Neither Settler nor Native: The Making and Unmaking of Permanent Minorities is a 2020 book by Ugandan political theorist Mahmood Mamdani. [1] [2] [3] Mamdani argues that nationalism and colonialism have common origins and are two sides of the same coin. He argues for responding to the violence inherent in the nation-state by rejecting the identities of settler and native and participating as equal citizens instead.
Mahmood Mamdani is a Ugandan political theorist. [4] [5] The intended audience of the book is "scholars of the liberal state, scholars of settler colonialism, and scholars of indirect rule colonialism". [6] It follows Mamdani's earlier books, Citizen and Subject (1996) about the legacy of colonialism in Africa, When Victims Became Killers (2001) and Saviours and Survivors (2009), about large-scale violence in Rwanda and Sudan. [7] The book is related to disagreements between Mamdani and Michael Neocosmos over the latter's 2016 book, Thinking Freedom in Africa . [8] Mamdani decided to write the book after questioning some of the assumptions in his earlier books and realizing "that colonialism and nationalism were actually born together and represent two sides of the same coin". [6]
Instead of the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia, Mamdani traces the origins of the modern state to 1492: the year of the expulsion of Jews and Muslims from Spain following the Reconquista, and simultaneously the beginning of the European colonization of the Americas. [9] He argues that political modernity exists in the form of the nation-state; the birth of the nation-state forms both national majorities and national minorities, the latter of which are excluded from some rights. The nation-state is an inherently violent endeavor and efforts to homogenize it have triggered various episodes of ethnic cleansing and genocide. [7]
Mamdani differentiates between immigrants and settlers: "Immigrants are unarmed; settlers come armed with both weapons and a nationalist agenda. Immigrants come in search of a homeland, not a state; for settlers, there can be no homeland without a state. For the immigrant, the homeland can be shared; for the settler, the state must be a nation-state, a preserve of the nation in which all others are at most tolerated guests." [5]
The book draws on several case studies: the nineteenth century in the United States, which involved the dispossession of Native Americans and their concentration in Indian reservations; post-World War II Germany, in which he sees the Nuremberg trials as a failure that completed the Nazis' project of separating Germans from Jews; the end of apartheid in South Africa; Sudan and South Sudan, which separated after a civil war; and Israel/Palestine. [4] [7] Of these, the one Mamdani prefers is South Africa which fits his model of rejecting the identities of settler and native in favor of becoming equal citizens, or "survivors". [10]
Mamdani's book is underpinned by normative stances, such as his model of political modernity generating the nation state and hence mass violence, and against the use of criminal justice in responses to mass violence. Mamdani's argument is that since colonialism was the “making of permanent minorities and their maintenance through the politicisation of identity” decolonization would require “unmaking of the permanence of these identities”. [10] His conclusion is:
Recognizing this history gives us the power to change perspectives and reality. The history of political modernity tells those of us who identify with the nation that we have been coopted. The nation is not inherent in us. It overwhelmed us. Political modernity led us to believe that we could not live without the nation-state, lest we not only be denied its privileges but also find ourselves dispossessed in the way of the permanent minority. The nation made the immigrant a settler and the settler a perpetrator. The nation made the local a native and the native a perpetrator, too. In this new history, everyone is colonized—settler and native, perpetrator and victim, majority and minority. Once we learn this history, we might prefer to be survivors instead. [4]
Congolese historian Jacques Depelchin described the book as "a landmark in trying to figure out how to transform the way humans relate to each other", [11] but flawed in that in his view it overlooked relevant works on reconciliation by Cheikh Anta Diop, Théophile Obenga, Ayi Kwei Armah, and Yoporeka Somet and colonial legacies in postcolonial states. [11] Sociologist Nandita Sharma describes the book as "an urgent intervention in contemporary politics" and "a searing critique of the nation-state". However, she argues that Mamdani does not adequately address all forms of postcolonial violence, such as border violence and the role of immigration restrictions in defining nation-states. She also disagrees with Mamdani's decision to treat colonial land appropriation and labor exploitation as separate processes. [5]
Historian Eve M. Troutt Powell describes the book as "a grand narrative with which to review and revise our investment in our political identities", but criticizes the lack of a bibliography, absence of some relevant works, lack of attention to women and gender, and some of Mamdani's findings in the case studies. [4] Reviewer Vivienne Jabri argues that Mamdani's concept of political modernity ignores the paradox that both violent and exclusionary forms of nationalism and the response to these that Mamdani advocates derive from modernity. She also argues that political and criminal justice are not dichotomous, as Mamdani argues. Despite her criticism, Jabri states that the book "will be of core interest both pedagogically and intellectually to understandings of conflict, political transformation, and responses to the extremes of violence in postcolonial states". [10]
According to Elliott Green, Mamdani fails to engage with literature in nationalism studies and his argument would have been better served by a global history rather than case studies perspective. [7] Stefan Andreasson argues that the most valuable aspect of the book is "Mamdani’s argument about why a genuine process of decolonisation has proven elusive, but also how it might be attained". [12] Fara Dabhoiwala describes the book as provocative and elegantly written, but cites limitations in its neglect of internationalism and "bold but selective abstractions". [13]
The Wretched of the Earth is a 1961 book by the philosopher Frantz Fanon, in which the author provides a psychoanalysis of the dehumanizing effects of colonization upon the individual and the nation, and discusses the broader social, cultural, and political implications of establishing a social movement for the decolonization of a person and of a people. The French-language title derives from the opening lyrics of "The Internationale".
An ethnocracy is a type of political structure in which the state apparatus is controlled by a dominant ethnic group to further its interests, power and resources. Ethnocratic regimes typically display a 'thin' democratic façade covering a more profound ethnic structure, in which ethnicity – and not citizenship – is the key to securing power and resources.
Internal colonialism is the uneven effects of economic development on a regional basis, otherwise known as "uneven development" as a result of the exploitation of minority groups within a wider society which leads to political and economic inequalities between regions within a state. This is held to be similar to the relationship between a metropole and a colony, in colonialism proper. The phenomenon leads to the distinct separation of the dominant core from the periphery in an empire.
Indirect rule was a system of governance used by the British and others to control parts of their colonial empires, particularly in Africa and Asia, which was done through pre-existing indigenous power structures. Indirect rule was used by various colonial rulers: the French in Algeria and Tunisia, the Dutch in the East Indies, the Portuguese in Angola and Mozambique and the Belgians in Rwanda and Burundi. These dependencies were often called "protectorates" or "trucial states". By this system, the day-to-day government and administration of areas both small and large were left in the hands of traditional rulers, who gained prestige and the stability and protection afforded by the Pax Britannica, at the cost of losing control of their external affairs, and often of taxation, communications, and other matters, usually with a small number of European "advisors" effectively overseeing the government of large numbers of people spread over extensive areas.
European colonialism and colonization was the policy or practice of acquiring full or partial political control over other societies and territories, founding a colony, occupying it with settlers, and exploiting it economically. For example, colonial policies, such as the type of rule implemented, the nature of investments, and identity of the colonizers, are cited as impacting postcolonial states. Examination of the state-building process, economic development, and cultural norms and mores shows the direct and indirect consequences of colonialism on the postcolonial states.
Ashis Nandy is an Indian political psychologist, social theorist, and critic. A trained clinical psychologist, Nandy has provided theoretical critiques of European colonialism, development, modernity, secularism, Hindutva, science, technology, nuclearism, cosmopolitanism, and utopia. He has also offered alternative conceptions relating to cosmopolitanism and critical traditionalism. In addition to the above, Nandy has offered an original historical profile of India's commercial cinema as well as critiques of state and violence.
The history of external colonisation of Africa can be dated back from ancient, medieval, or modern history, depending on how the term colonisation is defined.
Postcolonialism is the critical academic study of the cultural, political and economic legacy of colonialism and imperialism, focusing on the impact of human control and exploitation of colonized people and their lands. More specifically, it is a critical theory analysis of the history, culture, literature, and discourse of imperial power.
Postcolonial international relations is a branch of scholarship that approaches the study of international relations (IR) using the critical lens of postcolonialism. This critique of IR theory suggests that mainstream IR scholarship does not adequately address the impacts of colonialism and imperialism on current day world politics. Despite using the language of post-, scholars of Postcolonial IR argue that the legacies of colonialism are ongoing, and that critiquing International Relations with this lens allows scholars to contextualize global events. By bridging postcolonialism and International Relations, scholars point to the process of globalization as a crucial point in both fields, due to the increases in global interactions and integration. Postcolonial IR focuses on the re-narrativization of global politics to create a balanced transnational understanding of colonial histories, and attempts to tie non-Western sources of thought into political praxis.
Mahmood Mamdani, FBA is an Indian-born Ugandan academic, author, and political commentator. He currently serves as the Chancellor of Kampala International University, Uganda. He was the director of the Makerere Institute of Social Research (MISR) from 2010 until February 2022, the Herbert Lehman Professor of Government at the School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University and the Professor of Anthropology, Political Science and African Studies at Columbia University.
The coloniality of power is a concept interrelating the practices and legacies of European colonialism in social orders and forms of knowledge, advanced in postcolonial studies, decoloniality, and Latin American subaltern studies, most prominently by Anibal Quijano. It identifies and describes the living legacy of colonialism in contemporary societies in the form of social discrimination that outlived formal colonialism and became integrated in succeeding social orders. The concept identifies the racial, political and social hierarchical orders imposed by European colonialism in Latin America that prescribed value to certain peoples/societies while disenfranchising others.
Settler colonialism is a type of colonialism in which foreign settlers move to and permanently reside on land already inhabited by Indigenous residents, with the goal of eliminating them and their cultures and replacing them with a settler society. Some, but not all, scholars argue that settler colonialism is inherently genocidal. It may be enacted by a variety of means, ranging from violent depopulation of the previous inhabitants to less deadly means, such as assimilation or recognition of Indigenous identity within a colonial framework.
Decoloniality is a school of thought that aims to delink from Eurocentric knowledge hierarchies and ways of being in the world in order to enable other forms of existence on Earth. It critiques the perceived universality of Western knowledge and the superiority of Western culture, including the systems and institutions that reinforce these perceptions. Decolonial perspectives understand colonialism as the basis for the everyday function of capitalist modernity and imperialism. Decoloniality emerged as part of a Latin American movement examining the role of the European colonization of the Americas in establishing Eurocentric modernity/coloniality.
Indigenous feminism is an intersectional theory and practice of feminism that focuses on decolonization, indigenous sovereignty, and human rights for Indigenous women and their families. The focus is to empower Indigenous women in the context of Indigenous cultural values and priorities, rather than mainstream, white, patriarchal ones. In this cultural perspective, it can be compared to womanism in the African-American communities.
Anthony Dirk Moses is an Australian scholar who researches various aspects of genocide. In 2022 he became the Anne and Bernard Spitzer Professor of Political Science at the City College of New York, after having been the Frank Porter Graham Distinguished Professor of Global Human Rights History at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He is a widely regarded as a leading scholar on genocide, especially in colonial contexts, as well as on the political development of the concept itself. He is known for coining the term racial century in reference to the period 1850–1950. He is editor-in-chief of the Journal of Genocide Research.
Faramerz Noshir Dabhoiwala is a historian and senior research scholar at Princeton University where he teaches and writes about the social history, cultural history, and intellectual history of the English-speaking world, from the Middle Ages to the present day.
Scholarship on nationalism and gender explores the processes by which gender affects and is impacted by the development of nationalism. Sometimes referred to as "gendered nationalism," gender and nationalism describes the phenomena whereby conceptions of the state or nation, including notions of citizenship, sovereignty, or national identity contribute to or arise in relation to gender roles.
Andreas Wimmer is a Swiss sociologist who is the Lieber Professor of Sociology and Political Philosophy at Columbia University. He has a PhD in social anthropology from the University of Zurich.
The Problems of Genocide: Permanent Security and the Language of Transgression is a 2021 book by Australian historian A. Dirk Moses. The book explores what Moses sees as flaws in the concept of genocide, which he argues allows killings of civilians that do not resemble the Holocaust to be ignored. Moses proposes "permanent security" as an alternative to the concept of genocide. The book was described as important, but his emphasis on security is considered only one factor to be causing mass violence.
Zionism as settler colonialism is the paradigm that views Zionism and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict as a form of settler colonialism. Patrick Wolfe, one of the most influential theorists of settler colonial studies, considered Israel an example and discussed it in his widely cited essay "Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native". Other scholars who have used a settler-colonial analysis of Israel/Palestine include Edward Said, Fayez Sayegh, Maxime Rodinson, George Jabbour, Ibrahim Abu-Lughod, Baha Abu-Laban, Jamil Hilal, and Rosemary Sayigh.