Postcolonialism and political theory (original) (raw)

2009, Contemporary Political Theory

Promoted as an exploration of the intersection of political theory and postcolonialism, this rather ambitious edited volume perhaps says too much of itself, though certain of its chapters live up to its promise. In spite of the Introduction, which provides an accessible account of postcolonial theory as practiced by authors such as Spivak and Bhabha, the volume does not concentrate on what might be considered the Anglophone mainstream of postcolonial theory, but instead on its Latin American and Caribbean variants. One recurring leitmotif is the intersection of postcolonial theory and phenomenology, the call for postcolonialism to redirect its attention from theory to everyday life, for engagement with lived practices of resistance and hybridity, discourses and meanings constructed by the excluded, movements and authors outside the western canon, and a politics of openness and dialogism. It is divided into three sections that are very distinct in terms of content. The essays contained in the first section deal with the relationship of postcolonial theory to political and normative theories traditionally conceived through a 'history of ideas' lens. Leading Argentine philosopher Enrique Dussel's chapter 'Alterity and Modernity' summarizes the works of three Spanish authors-Las Casas, Vitoria and Sua´rez-whose critiques of Spanish colonialism and genocide in Latin America have largely been lost from accounts of the origins of the Enlightenment. He portrays their calls for recognition of the voice of the other as lying at the origins of political philosophy. Graham Finlay's chapter compares and contrasts Mill and Burke on Empire. Primarily this chapter is a critique of Uday Mehta's influential presentation of Mill as a paternalist, a racist and an economic determinist who refuses to perceive difference. John Savage's chapter explores the relationship between slavery and race and the law in the work of de Tocqueville. Lucian M. Ashworth's chapter on Ibn Khaldun locates this North African Islamic author at the origins of modern statecraft, as the partial creator of the idea of a distinct political world. The question arises, however, of whether originating modern statism and instrumental state rationality are really such a good thing. In placing Ibn Khaldun at the base of what was to become the imperial state form, Ashworth