Discourse on colonialism generally results in the different opinions of the colonizer and the colonized. The upshot of such discourse shows that colonialism has divergent interpretations. For the colonizer, it is ‘a civilizing mission’; to the colonized, it is exploitation. Such concept is better understood when both the views are studied with an objective approach. Things Fall Apart is a perfect novel to study colonialism as it deals with the perspectives of the colonizer and the colonized.
For postmodernism, meaning & the categories of thought are shifting & unstable. While using many of the fundamental ideas in structuralism, I follow the American anthropologist Roy Wagner in using the notion of trope or metaphor in the context of a phenomenology in order to map the unfolding structure of social forms. Using linguistic sociological tools in an analysis of mysticism & some other relevant subject matter such as magic, sacrifice, ritual initiation, and so on, is difficult for several reasons. One of these is that language & the structure of society were in their origins and development completely entangled in religion and the sacred. It seems that language originally was, by its very nature & power, sacred.
In the case of Chidester 's & Linenthal 's essay versus Sherrill 's essay, there are quite a few similarities and one important difference. In Chidester and Linenthal, they mostly discuss the politics of sacred space, and how politics play into the geography, the ownership, and the title of “sacred”. Chidester and Linenthal speak more directly to the reality of sacred space and how a site can logically take the steps in order to become one. They speak about substantial versus situational, and focus highly on the situational through politics. They also mention Van der Leeuw when explaining the politics of power, inclusion, and exclusion in terms of a sacred space.
Whenever someone is exposed to primary sources, they are able to stop learning history and actually start doing history because they are researching actual data/evidence. The book helped reveal the reasons why legal systems were created in the first place by documenting the prolongation of social order as well as the preservation of self interest. Anne Orthwood’s Bastard critically examines the role of unfree labor, women, religion and law in colonial life which tends to answer the question of what values and customs were aligned with the start of American civilization. In addition, the way English law was used as a menacing force by the colonial states to help maintain the social order and promote capitalist development as well as renovate social relations. The social and legal systems of the states became closely tied to their religious beliefs, as well as English
It calls for a reevaluation of how governing documents should be interpreted. By providing that the original Declaration had inconsistencies between the text and what happens in reality, it calls for people to act on their right to mold the political system into a just one. Works like “Freedom’s Plow” and these alternative declaration work to show that laws are not always implemented or upheld fairly. These works also show that politicians and their constituents should seek to learn from past mistakes, just as America was built by analyzing the grievances of the British rule over the
According to Ryan, they ‘are united by their compulsion to relate literature to history, to treat texts as indivisible from contexts, and to do so from a politically charged perspective forged in the present’ (Ryan xi). New historicism could, in a sense, be considered as cultural materialism in a postmodern register preoccupied with historicizing texts and with the workings of power through culture, but focused on issues of individual subjectivity construction, gender and the workings of patriarchy, rather than on class and nation. Where Williams’ cultural materialism had been concerned with the connections between social class and collective emancipatory politics, new historicism tends to exhibit the characteristic preoccupations of the officially sanctioned forms of political radicalism within the North American academy: subjectivity formation, desire, race, gender, queer theory, and so on. This later is also analyzable in more strictly cultural materialist terms, however, as Dollimore and Sinfield’s work clearly suggests (Dollimore, 1991; Sinfield, 1994; Sinfield, 1994a). The more fundamental differences between cultural materialism and the new historicism are threefold: first, “the theoretical question, concerning the subversive potential of apparently subversive texts; second, the political question, concerning the competing claims of academic professionalism and
Unpacking Habib’s quote “Scholarly studies that are partial to visions of substantive democracy and inclusive development have been divided between a nationalist historiography on the one hand and that emanating from a progressively liberal or social justice ideological orientation on the other hand. The battle between these studies is about how to interpret, understand and address societal conflicts”. – Adam Habib In order to understand what Habib means by this quote the key concepts and words within the quote need to be explained and analysed. The first concept that should be explained is ‘substantive democracy’. According to (Meszaros, 2004) substantive democracy is defined as a form of democracy that functions in the interests of the public.
In spite of the fact that these two directions cover, there are essential contrasts between them. Multicultural legislative issues are established in the character governmental issues basic different social developments that picked up conspicuousness mind the 1960s, for example, the social liabilities development and radical social women liberation. These developments have a tendency to underline the peculiarity and estimation of their social personality and request bunch particular rights to secure this uniqueness. Without devaluing character legislations issues and multiculturalism, this article is basically worried with political speculation of recognition, especially those planned by Charles Tylor (who is additionally a conspicuous figure in multicultural governmental issues). these emphases on the pretended by recognition in individual personality arrangement and the regulating establishment this can give to speculation of
It is for these reasons that although all three articles definitely give a good analysis of different nationalist agendas through Latin American countries the articles leave readers with some ambiguity. For example, Chambers’ article states “who and what constitutes the ‘nation’ is always changing”. Yet, Chambers does not explain how this shift is produced and who decides such a restructuring. Given that Chambers’ article is composed of a continuum of definitions relating to boundaries his work could have benefited from expanding on the dominant players of nation building. On another end, Knight becomes somewhat reductionist in arguing how specifically in Mexico race is based on societal perception rather than biological asset.
The book, The Occupy Movement Explained: From Corporate Control to Democracy, by Nicholas Smaligo is part of the Idea Explained series, the author offers a thorough and impassioned yet at sometimes biased look at the Occupy Wall Street Movement (OSW). Smaligo attempts to explain the formation and political//social basis for the Occupy movement, diagram how its leaderless and demand less structure functioned, offer a rebuke to some the criticisms and misconceptions of the OSW movement and to analyze the lasting legacy of the Occupy Wall Street Movement. The Occupy Movement Explained is a unique look at social movement offering the authors own experience and passion, in a addition to a variety of different peoples own experience with or critique