Neither Settler nor Native: The Making and Unmaking of Permanent Minorities is a 2020 book by Ugandan political theorist Mahmood Mamdani. [1] [2] [3] Mamdani argues that nationalism and colonialism have common origins and are two sides of the same coin. He argues for responding to the violence inherent in the nation-state by rejecting the identities of settler and native and participating as equal citizens instead.
Mahmood Mamdani is a Ugandan political theorist. [4] [5] The intended audience of the book is "scholars of the liberal state, scholars of settler colonialism, and scholars of indirect rule colonialism". [6] It follows Mamdani's earlier books, Citizen and Subject (1996) about the legacy of colonialism in Africa, When Victims Became Killers (2001) and Saviours and Survivors (2009), about large-scale violence in Rwanda and Sudan. [7] The book is related to disagreements between Mamdani and Michael Neocosmos over the latter's 2016 book, Thinking Freedom in Africa . [8] Mamdani decided to write the book after questioning some of the assumptions in his earlier books and realizing "that colonialism and nationalism were actually born together and represent two sides of the same coin". [6]
Instead of the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia, Mamdani traces the origins of the modern state to 1492: the year of the expulsion of Jews and Muslims from Spain following the Reconquista, and simultaneously the beginning of the European colonization of the Americas. [9] He argues that political modernity exists in the form of the nation-state; the birth of the nation-state forms both national majorities and national minorities, the latter of which are excluded from some rights. The nation-state is an inherently violent endeavor and efforts to homogenize it have triggered various episodes of ethnic cleansing and genocide. [7]
Mamdani differentiates between immigrants and settlers: "Immigrants are unarmed; settlers come armed with both weapons and a nationalist agenda. Immigrants come in search of a homeland, not a state; for settlers, there can be no homeland without a state. For the immigrant, the homeland can be shared; for the settler, the state must be a nation-state, a preserve of the nation in which all others are at most tolerated guests." [5]
The book draws on several case studies: the nineteenth century in the United States, which involved the dispossession of Native Americans and their concentration in Indian reservations; post-World War II Germany, in which he sees the Nuremberg trials as a failure that completed the Nazis' project of separating Germans from Jews; the end of apartheid in South Africa; Sudan and South Sudan, which separated after a civil war; and Israel/Palestine. [4] [7] Of these, the one Mamdani prefers is South Africa which fits his model of rejecting the identities of settler and native in favor of becoming equal citizens, or "survivors". [10]
Mamdani's book is underpinned by normative stances, such as his model of political modernity generating the nation state and hence mass violence, and against the use of criminal justice in responses to mass violence. Mamdani's argument is that since colonialism was the “making of permanent minorities and their maintenance through the politicisation of identity” decolonization would require “unmaking of the permanence of these identities”. [10] His conclusion is:
Recognizing this history gives us the power to change perspectives and reality. The history of political modernity tells those of us who identify with the nation that we have been coopted. The nation is not inherent in us. It overwhelmed us. Political modernity led us to believe that we could not live without the nation-state, lest we not only be denied its privileges but also find ourselves dispossessed in the way of the permanent minority. The nation made the immigrant a settler and the settler a perpetrator. The nation made the local a native and the native a perpetrator, too. In this new history, everyone is colonized—settler and native, perpetrator and victim, majority and minority. Once we learn this history, we might prefer to be survivors instead. [4]
Congolese historian Jacques Depelchin described the book as "a landmark in trying to figure out how to transform the way humans relate to each other", [11] but flawed in that in his view it overlooked relevant works on reconciliation by Cheikh Anta Diop, Théophile Obenga, Ayi Kwei Armah, and Yoporeka Somet and colonial legacies in postcolonial states. [11] Sociologist Nandita Sharma describes the book as "an urgent intervention in contemporary politics" and "a searing critique of the nation-state". However, she argues that Mamdani does not adequately address all forms of postcolonial violence, such as border violence and the role of immigration restrictions in defining nation-states. She also disagrees with Mamdani's decision to treat colonial land appropriation and labor exploitation as separate processes. [5]
Historian Eve M. Troutt Powell describes the book as "a grand narrative with which to review and revise our investment in our political identities", but criticizes the lack of a bibliography, absence of some relevant works, lack of attention to women and gender, and some of Mamdani's findings in the case studies. [4] Reviewer Vivienne Jabri argues that Mamdani's concept of political modernity ignores the paradox that both violent and exclusionary forms of nationalism and the response to these that Mamdani advocates derive from modernity. She also argues that political and criminal justice are not dichotomous, as Mamdani argues. Despite her criticism, Jabri states that the book "will be of core interest both pedagogically and intellectually to understandings of conflict, political transformation, and responses to the extremes of violence in postcolonial states". [10]
According to Elliott Green, Mamdani fails to engage with literature in nationalism studies and his argument would have been better served by a global history rather than case studies perspective. [7] Stefan Andreasson argues that the most valuable aspect of the book is "Mamdani's argument about why a genuine process of decolonisation has proven elusive, but also how it might be attained". [12] Fara Dabhoiwala describes the book as provocative and elegantly written, but cites limitations in its neglect of internationalism and "bold but selective abstractions". [13]
Colonialism is the exploitation of people and of resources by a foreign group. Colonizers monopolize political power and hold conquered societies and their people to be inferior to their conquerors in legal, administrative, social, cultural, or biological terms. While frequently advanced as an imperialist regime, colonialism can also take the form of settler colonialism, whereby colonial settlers invade and occupy territory to permanently replace an existing society with that of the colonizers, possibly towards a genocide of native populations.
The Wretched of the Earth is a 1961 book by the philosopher Frantz Fanon, in which the author provides a psychoanalysis of the dehumanizing effects of colonization upon the individual and the nation, and discusses the broader social, cultural, and political implications of establishing a social movement for the decolonisation of a person and of a people. The French-language title derives from the opening lyrics of "The Internationale", which is reflected in the English title as well.
An ethnocracy is a type of political structure in which the state apparatus is controlled by a dominant ethnic group to further its interests, power, dominance, and resources. Ethnocratic regimes in the modern era typically display a 'thin' democratic façade covering a more profound ethnic structure, in which ethnicity – and not citizenship – is the key to securing power and resources.
Internal colonialism is the uneven effects of economic development on a regional basis, otherwise known as "uneven development" as a result of the exploitation of minority groups within a wider society which leads to political and economic inequalities between regions within a state. This is held to be similar to the relationship between a metropole and a colony, in colonialism proper. The phenomenon leads to the distinct separation of the dominant core from the periphery in an empire.
Indirect rule was a system of governance used by imperial powers to control parts of their empires. This was particularly used by colonial empires like the British Empire to control their possessions in Africa and Asia, which was done through pre-existing indigenous power structures. Indirect rule was used by various colonial rulers such as: the French in Algeria and Tunisia, the Dutch in the East Indies, the Portuguese in Angola and Mozambique and the Belgians in Rwanda and Burundi. These dependencies were often called "protectorates" or "trucial states".
African nationalism is an umbrella term which refers to a group of political ideologies in West, Central, East and Southern Africa, which are based on the idea of national self-determination and the creation of nation states. The ideology emerged under European colonial rule during the 19th and 20th centuries and was loosely inspired by nationalist ideas from Europe. Originally, African nationalism was based on demands for self-determination and played an important role in forcing the process of decolonisation of Africa. However, the term refers to a broad range of different ideological and political movements and should not be confused with Pan-Africanism which may seek the federation of many or all nation states in Africa.
Western European colonialism and colonization was the Western European policy or practice of acquiring full or partial political control over other societies and territories, founding a colony, occupying it with settlers, and exploiting it economically. For example, colonial policies, such as the type of rule implemented, the nature of investments, and identity of the colonizers, are cited as impacting postcolonial states. Examination of the state-building process, economic development, and cultural norms and mores shows the direct and indirect consequences of colonialism on the postcolonial states. It has been estimated that Britain and France traced almost 50% of the entire length of today's international boundaries as a result of British and French imperialism.
External colonies were first founded in Africa during antiquity. Ancient Greeks and Romans established colonies on the African continent in North Africa, similar to how they established settler-colonies in parts of Eurasia. Some of these endured for centuries; however, popular parlance of colonialism in Africa usually focuses on the European conquests of African kingdoms and societies in the Scramble for Africa (1884–1914) during the age of New Imperialism, followed by gradual decolonisation after World War II.
Postcolonialism is the critical academic study of the cultural, political and economic legacy of colonialism and imperialism, focusing on the impact of human control and exploitation of colonized people and their lands. The field started to emerge in the 1960s, as scholars from previously colonized countries began publishing on the lingering effects of colonialism, developing a critical theory analysis of the history, culture, literature, and discourse of imperial power.
Postcolonial international relations is a branch of scholarship that approaches the study of international relations (IR) using the critical lens of postcolonialism. This critique of IR theory suggests that mainstream IR scholarship does not adequately address the impacts of colonialism and imperialism on current day world politics. Despite using the language of post-, scholars of postcolonial IR argue that the legacies of colonialism are ongoing, and that critiquing international relations with this lens allows scholars to contextualize global events. By bridging postcolonialism and international relations, scholars point to the process of globalization as a crucial point in both fields, due to the increases in global interactions and integration. Postcolonial IR focuses on the re-narrativization of global politics to create a balanced transnational understanding of colonial histories, and attempts to tie non-Western sources of thought into political praxis.
Mahmood Mamdani, FBA is an Indian-born Ugandan academic, author, and political commentator. He currently serves as the Chancellor of Kampala International University, Uganda. He was the director of the Makerere Institute of Social Research (MISR) from 2010 until February 2022, the Herbert Lehman Professor of Government at the School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University and the Professor of Anthropology, Political Science and African Studies at Columbia University.
Settler colonialism occurs when colonizers and settlers invade and occupy territory to permanently replace the existing society with the society of the colonizers.
Decoloniality is a school of thought that aims to delink from Eurocentric knowledge hierarchies and ways of being in the world in order to enable other forms of existence on Earth. It critiques the perceived universality of Western knowledge and the superiority of Western culture, including the systems and institutions that reinforce these perceptions. Decolonial perspectives understand colonialism as the basis for the everyday function of capitalist modernity and imperialism.
Indigenous feminism is an intersectional theory and practice of feminism that focuses on decolonization, Indigenous sovereignty, and human rights for Indigenous women and their families. The focus is to empower Indigenous women in the context of Indigenous cultural values and priorities, rather than mainstream, white, patriarchal ones. In this cultural perspective, it can be compared to womanism in the African-American communities.
Anthony Dirk Moses is an Australian scholar who researches various aspects of genocide. In 2022 he became the Anne and Bernard Spitzer Professor of Political Science at the City College of New York, after having been the Frank Porter Graham Distinguished Professor of Global Human Rights History at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He is a leading scholar of genocide, especially in colonial contexts, as well as of the political development of the concept itself. He is known for coining the term racial century in reference to the period 1850–1950. He is editor-in-chief of the Journal of Genocide Research.
Faramerz Noshir Dabhoiwala is a historian and senior research scholar at Princeton University where he teaches and writes about the social history, cultural history, and intellectual history of the English-speaking world, from the Middle Ages to the present day.
Scholarship on nationalism and gender explores the processes by which gender affects and is impacted by the development of nationalism. Sometimes referred to as "gendered nationalism," gender and nationalism describes the phenomena whereby conceptions of the state or nation, including notions of citizenship, sovereignty, or national identity contribute to or arise in relation to gender roles.
Andreas Wimmer is a Swiss sociologist who is the Lieber Professor of Sociology and Political Philosophy at Columbia University. He has a PhD in social anthropology from the University of Zurich.
The connection between colonialism and genocide has been explored in academic research. According to historian Patrick Wolfe, "[t]he question of genocide is never far from discussions of settler colonialism." Historians have commented that although colonialism does not necessarily directly involve genocide, research suggests that the two share a connection.
Zionism has been described by several scholars as a form of settler colonialism in relation to the region of Palestine and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. This paradigm has been applied to Zionism by various scholars and figures, including Patrick Wolfe, Edward Said, Ilan Pappe, Noam Chomsky, and others who view Zionism as a form of settler colonialism. Many of Zionism's founders and leaders described their project as a colonial project, and major Zionist organizations and agencies central to Israel creation held names reflecting colonial identity.