'via Blog this'Abdiel Wanekia22 minutes ago (edited)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
Perhaps even the majority of people absolutely have a reading and perception problem or just want to be something they are not. I just rec...
-
Wouldn’t a Matriarchal Society Be Great? | Clarissa's Blog It's very bizarre essentialism. The 19th Century European notion -- or ...
The problem with Said (and I speak as a Marxist who subscribes to dialectics) is that he is an idealist. According to his PoMo interpretation of colonialism, based in what I think is a misreading of Foucault, colonial systems are produced by colonial mindsets. The colonizer's "orientalist gaze" others the colonized, thereby reducing their perceived status to that of lower animal species to be prodded at and surveyed without any consideration for their feelings. This isn't necessarily so. For one, ideas are produced by systems, dominant ideology and the material conditions at hand, particularly during the formative years, and not the other way around, as Marx pointed out in The German Ideology. In other words, the colonial mindset is the product of a definite, actually existing colonial system. Colonialism is systemic and not simply "in the mind." It is more than the thoughts, sentiments and actions of individual white Europeans. Also, the colonizer never colonizes out of mere callousness -- he wants to save what is human in the supposed "savage," and this is a most righteous and morally upright cause, in his eyes. This was the prevailing justification behind the enrollment of Native American children en masse into the white colonial residential schools, here in the U.S. This is best summed up in a statement made by the founder and superintendent of the Carlisle Indian Industrial School, Capt. Richard H. Pratt: "Kill the Indian, Save the Man." This sentiment of transforming the "savage" into the European idea of a "man" is at the heart of European colonialism.