We see an increased interest in decolonization – with articles from popular news sources arguing in favor or against decolonization, calls to decolonize universities or the curriculum, and social media mentions about decolonizing your mind, museum, therapy practice, or your bookshelf. Maldonado-Torres argued that we are witnessing a ‘decolonial turn,’ a process when colonialism and coloniality are placed at the center of analysis or discussion. As with all things fashionable, the term ‘decolonization’ is also used for ulterior purposes by authoritarian leaders, neoliberal academia, and corporate agendas. This trend created important responses, one of which is a call to not to use decolonization as a ‘metaphor.’ One way to avoid using decolonization as a metaphor that we can make on individual level is to familiarize ourselves with what decolonization is by reading the thinkers who worked with this lens in the first place. Suspicion and misuse often come from people who are not familiar with decolonial writing.
Another reason to familiarize ourselves with the basic writing on decolonization is to question colonial structures in the present. Colonialism persists despite the independence won by many countries in Asia and Africa especially in the mid-20th century. Colonialism and coloniality (the texts below describe what is the different between the two) did not go anywhere. For example, in October of 2024, Mauritius recuperated sovereignty of Chagos Archipelago from the UK, the process that was accompanied by the decisions of the International Court of Justice, arguing that people of the Chagos Archipelago have a right to self-determination, with law of decolonization applicable to them, and have a right to return. Many more countries and people continue to exist under foreign occupation and colonization.
This piece gathers five articles that serve as a starting point for those interested in decolonization. By mapping key concepts and theories, it aims to make decolonial thinking less intimidating and more accessible. It also highlights key ideas from the text and discusses why they are important.
Some Caveats about this List
- This is a non-exhaustive, non-authoritative, and gently suggestive list that introduces decolonization from various views – as you can see, it has authors from South America, Africa, and Eurasia. It does not represent the broad range of themes and topics decoloniality deals with. It does not list the seminal and important authors for decolonization who inspired generations, as, most notably, Frantz Fanon. The author does not necessarily agree with all the arguments of the presented texts and these writers are not necessarily the author’s favorite thinkers (for example, the author would prefer Sylvia Wynter or Gloria Anzaldua to some of the articles mentioned).
- One of the authors in the list, Madina Tlostanova often highlights how there is no such thing as ‘decolonial theory.’ Although the texts outline concepts and critically engage with them, and the texts are written within the walls of academia by mostly (engaged) academics and published in academic journals – what they do is recap the practice. There are various pathways to decolonization – it has space for different knowledges, and many ideas, from a pluriversal (the opposite of universal) world. Many decolonial thinkers highlight that as long as hierarchies are not imposed, there is space for all.
- One of the things decolonization is about, as can be seen from the reading, is epistemic justice – which means decentering knowledge from global and Western Europe/North America. Epistemic justice means that there are many ways of producing knowledge and there is no one best (or only one) way of doing that. Epistemic justice involves considering different formats in which knowledge exists, which includes knowledge produced outside of academia in various mediums (for example, poetry or dance practices), practiced by different people. Decolonization is not a closed club of a selected few, nor is it a uniform system of knowledge (there is no one single “theory” of decolonization). Because of the disproportionate access to knowledge (both when it comes to creation and consumption) – it is important to demystify, make what is produced in academia open and clear, and advocate for a mind-shift of what constitutes ‘scientific’ or ‘serious’ knowledge and what not – in terms of the format (e.g. moving away from the prevalence of text), language (I understand the irony of writing this piece in English but as said numerously – we can think of English as a language of international solidarity), and content. Academics and practitioners need to question themselves each time they think something is worthy to be considered ‘knowledge,’ while something is not.
- Lists inevitably spotlight some and not others – which could also mean endorsing a canon in which certain authors or texts are idealized while other are unjustifiably forgotten or ignored. ‘Decolonial canon,’ in the words of Sivia Rivera Cusicanqui, can result in the ‘creation of empire within empire’ if detached from the struggle, meaning that no one should be put on pedestal of worship. This is not an intention of this piece. Reading is a tool we can use, as Paulo Freire said, to free ourselves. The compiling of this (and other lists) is an invitation to explore, learn and fight instances of expropriation and the use of decolonization deprived of its meaning.
Five Introductory and Informative Reads on Decoloniality and Decolonization:
1. Sabelo J. Ndlovu-Gatsheni, “Decoloniality as the Future of Africa”
Sabelo Ndlovu-Gatsheni gives an overview of key debates, concepts, and main discussions in decolonial thought (particularly focusing on African thinkers). This is a good starting text for beginners. Ndlovu-Gatsheni discusses the distinction between coloniality and colonialism; coloniality of power; colonial matrix of power; and epistemicide (from ‘epistemic’, or knowledge-related, genocide). He defines decoloniality as an “epistemological and political movement,” and “a necessary liberatory language.” (485)
Perhaps one of the most useful contributions of this article is the explanation of how postcolonial theory and decoloniality differ and resemble one another. Although ‘postcolonial’ and decolonization have ‘colonial’ in them, they are not the same and they do not mean that colonialism is no longer present. Postcolonial theory mainly emerged from cultural studies and critique, particularly, but not only, literary theory. The most known advocates of the ‘postcolonial cultural turn’ (although there is a call to not assign a selected few to the school of thought) are Edward Said, Gayatri Spivak, and Homi Bhabha. Ndlovu-Gatsheni argues that postcolonialism does not aim to challenge but it rather reflects on the status quo and is not rooted in transformative praxis and “a decolonial spirit of disobedience.” (491) Ndlovu-Gatsheni gives an example of Achille Mbembe and explains why he belongs to postcolonial tradition, with the subsequent critique of his work. Whereas postcolonial theory is important, it is different from decolonial thinking as it is not rooted in critique of modernity and the arguments of de-centering from Western Europe/North America. Postcolonial theorists often use Western European thinkers to describe a situation, they do not pay as much attention to land retribution and knowledge-production.
Some debates Ndlovu-Gatsheni picks up are more nuanced and developed further with time. Some sections of his article have been constructively criticized, for example, when he draws on Mignolo’s not-nuanced articulation of ‘dewesternization.’ Decoloniality and decolonization, as articulated within academic settings, have been subjected to constructive critique by decolonial thinkers themselves, notably, Cusicanqui, but they escape Ndlovu-Gatsheni’s attention. It is nevertheless a great explanatory text that collects and explains the concepts using the vocabulary (often direct quotes) of those who advanced and advocated for the concepts.
2. Anibal Quijano, “Coloniality of Power, Eurocentrism, and Latin America”
Anibal Quijano is a Peruvian sociologist who advanced the concepts of coloniality of power, colonial matrix of power, and systems of hierarchies. Taken together, these concepts highlight the ways in which colonial domination affects interrelated aspects of social relations that touch upon race and capital, and which include but are not limited to, gender and sexuality, labor, and knowledge. In this article, Quijano traces the development of ‘modernity’ and ‘rationality,’ arguing that both are based on the “the Western European version of rational knowledge” (221). Knowledges and worldviews that fall outside of the Western ‘standards’ are considered to be lagging behind and in need of fixing and educating. The critique of modernity is central to decolonial thought. Quijano argues that everyone is capable of producing knowledge and these processes should not be centered on Europe.
He also describes the processes by which nation-states were created, highlighting the fact that nation-states, themselves byproducts of modernity, produce and reproduce conflicts, violent border regimes, and colonization. This critique is also integral to decolonial thought. Quijano argues that nation-states are created through power and represent a power structure built for domination and oppression. The rise of nation-states consists of two stages. The first is forceful homogenization (usually through removing those who do not belong to a certain race) of the populations in Europe and later in the colonized societies, within the borders of imagined communities (making a reference to Andersen) of nation-states. He calls this process “consolidation of whiteness.” And secondly, nation states are formed through ‘external’ or ‘imperial’ “colonization of foreign people and territories” that is, the processes when a colonizer expands border by conquering more territories or traveling abroad to colonize (223).
Quijano challenges Western conceptions of the universal subject as a white cisgender man and the fact that “European culture became a universal cultural model.” Cultural superiority was often an excuse to colonize. The colonizer would argue that the colonized do not have their own culture, history, language and use it as a pretext to colonize, or ‘civilize.’ Quijano argues that Enlightenment ideas about what constitutes ‘humanity’ or ‘society’ purposefully excluded the colonized and thereby reinforced a myth that the world has one history which moves in a linear way. He explains it as: “…history was conceived as a evolutionary continuum from the primitive to the civilized; from the traditional to the modern; from the savage to the rational; from pro-capitalism to capitalism, etc.” (169) The image of ‘the future’ for which other societies need to aspire was created “as the advanced form of the history of the entire species.” (176) This image was imposed by the colonizer on the colonized and it still remains “so attractive to so many.” (176) Quijano notes that South and Central American societies, to varying degrees, realized “European-like nation-states.” (173)
As Quijano argues, “[T]he critique of the European paradigm of rationality/modernity is indispensable – even more, urgent.” (176) It is not about “a simple negation of all its categories” but about freeing oneself from ‘rationality/modernity and coloniality’ binds. (177) In other words, we should not assume that only certain forms of knowledge and knowing are valid (he refers here to Western European or North American imposition of their ways of existence, but there are more), questioning ourselves of where and how did we come to such assumptions. Quijano suggests an alternative – where ‘free decisions’ are ‘made by free people’ (both on individual and collective levels) with respect to choosing “various cultural orientations, and, above all, the freedom to produce, criticize, change, and exchange culture and society.” (177)
A volume collection of Quijano’s essays was published in Aníbal Quijano: Foundational Essays on the Coloniality of Power (2024) and has texts that were previously not available in English.
Maldonado-Torres advances the concept of coloniality of being to reflect on the impact of coloniality on “lived experience and not only in the mind” (242). Drawing from Franz Fanon, the major trauma the colonized experience comes from their encounter with the colonizer (243). Fanon traveled from his home in Martinique (a French colony) to France and wrote about the racism and dehumanization he experienced. Daily encounters with coloniality reveal that it is present even outside of official and visible colonial structures. Further, colonization creates conditions of living that dehumanize and erase individuals. Decolonization, thus, aims to target two things: racism and dehumanization.
Notably, Maldonado-Torres defines coloniality by distinguishing it from colonialism. Colonialism, according to Maldonado-Torres is “a political and economic relations in which the sovereignty of a nation or a people rests on the power of another nation, which makes such nation an empire.” (243) To put it simply, colonialism is a situation when one country takes away or attempts to take away sovereignty of another country by controlling its territory, politics, culture, borders, economy, taxation system, and other essential aspects of existence like municipal administration (electricity, water, etc). In some cases, a colonial power will have their population move to and live on the territory of the occupied land, which makes such situation settler colonialism. This process is illegal, according to Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention: “the Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”
Maldonado-Torres defines coloniality as a “long-standing patters of power that emerged as a result of colonialism, but that define culture, labor, intersubjective relations, and knowledge production well beyond the strict limits of colonial administrations.” (243) He contends that “coloniality survives colonialism,” meaning that remainders of colonial power survive the decolonization process even after a state obtains sovereinty. Because “we breath coloniality all the time and everyday,” it touches our daily interactions even if we do not notice it (243). Coloniality transforms into border regimes, dehumanization of those deemed less “civilized”, erasure of languages and cultures, and privileging of Western epistemologies. We can see coloniality manifest itself in, for example, how some works of literature are forgotten and lost, or when some languages disappear.
It is difficult to choose just one work of Madina Tlostanova, a Circassian indigenous decolonial thinker, who wrote over 170 articles and numerous books. Tlostanova mainly writes about Russia’s and Soviet colonialism and coloniality, masterfully dispelling the myth of equality and enchantment with the Soviet project. Tlostanova calls the Soviet Union and Russia a ‘Janus-faced empire,’ as it was subjected to, on the one hand, its own modernity and a sense of superiority over ethnically-non-Russian people, indigenous peoples whose lands Russia occupied, and countries that the Soviet Union and Russia occupied or/and continue to occupy. (134) Another side of the Janus-faced empire is that Russia and the Soviet Union try to ‘catch up’ with global modernity, by self-orientalizing and positioning itself as a humiliated victim that was never ‘welcomed’ by the West. (135) This text serves as a good introduction to these processes, non-Western imperialisms, and multiple faces of modernity.
In this article, Madina Tlostanova argues that the Soviet Union was a colonial project with its specifics; and Russia never acknowledged, let alone came to terms with its colonial past and present. Tlostanova criticizes how the countries, people, and regions occupied by Russia are crushed under the weight of double coloniality – that of Russia/Soviet Union modernity and global coloniality, and how they were subsumed under the ‘postsocialist’, ‘Russian studies’ departments, yet having to deal with the destructive tendencies of Russia’s colonial appetites.
It is also important to note that decolonization, which is rooted in critical race theory, puts race and racism at the center of analysis, and the contribution of Tlostanova in this sense cannot be underestimated. Tlostanova was one of the few who proliferated the conversations on what she calls Soviet ‘muted’ racism, highlighting the intentionally racist character of the Soviet project.
Madina Tlostanova’s rich body of work also contributed to scholarship on decolonial feminism and the decolonization of knowledge. Her other seminal essay ‘Can the Post-Soviet Think? On Coloniality of Knowledge, External Imperial and Double Colonial Difference’ where she rephrases the famous title of Gayatri Spivak’s essay, talks about how people who were occupied by Russia/Soviet Union are often talked over even when they try to articulate their experiences because they are not considered as ‘knowers’ in the first place.
Madina Tlostanova also writes non-academic texts and experiments with the language and format, trying to escape from the constraints of academic knowledge production. Her most recent book on Narratives of Unsettlement: Being Out-of-joint as a Generative Human Condition is a combination of fictional essays and academic texts. Tlostanova not only challenges the thinking within decolonization as discussed within academic walls by being an ardent critique of non-Western imperialisms but also pioneers new and unconventional approaches to writing, beyond academic canon, continuously promoting non-logocentric (non-word-centred, for example, art as medium) forms of knowing and accessing knowledge.
5. Eve Tuck and K. Wayne Yang, “Decolonization Is Not a Metaphor”
This is one of the most widely cited and read articles on decolonization that was written relatively recently. Tuck and Yang’s article focuses on the USA’s settler colonialism. They argue that we cannot detach decolonization from its meaning, which is materially rooted in the return land. Without the return of land, any talk of decolonization becomes a ‘move to innocence’ – an attempt to distract attention, “reconcile settler guilt and complicity, and rescue settler futurity.” (3) The article is a plea against superficial adaptations and insists, drawing from Wolfe and his definition of settler colonialism, that postcolonial theory that does not engage with settler colonial contexts is not decolonial. Tuck and Yang advance an important concept – incommensurability – an argument that we cannot compare decolonization to anything else because it “doesn’t have a synonym.” (3)
Tuck and Yang also problematize an assumption that if you decolonize your thinking and the rest will follow. While they do not discount the importance of epistemology, they stress that decolonization is not a buzz word or symbolic talk, but a project of material consequence, specifically the land on which people live. This text reminds us that the liberation of the Wretched of the Earth – those for whom Fanon famously claimed the “future is mortgaged,” is an endeavor that is ‘unsettling,’ “that never takes place unnoticed” and results in “the birth of new humanity.”
As with any important and powerful texts, Tuck and Yang’s article met critique, for example, by Tapji Garba and Sara-Maria Sorentino, ‘Slavery is a Metaphor: A Critical Commentary on Eve Tuck and K. Wayne Yang’s “Decolonization is Not a Metaphor”‘. The phrase ‘decolonization is not a metaphor’ became an integral part of the resistance vocabulary. This article is a good start for a reading journey into decoloniality, but it is also the kind of text to return to continuously to underline the true meaning and goals of decolonization.
Featured Image Credit: Jay Mantri (CC0)
Clio and the Contemporary 