Search results

An examination of the Third Reich & Hitler's war against Poland & the USSR from the perspective of the history of colonialism systematically describes Nazi expansion & occupation policy in the East as colonial in nature. Historians have wrongly concluded that Hitler was not interested in a colonial empire & structural similarities between colonialism & the Third Reich have been largely ignored. The United Nations Convention on Genocide definition of genocide is drawn upon to illustrate equivalences between concepts of space & race common to European colonialism & those at the heart of Nazi policies. The focus is on structural similarities apparent in the formulation & function of concepts of race & space as well as likenesses & differences in the conditions of genocide in both cases. Although Nazi policy of expansion & annihilation was firmly in the tradition of European colonialism, it is pointed out that colonial genocides were less organized & centralized, as well as far less dependent on state bureaucracy. References. J. Lindroth

Cover -- Contents -- List of Illustrations -- Acknowledgements -- Notes on Contributors -- Introduction: The End of Innocence: Debating Colonialism in Switzerland -- Part I: Colonialism and Science -- 1 On the Tropical Origins of the Alps: Science and the Colonial Imagination of Switzerland, 1700-1900 -- 2 Race in the Making: Colonial Encounters, Body Measurements and the Global Dimensions of Swiss Racial Science, 1900-1950 -- 3 The Other's Colony: Switzerland and the Discovery of Côte d'Ivoire -- Part II: (Post)colonial Economies

'Post-Colonialism and the Politics of Kenya' by D. Pal Ahluwalia is reviewed.

This text offers an exploration of Kant's position on colonialism. Bringing together a team of leading scholars in both the history of political thought and normative theory, the chapters in the volume seek to place Kant's thoughts on colonialism in historical context, examine the tensions that the assessment of colonialism produces in Kant's work, and evaluate the relevance of these reflections for current debates on global justice andthe relation of Western political thinking to other parts of the world

AbstractThe controversy around Bruce Gilley's article "The Case for Colonialism" has drawn global attention to a stream of revisionist claims and visions on the history of colonialism that has emerged in academia and in the media in recent years. Authors such as Nigel Biggar in the UK, Niall Ferguson in the USA, and Pieter Emmer in the Netherlands, have all published similarly revisionist claims about colonialism, arguing that postcolonial guilt and political correctness blind the majority of their colleagues to the positive side of the colonial project. Their argument chimes with wider societal trends, transforming the revisionist defenders of empire into heroes of a reinvigorated nationalist right within and beyond academia. The public influence attained by these approaches to colonialism requires historians to expose the deep methodological flaws, misreading of historical facts, and misrepresentations of prior scholarship that characterize the writings of this emerging revisionist trend. It is for this reason that the Editorial Committee of theInternational Review of Social History(IRSH) has decided to devote its first ever Virtual Special Issue to labour history's case against colonialism. This article, also an introduction to the Virtual Special Issue, sifts through the logical implications of the claims made by Gilley and like-minded scholars, providing both a contextualization and a rebuttal of their arguments. After assessing the long absence of colonial labour relations from the field of interest of labour historians and the pages of theIRSHitself, this article shows the centrality of a critique of colonialism to labour history's global turn in the 1990s. Using a selection of articles on colonial labour history from theIRSH's own archive, the article not only reconstructs "labour history's case against colonialism", but also shows why labour history's critical insights into the nature of colonialism should be deepened and extended, not discarded.

Collecting Colonialism: Material Culture and Colonial Change. Chris Gosden and Chantal Knowles Oxford: Berg Publishers, 2001. 234 pp.

This paper examines the implications of Indian nationalism during the inter-war period for both Japanese rule in Korea and the anti-colonial struggle against it. It discusses how two Bengalis, famous for their Anglophobia—the poet Rabindranath Tagore and the revolutionary Rash Behari Bose—saw Japanese colonialism in Korea and how their contrasting views differentially influenced thoughts about colonialism in the Japanese empire, among both Japanese and Koreans. The paper shows how the views and influence of these two Indians can usefully be examined in terms of what Ann Laura Stoler has called the "politics of comparison."

A widespread and still contemporary political phenomenon that exercises a profound effect on societies, settler colonialism structures relationships both historically and culturally diverse. This book assesses the distinctive feature of settler colonialism, and discusses its political, sociological, economic and cultural consequences

Beginning in earnest in the 1990s, archaeologists have used the material record as an alternative window into the experiences and practices of Black and Indigenous peoples in North America from the sixteenth century onward. This now robust body of scholarship on settler colonialism has been shaped by postcolonial theories of power and broad-based calls to diversify Western history. While archaeologists have long recognized the political, cultural, biological, and economic entanglements produced by settler colonialism, the lives of Indigenous peoples have largely been studied in isolation from peoples of African descent. In addition to reinforcing static ethnic divisions, until recently, most archaeological studies of settler colonialism have focused on early periods of interethnic interaction, ending abruptly in the nineteenth century. These intellectual silos gloss over the intimate relationships that formed between diverse communities and hinder a deeper understanding of settler colonialism's continued impact on archaeological praxis.

In early 2022, over 30 years after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its first report on the challenges posed by climate change and four subsequent Assessment Reports later, the word 'colonialism' finally entered its official lexicon. The sixth report on 'Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability'  references colonialism, not only as a historical driver of the climate crisis, but also as something that continues to exacerbate the vulnerabilities of communities to it (IPCC, 2022). As Funes (2022) argues, this comes in the wake of long-standing arguments made by Indigenous groups and others on the frontline of climate change about the centrality of colonialism to comprehending and responding to the crisis. The last decade has also seen a significant increase in scholarly literature that draws explicit links between colonialism and climate change – much of which is referenced in the latest IPCC report. While formal acknowledgement of this relationship is long overdue, in this article we argue for caution and precision in the invocation of colonialism within these debates. Following Tuck and Yang's (2012) classic article setting out why 'decolonization is not a metaphor', we argue relatedly that colonialism needs to be understood as more than a metaphor in climate change debates.