In the article Introduction: Symposium on Cultural Sovereignty by Rebecca Tsosie, her symposium focuses on three main ideas. First, Tsosie discusses the various standpoints on sovereignty from David Matheson, Clauden Bates Arthur, and Kunani Nihipali, whose were Native Leaders. Furthermore, she describes the challenges in attaining cultural sovereignty and the critique on other perspectives of cultural sovereignty as well as better definitions of cultural sovereignty. Lastly, Tsosie list various strategies to restore cultural and political sovereignty. David Matheson defines cultural sovereignty as the fact that Native people have always been an autonomous nation.
Colonial Mentality theory grounds this study in recognition of colonialism’s lingering impact. Colonial Mentality theory attempts to shift the dominant ways in which people perceive the world (Young, 2003). Young (2003) stated, “Colonialism claims the right of all people on this earth to the same material and cultural well-being” (p.2). Young (2003) asserted that colonialism “names a politics and a philosophy of activism” that challenges the pervasive inequality in the world. In a different way, it resumes anti-colonial struggles of the past.
2.2 Bandwagoning: the understated strategic phenomenon Bandwagoning behavior was first established as the opposite to balancing (Waltz 1979: 126). However, the concept was later developed substantively in the literature, most notably the concept of ‘bandwagoning for profit’ (Schweller 1994). This section looks at the literature on bandwagoning, briefly reviews how bandwagoning strategy is defined and developed. 2.2.1 Conceptualization of bandwagoning in literature Attributed coining of the term to Stephen van Evera, Waltz (1979: 126) defined bandwagoning strategy as a surrender of self-autonomy to powerful states for better security. In his study of the development in Middle East politics in between 1957 to 1979, Walt (1987: 17) revised Waltz’s definition of bandwagoning as “the alignment of the source of danger” which the source of danger is threatening, not necessarily powerful.
Imperialism is the practice of powerful nations attempting to acquire control over lesser nations; typically, imperialism revolves around expanding or upholding influence. Historically, in The United States, an imperialistic mindset is perceivable in the popular concept of manifest destiny. Again, in 1823, The United States seeks to exude international influence in publishing The Monroe Doctrine. This document is later used as reasoning to invade territories. Evidently, imperialism was intertwined within the mindsets of many Americans.
There are four main elements that explained postmodernism’s quasi-phenomenology of the state. First one is a genealogical analysis of the modern state’s ‘origins’ in violence. Modern political thought has attempted to transcend illegitimate forms of rule where power is unconstrained, unchecked, arbitrary and violent, by founding legitimate, democratic forms of government where authority is subject to law. The second one is an account of boundary inscription. To inquire into the state’s constitution, as postmodernism does, is partly to inquire into the ways in which global political space is partitioned.
Hybridity/Hybridization in Postcolonialism In postcolonialism, the word hybridity/hybridization reveals the concept as a sort of improvement or progress in the lives of hybrids while some other critics assess such a word as a means of colonizers to make the colonized catch up with the western culture and style of life. Homi Bhabha (1993) explicated the real meaning of hybridity It is the sign of productivity of colonial power, its shifting forces and fixities, it is the name of strategic reversal of the process of discriminatory identities that secure the pure and original identity of authority, Hybridity is the revaluation of the assumption of colonial identity through the repetition of discriminatory identity effects. (The Location p.
I. INTRODUCTION In International Law, jurisdiction is related to the concept of sovereignty and territory. In order to become a state, it must have territory and when a state has territory it is sovereign; and sovereign means it has supreme authority within its territory and is politically and legally independent with power to affect people, property and circumstances within its territory. Jurisdiction on people and property is an important and crucial part of state sovereignty. According to Shaw, jurisdiction is concerning about the power of state under international law to regulate or otherwise impact upon people, property and circumstances and reflects the basic principles of state sovereignty, equality of states and non-interference in
Cornel (2004) definition of autonomy as the right of a certain group to "…regulate their own affairs by enacting legal rules” (p. 248-249). Kurian (2011) added that this rules are “based on their own norms, laws, and cultures” and shall “determine the manner of their collective lives and to establish the framework of their communities”. This is in agreement to Heywood’s (2007) definition above but Cornell (2004) expounded that the concept must not be confused with state sovereignty since autonomous regions are formed “without constituting a state of their own" (p. 248-249). We can infer here that though Heywood’s (2006) definition states freedom from external authority, regions granted with autonomy do not possess sovereignty like states. Many of the literature review favors the idea that power sharing through devolution agreements are the effective way of dealing with secessionist tension.
1.1.There is an odd balance between the culture of the Western Europe and the culture of the country outside the West. There is a kind of signature by the west of the decline of other nations through commencing, and globalisation and several attempts have been made by scholars, especially those from the west to argue for globalisation as an inevitable drift. Winseck and Pike (2009), examined the Indices that made prominent the global media system around 1860. Ugo (2009) looks at the issues, cultural issues: globalisation of the press, the new media culture and development of nascent media multiple channels by the youth in
Jackson (2001) argues in previous research that Hofstede’s individualism dimension is being oversimplified. He recom-mends the egalitarian dimension introduced by Schwartz to be more relevant in analysing the ethi-cal attributions in countries described as more individualistic (Imm et al, 2007: p. 166; after Jack-son, 2001). For Siegel, Licht and Schwartz (2011: p. 1), egalitarianism influences international investment progress. To this end, they assert that a society's cultural orientation toward egalitarian-ism is shaped through flexibility for use of political power, including the desire to protect less powerful actors in the international market