are controlled, exports are controlled, real estate is controlled, universities are controlled, media is controlled, ideas are controlled, and currency is controlled.
The best example of this is are the "former" French colonies in Africa, Françafrique is still a thing. Even though, these countries seem independent but in reality France has complete control over them.

Look at CFA Franc momentary system. The CFA franc is the name of two currencies, the West African CFA franc, used in eight West African countries, and the Central African CFA franc, used in six Central African countries. Both currencies are guaranteed by the French treasury. Although, this system gives these countries stable and robust currencies but it also legally obliged these countries to put 50% of their foreign currency reserves into the French treasury plus another 20% for financial liabilities. Their is currency printed under the supervision of the French National Bank. If these African states want to gain access to their own funds then they have to borrow it from the French at fixed commercial rates. This monetary system breeds corruption, capital flight and illegal activities. In such a climate, economic development is impossible. This not only greatly compromises the sovereignty of these African nations, it gives France complete control over these countries. Former French President, Jacques Chirac stated: "We have to be honest and acknowledge that a big part of the money in our banks comes precisely from the exploitation of the African continent". In 2008 he stated: "Without Africa, France would slide down into the rank of a third world power".

French multinational firms retain exclusive rights to purchase or reject any natural resources extracted from the soil of the former French colonies such as crude oil, natural gas, uranium, diamonds, gold, iron etc. West and Central Africa is rich in raw materials and French firms such as Areva and Total have first pick. These African nations can't sell their resources at international markets without the approval of France.

Look at the fate of those African leaders who tried to stop using these currencies. In 1963, President Sylvanus Olympio of Togo was assassinated three days after issuing a new currency. Other leaders including David Dacko, Thomas Sankara, Maurice Yaméogo, Hubert Maga and Modibo Keita had the same fate. France has militarily intervened at least 40 times across Africa since 1960s.
 
.
The best example of this is are the "former" French colonies in Africa, Françafrique is still a thing. Even though, these countries seem independent but in reality France has complete control over them.

Look at CFA Franc momentary system. The CFA franc is the name of two currencies, the West African CFA franc, used in eight West African countries, and the Central African CFA franc, used in six Central African countries. Both currencies are guaranteed by the French treasury. Although, this system gives these countries stable and robust currencies but it also legally obliged these countries to put 50% of their foreign currency reserves into the French treasury plus another 20% for financial liabilities. Their is currency printed under the supervision of the French National Bank. If these African states want to gain access to their own funds then they have to borrow it from the French at fixed commercial rates. This monetary system breeds corruption, capital flight and illegal activities. In such a climate, economic development is impossible. This not only greatly compromises the sovereignty of these African nations, it gives France complete control over these countries. Former French President, Jacques Chirac stated: "We have to be honest and acknowledge that a big part of the money in our banks comes precisely from the exploitation of the African continent". In 2008 he stated: "Without Africa, France would slide down into the rank of a third world power".

French multinational firms retain exclusive rights to purchase or reject any natural resources extracted from the soil of the former French colonies such as crude oil, natural gas, uranium, diamonds, gold, iron etc. West and Central Africa is rich in raw materials and French firms such as Areva and Total have first pick. These African nations can't sell their resources at international markets without the approval of France.

Look at the fate of those African leaders who tried to stop using these currencies. In 1963, President Sylvanus Olympio of Togo was assassinated three days after issuing a new currency. Other leaders including David Dacko, Thomas Sankara, Maurice Yaméogo, Hubert Maga and Modibo Keita had the same fate. France has militarily intervened at least 40 times across Africa since 1960s.
Did I miss anything? @denel
 
. .
Analyses that focus only on class fail to consider how the identification of the ‘Third World’ ... ... as ‘backward’, ‘primitive’ or ‘non-rational’ are linked to persistent economic marginalization.

Curious statement. Nobody can marginalize an economic success story. Any nation, regardless of its colonial past or not, can develop enough economic clout to participate in the global economy as it wishes to. It is just that it takes sustained and coordinated efforts to do so, that exploitative elite may choose not to benefit from in order to keep their monopolies going.
 
.
Curious statement. Nobody can marginalize an economic success story. Any nation, regardless of its colonial past or not, can develop enough economic clout to participate in the global economy as it wishes to. It is just that it takes sustained and coordinated efforts to do so, that exploitative elite may choose not to benefit from in order to keep their monopolies going.
Very few countries have pulled off such miracles.
 
.
Very few countries have pulled off such miracles.

Malaysia? Singapore? Brazil?

(Heck, even USA, or portions thereof, were a British colony, plus other colonial powers.)
 
.
Malaysia? Singapore? Brazil?

(Heck, even USA, or portions thereof, were a British colony, plus other colonial powers.)
Brazil is a resource rich nation so lets ignore it for now. Malaysia and all 4 Asian tigers are both excellent case studies. According to what I have studies, what these countries have achieved seems nothing less than a miracle. I am only an amateur when it comes to economy so for me to comment further on this would be inappropriate.
 
.
Brazil is a resource rich nation so lets ignore it for now. Malaysia and all 4 Asian tigers are both excellent case studies. According to what I have studies, what these countries have achieved seems nothing less than a miracle. I am only an amateur when it comes to economy so for me to comment further on this would be inappropriate.

But at least one could make the case that other postcolonial nations are equally free to emulate the successes mentioned above. If they choose to do so, that is.
 
.
Countries in the sub-continent are still run by UK connected media, politicians, civil- military bureaucracy and judiciary. Many of these people also have public or secret dual UK citizenship. Sane goes for otger former colonies' relationships with their colonial masters. It is a neo-colonialism in full swing and London/Paris is their Qibla. The young consumer generation don't know the meaning of colonialism and tgey nit interested to know either.
 
Last edited:
. .

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom