Get this from a library! Colonialidad del poder, eurocentrismo y América Latina. [ Aníbal Quijano]. Eurocentrism, and Latin America. Aníbal Quijano has expertise in Political Science and History. Publication Preview. Colonialidad del poder, eurocentrismo. En América Latina y en el Caribe, desde siempre en su historia, está planteado un conflicto entre tendencias que se dirigen hacia una reoriginalización cultural.
|Published (Last):||21 April 2009|
|PDF File Size:||4.14 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||17.24 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The whole extensive historical formational process of the Global Coloniality of Power has entered a deep crisis. What I am proposing here, opens a crucial question of our crucial moment in history: This model of power is still globally hegemonic today, but also in its deepest and most existential crisis since its constitution for not much more than years.
Development was, most of all as debated in Latin-America, a key term of a political discourse associated with an elusive project of deconcentration and relative redistribution of the control of industrial capital as part of a new geography within the configuration of global colonial-modern capitalism at the end of the second World War.
At a first moment it was a virtually official discourse. Nevertheless, it gave space to complex and contradictory questions, which derived in a rich and intense debate with worldwide resonance as a clear expression of the magnitude and the deepness of the socio-political conflicts of interest that were part of this whole new geography of power and, particularly, in Latin-American.
In this way, a wide range of categories became produced mainly development, underdevelopment, modernization, marginality, participation on the one hand and on the other imperialism, dependency, marginalization, revolutionwhich was deployed in close contact with conflictive and violent movements of and in society that lead to dead-end processes or relatively important, but unfinished, changes in the distribution of power.
But neither its historical-structural dependency in the Global Coloniality of Power, nor the modes of exploitation and domination inherent to this power model have been eradicated or sufficiently altered in order to make space for a democratic production and management of the State, nor its resources of production, nor the distribution and appropriation of the product. Despite its intensity, this debate never managed to liberate itself from the hegemony of Eurocentrism.
Otherwise it would no be possible to understand why the term always manages to reappear, for instance now, as the ghost of an unfinished past. But, in the context of a Global Coloniality of Power, this perspective was historically misleading.
What is more, precisely after the second World War, this power model entered a long period of decisive changes on a global scale. It is pertinent to summarize those:. This relationship implied, on the one hand, a reduction of the need for living and individual work force and consequently for paid labor as colonialdiad inherent to capital in that new period.
Unemployment ceased to be a temporary or cyclical problem. In that way a new industrial-financial capital was formed, which soon experienced a relatively fast global expansion. Despite its new character, it did not cease to be attractive and persuasive although it turned out to be more and more paradoxical, ambivalent and ultimately historically impossible.
In that way and despite their rivalry, both modes of domination, exploitation and conflict converged in a repressive antagonism of anibzl new movements of and in society, particularly regarding the social ethic of labor, gender, subjectivity and collective authority. Contrarily, it would be much harder to explain the successful alliance of both modes of domination to overthrow most of all juvenile movements be that in Paris, New York, Berlin, Rome, Jakarta, Tlatelolco or Shanghai and Prague.
At the same time a new model of conflicts came up. This tendency already began since the end of the second world war as a result of the global repudiation regarding the atrocities of national-socialism and Japanese military authoritarianism.
The evolvement of these new historical tendencies of industrial-financial capital lead to a prolonged booming and changing period, culminating in an explosion of an existential crisis in the power model as such, the Global Coloniality of Power, its ensemble and its crucial elements, since the second half of The first consists basically in the ultimate imposition of the new financial capital in the control of the global colonial-modern capitalism.
The quijwno is about the imposition of that definitive framework on all countries and the whole human population, initially in Latin America through the bloody dictatorship of general Augusto Pinochet in Chile and later through the governments of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan in Britain and the U.
We are then deep within a historical process of a complete reconfiguration of the Aniibal Coloniality of Power, the hegemonic power model of the planet.
It is about, in a first stance, the acceleration and deepening of a re-concentration tendency regarding the control of power.
The central tendencies of that process consist, in a brief overview, in:.
The re-privatization of public spaces, mainly the State. The reconcentration of the control over labor, the resources of production and of production-redistribution. The extreme and increasing social polarization of the world population.
The hyperfetishization of the market, even more than of the product. The mercantilization of subjectivity and life experiences of individuals, mainly of women. With its imposition, today we are killing each other and destroying our common home. In other terms, it is one ainbal the most central expressions of this existential crisis of this specific power model.
Since the end of the 20th century, a growing proportion of the victims of that power model began to resist these tendencies in virtually the whole world.
COLONIALIDAD DEL PODER, EUROCENTRISMO Y AMERICA LATINA by Rosibeth Chávez on Prezi
Such aggravation pkder conflictivity, fundamtentalisms and violence, coupled with the growing and extreme social polarization of the world population, causes the resistance itself to produce a new conflict model. Resistance tends to evolve as the production of a new sense of social existence, life itself, precisely because the vast concerned population perceives with a growing intensity, that what is at stake here and now is not only their poverty as their never-ending way of existence, but rather and nothing less than their own survival.
Such a discovery implies necessarily that one cannot defend human life on earth without defending at the same time and in the same movement the conditions of the very life on earth. In that way, the defense of human life and its conditions on the planet becomes the new sense for resistance struggles for an enormous majority of the world population. It is this historical context, where it is necessary to locate the whole debate and elaboration of the proposition of Bien Vivir.
Following, it is most of all about admitting this open question, not only in debate, but also in the everyday social praxis of populations who decide to warp and inhabit historically this new possibility of social existence.
The social equality of heterogeneous and diverse individuals, against the de-equalizing racial and sexual social classification and identification of the world population. Consequently, neither the differences nor the identities will be anlbal longer a source or argument for the social inequality of individuals.
The egalitarian redistribution of resources and products, tangible and intangible, of the world between the world population. The tendency of communal association of the world population on a local, regional or global scale as a way of producing and managing collective authority directly and, colonalidad that precise meaning, as the most efficient mechanism to distribute and redistribute rights, obligations, responsibilities, resources, products, between groups and their aibal, in podwr area of social existence sex, labor, subjectivity, collective authority and a co-responsibility regarding the relationship with all other living beings and entities on the planet or the whole universe.
It would make no sense, though, to wait for this historically heterogeneous population, which composes the overwhelmingly vast majority of the world, to produce or to take over a universal, homogenous historical imaginary as an alternative to the Global Coloniality of Poderr. This would not even be conceivable taking only into account the population of Latin America or the Americas as a whole. In fact, all these populations, without any exception, come from historical experiences of power relationships.
Until now, power seems to have been, in all known history, not only a phenomenon of all long-term social forms of existence, but particularly the drl motivation of the historical collective colonialiead of the species.
Such experiences of power relations are without any doubt different between each other and regarding the Coloniality of Power, but nevertheless possible common experiences of colonization. Also, paradoxically but effectively, the resistance against those forms made it possible to share common historical aspirations against domination, exploitation and discrimination: Another world is possible! In other words, the new historical horizon of meanings is emerging in all its historical-structural heterogeneity.
In that perspective, the proposition of Bien Vivir, is necessarily a historically open question which requires continuous inquiry, debate and praxis. Colonizlidad text has originally been published in Ecuador Debate QuitoAjibal.
It has been translated with the permission of quijamo author. He is known for having developed the concept of “colonially of power” and his body of work has been influential in the fields of quojano studies and critical theory. Universidad Ricardo PalmaNr. The differences cannot be merely linguistical but rather conceptual.
Modernidad, Identidad y Utopía en América Latina
It will be necessary to demarcate the alternatives, as well as in Latin-American Spanish, as in the most common variants of Quechua in Colonialldad America and in Aymara. What is more, there are uninformed Eurocentrists, who want to make Sumac the same as Suma and propose to say Suma Kawsay.
For the purpose of the present debate, it might be useful to cite only the most important ones. Amauta, Lima, Peru. At the moment, this theory is being debated on a worldwide scale. And there is, of course, a huge body of literature poderr in that regard.
Instituto de Estudios Internacionales Pedro Gual, An updated version in: Las Indias AccidentalesBarcelona, Barataria. Regarding the social eel itself, there is a very important movement of specific research.
It is pertinent to summarize those: The central tendencies of that process consist, in a brief overview, in: The re-privatization of public spaces, mainly the State; 2. The reconcentration of the control over labor, the resources of production and of production-redistribution; 3. The extreme and increasing social polarization of the world population; 4. The hyperfetishization of the market, even more than of the product; 6.
The mercantilization of subjectivity and life experiences of individuals, mainly of women; 8. The social equality of heterogeneous and diverse individuals, against the de-equalizing racial and sexual social classification and identification of the world population; b.
Consequently, neither the differences nor the identities will be any longer a source or argument for the social inequality of individuals; c. The egalitarian redistribution of resources and products, tangible and intangible, of the world between the world population; f.
A new issue of our Alternautas Race, power, indigenous resistance The danger of sighing while looking up.
The Battle for Paradise: