Professor Schulze-Engler described the ways in which a theory that developed out of actions from over 50 years ago is still relevant in current debates. He discussed how postcolonial studies can be applied to modern concerns of idealized institutions expanding beyond their intended objectives in order to give historical, social and political depth within the discourse.
The seminar voiced concerns over the use of the term Postcolonial Europe. It is a problematic term due to the vague definitions and unspecified nature of the expression. Firstly, Schulze-Engler is irritated by Postcolonial with regards to Europe. The term prevents any forward momentum with regards to building a healthy economic power and global political force as it suggests a fear of historical repetition. The remnants of European colonization are still evident in modern history. The lecture gave examples of conflict after the period of decolonization such as in Algeria, Kenya and Vietnam.
Secondly, he is irritated by Europe with regards to Postcolonial studies. Schulze-Engler suggests that “Europe is everywhere and nowhere”. We could say Europe is everywhere due to sovereign states and foreign policy keeping strong ties between a nation state and its former colonies. This matter is described as becoming more relevant in future discourse due to oil reserves being found beneath the Falkland Islands, being an overseas territory of Britain. Such examples confuse the matter by not defining the geographical borders of Europe. The case of Turkey requesting European Union membership blurs the issue further. They delay in their request is not only based on geographical dimensions but cultural differences to European values. The Islamic faith is prominent in this nation and raises issues of “what is Europe” as well as “where is Europe”. This political discourse raises concerns over “new racism” within the field of postcolonial studies.
Furthermore, questions of which nation states will have the most influence over dictating foreign and economic. During the colonial period, national empires were built as the colonies expanded. Within a multinational and supranational conglomerate, the decision making powers are less easily defined. Ambiguities arise between European interests and those that are purely serving the individual nation states. Schulze-Engler demonstrates three examples of the differing directions of European progression, as outlined by Beck and Grande. The first examines a “continental European camp”, led by France and Germany, to establish an economic superpower to compete with the USA and China. The second, led by Britain, suggests a “transatlantic camp” that maintains heavy influence from the USA and Western intentions. The third creates a “neutrality camp”, led by the smaller nations of Finland Austria and Sweden, keeping the independence of the European Union’s stance on foreign policy.
In terms of using theory, Professor Schulze-Engler creates further discourse in his chosen topic area. He achieves this by taking current arguments and essays, written by experts in the field, and expressing his agreement or disagreement with them at a highly complex level. He concludes with his own opinions on the direction of Europe within the boundaries of postcolonial studies. It is a well structured argument in this sense.
perhaps we could add that postcolonial studies is also 'everywhere and nowhere...' a good description of the talk... needs more focus on the elements and use of postcolonial theory in the talk... CR+
ReplyDelete