Structuralism and Colonialism
<script async src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js?client=ca-pub-6077932889256660"
crossorigin="anonymous"></script>
Stein and Andreotti indicate that "scholars more oriented toward a post-structuralist approach may critique the Marxist approach for being too rationalistically relying on Western human values, while scholars partial to the Marxist approach may critique post structural approaches for an inadequate critique of capitalism and insufficient commitment to political struggles" "Spivak critiques the ways well meaning Western intellectuals often fail to account for their own position and celebrate the oppressed in ways that actually resubjugate them" "the effects of colonialism are not easily dismantled, and efforts to overcome them may end up producing more of the same" In the well-intended way of the present-day Christian missional person there may continue to be the effect of Westernizing in the conceptualizations of the new disciples. This must be thoroughly thought through to get to a place where resubjugation and paternalism do not enter the pedagogical underpinnings of the theological and personal discourse of the missional person and the indigenous person. This demonstrates the need for Westerners to be aware of postcolonial philosophies. Using these insights, it will continue to plague the westerner with wildly inaccurate representations of the indigenous people. The frustration is that pictures of the training ground for the new believers ends-up putting them in western garb, literally and metaphorically. The indigenous wear of the colonized individual subject would rather be seen in a respectful light to be more helpful for future converts to the faith. There would likely be more respect for the westerner who responds this way.
Comments