Jacques Rancière: Poststructuralism, postcolonialism, postmodernism
relations. Deconstruction is the literary theory of poststructuralism, and the . poststructuralism and postmodernism, poststructuralism and postcolonialism. from the once imperial centres that dominated them-raises an important question regarding the relationship between post-structuralist theory and post-colonial. In its close association with 49 17 tures of language, knowledge, governance, ethics, poststructuralism, postcolonial scholarship is rou- 50 18 and patriarchal.
According to Derrida, however, logocentricism deconstructs itself in that both the dichotomies and hierarchical structures they authorize are unfounded and therefore carry an inbuilt tendency to dismantle Edkins, Although privileged, the first term is parasitic on and is contaminated by the second term.
Deconstruction as a form of thinking seizes these binaries and seeks to expose their inherent instability, untenability. His is also a thought of difference and grapples with this task by writing counter-histories, which challenge the basic presuppositions of Enlightenment thought about temporal unfolding—the idea of a unified history with an origin and an end.
These statements working together construct the topic in a specific way and circumscribe the limits to how it can be thought.Decolonizing the map : post-colonialism, post-structuralism and the cartographic connection.
It seeks to recover the epsitemic, historical discontinuities, reversals in central concepts of political life such as sovereignty Bartelson, In these accounts of the nature of power relations, power is regarded as a possession that enhances the capacity of those exercising it and impinges on those over whom it is exercised.
Furthermore, the implicit assumption underlying such analyses of power is the view that the subjects who are caught in relations of power are autonomous, moral agents Hindess, Consequently, questions about the exercise of power become entangled with questions of legitimacy and consent.
Moving away from juridico-political models of power and questions about sovereignty and legitimacy, Foucault distinguishes relations of power from other types of force relations such as exploitation and domination. Foucault suggests that power is not something that is possessed by preexisting entities such as an individual, a state, or a social class, but designates a social relation, which is characterized less by a confrontation between two adversaries or their mutual engagement than an interplay of nonegalitarian and mobile relations.
Power exists only when exercised within this relation.
Comparison Post-Colonialism and Post-Structuralism Essay
Rather than obstructing, power produces by structuring the possible fields of action. Such a conceptualization of power requires attending to the micro-physics of power technologies designed to observe, monitor, shape, control the behavior of individuals operating in a multiplicity of institutional settings.
This aspect of power relations provides the basis for differentiating them from other types of force relations, which are characterized by an asymmetrical relation within which the subordinated has little room for maneuver. In the case of such subordination, Foucault argues, what is stake is not power, but violence. In his analysis, Foucault identifies different practices of power.
Sovereign power is the power over death. In modernity, sovereign power gets supplanted with other relations of power—disciplinary power and biopower. While disciplines form the individualizing moment in the exercise of power, biopower is totalizing in that it takes as its object the mass of coexisting beings.
The emergence of biopower constitutes a shift in the mechanisms of sovereign power. They challenge disciplinary boundaries by taking to task the discursive limits of the discipline constructed in the language of modern social sciences, which presumes a unity between natural and social sciences and the possibility to distinguish between facts and values Smith,p.
They deny a strict separation between the subject who knows from the object that is known and problematizes the assumption that there can be a universal scientific language that allows the external world to be described in a detached manner Campbell, International Relations theory is regarded as a specific, privileged site that contributes to the production and reproduction of dominant interpretations of the world, hence, as constitutive of particular understandings of global life in terms of the binary logic of sovereignty and anarchy, inside and outside at the expense of others.
In his seminal work, for instance, R. Walkerp. Any mode of thought. In his deconstructive reading of—what he terms as—the paradigm of sovereignty, Ashley elaborates on how these three phenomena fuse into each other for both historical and epistemological reasons in modernity. Situated within the broader discursive and political agenda of modernity, sovereignty becomes the nodal point where reasoning, autonomous Man, who is invested with the capacity and the will to emancipate humankind, fuses with the sovereign political community the modern state as the locus of political life.
This narrative proscribes a political life amid an anarchical world of Otherness where the discourses of danger work toward domesticating political life by policing the limits, the boundaries of identity, of political possibility and ethical responsibility as it demarcates the self, secure inside, from the other, the dangerous outside Ashley, ; Walker, They deny the state functional unity or priority over other relations of power Kalyvas, Put differently, rather than treating the state as an a priori, ontological given, they investigate how the sovereign state is produced as a cohesive, purposive actor through the ongoing dynamic processes of statecraft.
They explore the ways in which the enactment of various domestic and foreign policies produce particular understandings of the state and constitutes the identity of the self. Always a work in progress and never a finished product, the state is thus constituted through practices that code and discipline boundaries and produce identity.
While the relation between identity and foreign policy constitutes an important area of investigation, there is no uniform understanding of the representation of difference, of the other, the outside in the constitution of the self, the identity, the inside. For instance, for scholars like Campbell, discourses of danger are central to securing state identity and legitimizing state power.
Shifting the focus away from geopolitical forms of othering between the inside and the outside, yet others focus on the temporal forms of othering in the constitution of the self Diez, Making central the idea that violence is constitutive of modern subjectivity and modern political freedom is a lethal affair Dillon,they examine strategic and security discourses to expose the ways in which the modern state constitutes political life as militarized life Campbell, ; Chaloupka, ; Klein, Informing these analyses is the idea that politics in modernity derives from an ontology of violence occasioned by a certain understanding of political subjectivity.
On the one hand, taking violence as the ultimo ratio of politics, the basic subject of modern political thought is posited as the subject of violence.
Comparison Post-Colonialism and Post-Structuralism Essay Example for Free
On the other hand, the subject of modern politics—the autonomous reasoning subject—is a violent political subject whose features, according to modern political thought, bring him into conflict with other men.
Given that the political subject of violence is a reasoning subject, the complicity of reason in the violence of the political subject cannot be elided. What this diagnosis implies is that modern political reason not only cannot provide adequate tools to understand and address political violence, but that as a rationality of rule it is not immune to it.
Rather than being an objective condition to be addressed and remedied through state action in order to safeguard its subjects, security is revealed as a form of political subjection, as a political technology of rule. In her analysis of food crisis and the problem of hunger, Jenny Edkins elaborates the ways in politics in modernity devoted to securing life is tantamount to the technologization and hence de-politicization of politics Edkins, Through various philosophical and 85 physical thought and the humanist tradition.
Invented constructs such as subaltern, 91 project, in the Location of Culture, Homi Bhabha native informant, hybridity, worlding, and the 92 invents strategies of critique to investigate the third space, seek to account for a persistently 93 micro-political dimensions of colonial operation. As John Willinsky Spivak insists that postcolonial studies are not demonstrates, public schooling in nations simply what comes before and after colonialism worldwide remains stubbornly tethered to educa- but what is retrievable from within its enabling tional processes of subject formation in the Euro- and enduring anthropomorphic, patriarchal, and pean mold of the human as upheld by the ethnocentric violence continuing to form human Commonwealth or ex-colonial state.
For example, thought, organization, and existence. Consequently Poststructuralism and the Post colonial English is the global language of commerce and Roots of Modern Education trade, academic knowledge, technology, cosmo- politanism, and culture. Across the world, in ex-colonial, settler colonial, Postcolonial scholars look to education as and colonial nation states, public schooling con- enabler, producer, and liberator of human subjec- tinues to impart, import, and exalt Western onto- tivity from Western aesthetics, logics, operations, logical and epistemological molds and logics.
Poststructuralism and Postmodernism in International Relations
Consequently, and worlds. For Said, knowledge, and thus edu- poststructural critiques of modernity are often cation, is not ethno-culturally neutral or empiri- unhinged from enduring material, geopolitical, cally unmotivated.
In his book, Out of Africa, Pal Ahluwalia knowledge above and at the expense of others. Ahluwalia further sug- edge archived in colonial encounter as a third gests that poststructuralism arises from an space of possibility for a world reeling from colo- unnamed postcolonial recognition of the violence nial pasts.
For example, obscuring lines between mimicry, misrecognition, and revolt, against colo- French poststructuralism and its Algerian post nial role. He locates human agency in the sym- colonial roots mute the violent historical and bolic capacity of human beings to imagine and political context driving its movement while produce different social organizations from forms sidelining the ontological and epistemological of resistance to multiple and continually contribution of formerly colonized nations to morphing forms of colonial violence and control.
Colonial legacies of vio- Spivak has theorized education as lence and antagonism can be directly indicted in pharmacon, as both a medicine and poison that the contemporary production of postcolonial ten- enable and injure subject formation by particular sions arising between French citizens, French- means, for colonizing and liberating ends. Excavating 4 Poststructuralism, Postcolonialism, and Education historical and political context to the legacies of pasts for perpetuating material, linguistic, and colonialism framing new social and political for- social inequities in the classroom.
They view the constructing and roots. They share the poststructural con- nial logics inform categories of difference, norma- cern with and interrogation of the status of human tive models of human development, and ideas of in education through postcolonial inquiries that national citizenship in public schools across the persistently question the tight Western, ontologi- globe.
Through the provision of English and cal hold and normative value of the human in the French and the centering of Euro-colonial curric- formation of children through schooling.
Postcolonial theory empire in the contemporary practice of education. Under global capitalism, ex-colonial school experiences.
As with poststructural nations continue to cling to colonial educational scholars, postcolonial scholars are concerned systems to gain economic, political, and material with the status of subjectivity and the human in advancement on the world stage.
As human the organization of categories of difference- rights-based movements of education are tied to stratifying school. The global partisan, and thus distorted versions of how each acceptance of Western forms of universal access child grows, learns, and participates in social life.
Indeed, as and exalted conceptions of the child, language, Fazal Rizvi suggests, education in a global care, knowledge, experience, pedagogy, human age necessitates a postcolonial approach as from participation, and education.
Global movements of At its most radical, postcolonial theory makes people, knowledge, and ideas generate new forms an ethical and pedagogical commitment to creat- of social connectivity, organization, and belong- ing a freedom seeking and just education for new- ing informed and driven by a postcolonial past. Without a postcolonial violently subject. Vanessa Andreotti further argues whole existence, participation, and potential in that, as an actionable form of social praxis, particular and shared worlds.
Postcolonial scholars in education argue that Western theories of develop- Ahluwalia, P.