The Experts below are selected from a list of 7557 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

George Steinmetz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Field of the Colonial State
    Actes De La Recherche En Sciences Sociales, 2020
    Co-Authors: George Steinmetz
    Abstract:

    Most of the States that exist nowadays are the direct institutional descendents of Colonial States, yet very little is understood about these Colonial predecessors. Social scientists have tended to reduce the Colonial State to an expression of economic practices and structures. This article argues that the modern Colonial State was relatively autonomous from the environing Colonial society and from metropolitan government, and that it took on some of the characteristics of a “field” as described by Bourdieu. Different European social groups competed for a specific form of symbolic capital within the ambit of the Colonial State, and these conflicts shaped the Colonial State’s policies. These effects are most evident when we examine Colonial native policy. This theoretical approach can help to explain why some pre-1914 German colonies engaged in economically-irrational genocide (Southwest Africa), some pursued programs of cultural re-traditionalization (German Polynesia), and others moved from racialized segregation to respectful civilizational exchange with members of the colonized society (German Qingdao/Kiaochow).

  • the Colonial State as a social field ethnographic capital and native policy in the german overseas empire before 1914
    American Sociological Review, 2008
    Co-Authors: George Steinmetz
    Abstract:

    What led modern colonizers to treat their subject populations in radically differing ways, ranging from genocide to efforts to "salvage" preColonial cultures? In Southwest Africa, Germany massacred the Ovaherero and Witbooi; in Samoa, Germany pursued a program of cultural retraditionalization; and in the Chinese leasehold colony of Qingdao/Kiaochow, the Germans moved from policies of racialized segregation to a respectful civilizational exchange. Bourdieu is not generally seen as a theorist of empire, despite the partial genesis of his lifelong research program in the late Colonial crucible of French Algeria (Bourdieu 1958; Yacine 2004). Nonetheless, Bourdieu's theoretical work—most notably his conceptions of field and capital—helps solve the main riddle of the Colonial State. Different European social groups competed inside the Colonial State field for a specific form of symbolic capital: ethnographic capital. This involved exhibiting an alleged talent for judging the culture and character of the colonized, a gift for understanding "the natives." Competitive dynamics among the Colonial rulers decisively shaped the ongoing production of native policies. Policy formation was also influenced by geopolitical and economic interests, responses by the colonized, and the metropolitan government's final authority in appointing and dismissing Colonial officials. The effects of these additional mechanisms were typically mediated by the internal dynamics of the semi-autonomous Colonial State.

  • the devil s handwriting preColoniality and the german Colonial State in qingdao samoa and southwest africa
    2007
    Co-Authors: George Steinmetz
    Abstract:

    Germany's overseas Colonial empire was relatively short-lived, lasting from 1884 to 1918. During this period, dramatically different policies were enacted in the colonies: in Southwest Africa, German troops carried out a brutal slaughter of the Herero people; in Samoa, authorities pursued a paternalistic defense of native culture; in Qingdao, China, policy veered between harsh racism and cultural exchange. Why did the same colonizing power act in such differing ways? In "The Devil's Handwriting", George Steinmetz tackles this question through a brilliant cross-cultural analysis of German Colonialism, leading to a new conceptualization of the Colonial State and postColonial theory. Steinmetz uncovers the roots of Colonial behavior in preColonial European ethnographies, where the Hereros were portrayed as cruel and inhuman, the Samoans were idealized as "noble savages," and depictions of Chinese culture were mixed. The effects of status competition among Colonial officials, colonizers' identification with their subjects, and the different strategies of cooperation and resistance offered by the colonized are also scrutinized in this deeply nuanced and ambitious comparative history.

Akin L Mabogunje - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • urban planning and the post Colonial State in africa a research overview
    African Studies Review, 1990
    Co-Authors: Akin L Mabogunje
    Abstract:

    Rapid urbanization has been perhaps the most dramatic of the social phenomena that marked the end of the Colonial era in Africa. From a situation in 1950 in which the total urban population was no more than 28 million, the figure had by 1984 jumped to well over 125 million, representing a sharply increasing proportion of the total population (World Bank, 1986a). Yet, after an initial period when urbanization was welcomed as a positive tendency in the modernization of the continent (Friedmann, 1961) there is today some ambivalence as to the contributions of urban centers to the overall development of the continent. There are those (Santos, 1971; Bardinet, 1977) who argue that urban centers have failed to serve as a major force in the economic transformation of African countries but have, instead, highlighted their economic dependency and the negative social consequences that go with this. Others (Collier and Lai, 1980; Mabogunje, 1983) argue that much of the limited development that has been achieved in these countries has been due in no small measure to non-farm activities of these urban centers. Cities and towns are therefore apprehended not as the cause but only as the scene of social and economic problems, their role being to draw attention to endemic poverty and social degradation which otherwise remain buried and unobtrusive in the rural areas. When it comes to the role of urban planning and policies in resolving these problems, the pervading impression is of the failure of governments in most African countries to make any appreciable impact on the situation, a fact which has in turn provoked serious debates as to the nature of the post-Colonial State in Africa (Hyden, 1983).

Nuria Sauri - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Edgardo Meléndez - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Puerto Rican Migration, the Colonial State, and Transnationalism
    Centro Journal, 2015
    Co-Authors: Edgardo Meléndez
    Abstract:

    The Puerto Rican government played a very active role in the process of migration from Puerto Rico to the United States after the late 1940s. But this very important element in the Puerto Rican migration experience is not a subject that has been extensively studied.1 Not that it was not noticed at the time. Well-known U.S. scholars studying Puerto Rican migration to the United States in the postwar period argued that the intervention of the Puerto Rican government in the migration and in the incorporation of island migrants in the United States distanced this case from "traditional" immigrants.2 Nowadays, this prominent role rendered by many sending-country States is central to the study of many contemporary migrations in the United States and Europe. This is certainly so within one of the most prominent perspectives in the contemporary study of migrations, that of transnational migration studies.The fact that the Puerto Rican government played a role in the promotion and management of migration to the United States thus poses a relevant question in the study of Puerto Rican migration: Is Puerto Rican migration a "transnational migration"? Several scholars examining Puerto Rican migration have argued that it is, including the respected anthropologist Jorge Duany. These scholars have argued that the Puerto Rican experience should be understood within the transnational paradigm even though Puerto Rico is not a nation-State and Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens. They contend that many elements used in the literature to characterize migrations as transnational can be observed in the Puerto Rican case.Puerto Rico's Colonial status and Puerto Ricans' U.S. citizenship certainly make some scholars reluctant to consider this experience as transnational. According to one of the central tenets in the literature on this subject, transnationalism is defined as the migration of people from one nation-State to another nation-State. This might explain why the most notable scholars in this field have avoided discussing or even mentioning the Puerto Rican case.3 Nevertheless, I will argue in this article that the Puerto Rican experience does look like that of other countries discussed in the literature on "political transnationalism," particularly on the issue related to the role of the State in the "management" of migration to developed countries and in the incorporation of its migrants in the host society. For scholars on this field of transnational studies, the existence of a "migration policy" by a sending-State signals the presence of "political transnationalism" (Ostergaard-Nielsen 2003a: 11). Whether the Puerto Rican migration experience is considered transnational or not, the fact is that the Colonial State in Puerto Rico formulated and implemented its own migration policy and created bureaucratic institutions to manage the migration and incorporation of its "citizens" to the U.S. mainland.The role played by the Colonial State in Puerto Rican migration makes this experience very different from any other "internal" migration in the United States. It also questions the validity of the argument that State-sponsored migration might be unique to transnational migrations, that is, particular to nation-States. The role of the Puerto Rican Colonial State in migration also raises questions regarding the nature of the Puerto Rican Colonial State within the America polity and the nature of U.S. citizenship for Puerto Ricans. The particular arrangement of the Puerto Rican Colonial State within the U.S. polity, as an unincorporated territory and the distinct construct of U.S. citizenship for Puerto Ricans-as one diminished in the Colonial territory-made them "foreign" to the United States not only culturally but also politically. Thus, the Puerto Rican migration experience appears like a transnational one. In order to provide social, economic, and political stability in its own territory, the Colonial State in the late 1940s, under the leadership of the rising Popular Democratic Party (Partido Popular Democratico-PPD), took upon itself the task of "managing" migration to the United States; it is a role similar to what many nation States would fulfill in later decades. …

Marie Muschalek - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Violence as Usual - Introduction: Everyday Violence and the Colonial State
    Violence as Usual, 2019
    Co-Authors: Marie Muschalek
    Abstract:

    This introductory chapter provides a brief background on the power of everyday violence in the settler colony of German Southwest Africa (present-day Namibia) at the beginning of the twentieth century. It explores the “unspectacular” violent acts orchestrated by the police force of German Southwest Africa. Instead of being built primarily on formal, legal, and bureaucratic processes, the Colonial State was produced by improvised, informal practices of violence. Contrary to most social theories of the State, the chapter argues that the organization of State power was not merely a matter of claiming the monopoly of force and thus proscribing any excessive, disruptive, and nonofficial violence. Rather, it reveals that Colonial rule consisted in diffusing and regulating specific types of seemingly self-evident harm throughout society.

  • Violence as Usual: Everyday Police Work and the Colonial State in German Southwest Africa
    Rethinking the Colonial State, 2017
    Co-Authors: Marie Muschalek
    Abstract:

    Abstract This chapter puts practices of everyday violence at the center of its analysis of Colonial order. It examines the micro-mechanisms and manifold forms of threatening and hurting people. While a quotidian part of Colonial life, such practices – accepted and normal within the Colonial moral economy – are not normally seen as State actions. However, they reveal the workings of a powerful State: one that was built in an improvised fashion by low-level State representatives. Based on an analysis of everyday police work in German Southwest Africa, this chapter offers a theoretical reframing of the Colonial State that aims to provincialize the modern European State. It shifts the perspective away from the legal and institutional aspirations and structures of the State, instead turning attention to less rationalized processes: the idiosyncratic, makeshift, affective procedures of low-ranking officials. On this plane, everyday violence played a key role in generating a new social order. Ultimately, it had constructive effects which were a fundamental and inherent part of the Colonial State’s power.