I'm doing an early post this week (who knows.... maybe two!) because of a thought process that was developed in a class that I enjoy but don't usually blog about. Issues and Institutions in Education is one of only 2 core courses I have to take out of the 12 I need to complete to graduate in May 2012. It takes a very economically-drive perspective of development, looking at the origins of the concept of development and modernization through Adam Smith's theory of capitalism. We've worked our way now through that, modernization theory, dependency theory, human capital theory, and now postcolonial and feminist theory. We swept very quickly through concept that we've taken an entire half semester to this point to cover in my class solely on Postcolonial Studies. But today was different. For the past half semester I leave my postcolonial class disheartened and sometimes even confused about the perspective that postcolonial takes and develops within me about the nature of development work and particularly in the context of education. It calls to question deeply rooted issues in the way that we are and act and think as a result of the "colonial legacy," i.e. the footprint that the colonial and imperial project has left not only on the colonized but the colonizer as well. I know deep down in my heart that educational initiatives intended for those who would not otherwise have access to education are really a good thing. But the postcolonial perspective has made me very unsettled about even thinking that. No, today, for the first time this semester, we talked about the critiques of postcolonial theory. While still confirming that postcolonial is an effective and rather transformative way of viewing the world, it has given me some ammo in the debate about the negative effects of education as development, particularly higher education in the Arabian Gulf.
First, postcolonial theory lends itself to the misattribution of motivation. Someone viewing a particular development phenomenon through this lens may assume that anything white, male, or western is automatically entrenched in the "colonial" objective. This is not necessarily the case. Just because an initiative comes from someone, something, or some institution that represents those with power does not mean that whatever project they are undertaking is automatically meant to oppress or exploit. This extreme application of postcolonial theory actually reproduces the dichotomies of colonizer and colonized, priveleged and disenfranchised, developed and developer, etc, in that it automatically assumes that all "industrialized nations do this" or they all think that. Certainly aid-giving entities are able to undertake said endeavor without it always and only being for a malicious intent.
Second, postcolonial theory underestimates both the history of a country before colonialism and the agency of the colonized. Not all countries are what they are right now only as a result of the colonizing influence. There are millennia of history before colonization that make countries, societies, and peoples their distinctive realities of today. Postcolonial theory looks only at the outcome of colonization and thus often doesn't consider other aspects or factors in the process. Further, it ignores any bit of resistance that was a part of the colonial period. If you accept that colonized territories were passive throughout their colonization, you inevitably adopt the views of the core, the skewed version of history as it is perpectuated by the colonizers of those "poor, local people" who couldn't defend themselves against the colonizers. HIstory shows that many, if not most, colonized people put up a fight.
Third, postcolonial theory offers very few concrete alternatives to the present state of development work. If postcolonial theory stands in judgment of current development projects, how would you use the theory to improve those projects? It's easy to identify the postcolonial legacy in a national education system but it's pretty difficult to identify a politically realistic and socially acceptable way to fix an education system, much less define what it means to fix it, through postcolonial theory.
I would still recommend to anyone and everyone that they should become more familiar with postcolonial literature. It has a way of liberating our thought processes and gives us a unique lens through which to view past historical events as well as many of the very tumultuous current events taking shape in our world. It's given me a new perspective on education, a new perspective on capitalist systems, and a new perspective on the way that America interacts with the rest of the world. In particular, it's taught me to question all of the above. But the theory itself certainly isn't without its faults. And that's exactly why anybody interested in applying this theory, and only this theory, to a particular international development phenomenon better be asking themselves: "Why?"
No comments:
Post a Comment