Suchergebnisse

Can there be a decolonial autoethnography? If so, what could such an autoethnography look, sound, and feel like? If the possibility of decolonizing this mode of knowing does not exist, then what are the impediments—discursive, material, political, social—that disallow a move to decolonized autoethnographic work? Where would decolonization take us? What does it mean to write the self in and out of colonial historical frameworks? In this special issue, we bring to life such conversations through nine essays and a postscript that perform, ruminate, narrate—with a thoughtful tenderness—some versions of decolonized and postcolonial autoethnography. The essays illustrate the form that emerges when the colonial and postcolonial (both past and present) are taken as central concerns in autoethnographic writing.

In his extensive body of work, Professor Abdullahi Ahmed An-Naim challenges both historical interpretations of Islamic Sharia and neo-colonial understanding of human rights. To advance the rationale of scholarship for social change, An-Naim proposes advancing the universality of human rights through internal discourse within Islamic and African societies and cross-cultural dialogue among human cultures. This book proposes a transformation from human rights organized around a state determined practice to one that is focused on a people-centric approach that empowers individuals to decide how human rights will be understood and integrated into their communities. Decolonizing Human Rights aims to illustrate the decisive role of human agency on the subject of change, without implying that Islamic or any other society are exceptionally disposed to politically motivated violence and consequent profound political instability

What is the role of contemporary foreign correspondence? How does the profession tell stories of active conflict and make connections across time, space, politics, and people? Foreign correspondents have a crucial role to play in communicating our shared world of conflict, but their reporting often relies on stereotypes rooted in the profession's colonial history. In this book, Chrisanthi Giotis argues that decolonization is possible and necessary for the development of a truly global, public sphere.

AbstractAfter Ferguson, Standing Rock, the Black Lives Matter protests, and the crisis of refugees at the US southern border, there have been renewed calls for a racial reckoning in US anthropology. Dissatisfaction on the domestic front runs parallel to an unease over US anthropology's failure to adequately address militarism, imperialism, and predatory capitalism abroad. Finally, there is the fraught question of US anthropology's oversized influence within world anthropologies. We propose that a reassessment of US anthropology might fruitfully begin with some counterfactual history. How would US anthropology been different had the founding generations conceptualized the discipline as a decolonizing project? What topics or themes might have become central to US anthropology? How might our methods have been different? To make anthropology departments more diverse, inclusive, and equitable, we need to do more than add faculty and students of color. Despite being a field whose central concept is "culture," we have paid far too little attention to the culture of anthropology departments. Do unexamined practices of "white‐norming" that shape the everyday lives of faculty and students in anthropology departments persistently "Other"—marginalize and alienate—people of color?

Decolonizing biodiversity conservation science and practice involves a transition towards more locally rooted, plural, socially just, and convivial forms of conservation, moving away from mainstream conservation approaches, such as protected areas, sustainable resource management plans, or market-based instruments that are strongly rooted in Eurocentric ontologies and epistemologies. In this article, we introduce and review the contributions to the special issue "Decolonizing biodiversity conservation" and we identify six principles that can be thought of as starting points in efforts to decolonize conservation: recognition, reparation, epistemic disobedience, relationality, power subversion, and limits. We explain how these principles feature in the collection's contributions and how they can contribute to decolonizing conservation science, policy, and practice. We also acknowledge that there can be differences over meaning and emphasis regarding the principles among Indigenous and local peoples, scholars, and practitioners. Yet we think that their implementation can result in subtler and less universalizing conservation approaches.

"Decolonizing Latinx Masculinities presents scholarly chapters that 'address the complex issues of racialized masculinities in the Latinx communities'. Building on Chicana feminist theories and decolonial gender studies, the manuscript explores such issues as machismo, patriarchy, and compulsory heteronormativities; how these issues are reinforced; and how 'Latinx men are criminalized by the dominant discourse'. Arturo Aldama and Frederick Aldama take a hemispheric approach to their content in order to place Latinx masculinities within the broader context of the Américas. According to reviewer Richard T. Rodríguez: 'By examining recent films, historical and contemporary novels, political phenomena, theater and performance, short stories, and various popular cultural forms, the 18 essays assembled here and written by established and emergent scholars make a significant contribution to the literature on manhood, queer sexualities, and gender roles'."--

In order to decolonize the history of philosophy against the fabrication of translatio studiorum as the unilinear path connecting Greek thought and sciences to medieval European Christianity, we need to pluralize that history. And to manifest in our textbooks that translatio studiorum is not just Jerusalem-AthensRome-Paris or London or Heidelberg … but, as well: Athens-Nishapur-BagdadCordoba-Fez-Timbuktu …. To decolonize the history of philosophy is also to take into account the plurality of languages, in order to consider the perspectives introduced by tongues other than European, and thus undo the "ontological nationalism" upon which rests the assumption that philosophical exercise is intrinsically tied to certain (European) languages.

This article shares our reflections and learning on decolonizing field education programs based on exploratory research in the Interior of British Columbia (BC). Because there is no existing research on field education by or with urban Aboriginal people this article aims to contribute to the development of new literature on the process of decolonizing field education practices through cultural safety and intersectional frameworks. The findings call for a transformation in social work and human service field education policies and practices.