Toward decolonial globalisation studies

Fúnez-Flores, Jairo I.

doi:10.1080/14767724.2022.2048796

Cited by 20 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In broad strokes, the coloniality of curriculum is understood as an imperial/colonial doctrine insofar as it is conceived as a pedagogical mode of imperial domination aimed at colonial domesticity and capitalist exploitation. This conceptualisation seeks to contribute to understanding the complex ways the dominant curriculum propagates and articulates an imperial/colonial sense of being indifferent towards the suffering of colonised and racialised others (Fúnez‐Flores, 2022a, 2022b), not only within a specific nation‐state but also within a planetary frame. Although this article is not empirical per se, as an analytic, the coloniality of curriculum may be deployed to examine how education policies are entangled with broader global tendencies seeking to foreclose the possibility of teaching students about slavery, colonialism, heteropatriarchy, genocide and other silences of the past (Trouillot, 2015).…”

Section: Geopolitics and Coloniality Of Curriculum As A Planetary Fra...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Carter, 2008), while others underscore social ontology and the material relations of power (Monzó & McLaren, 2014). Geopolitically attuned perspectives informing comparative and international education (Andreotti et al, 2016; Fúnez‐Flores, 2021, 2022b; Fúnez‐Flores et al, 2022a, 2022b; Shahjahan, 2016; Stein, 2021) emphasise both the material and symbolic more explicitly, utilising the geopolitics of knowledge as an analytic to address how the curriculum is instrumentalised through the internationalisation of higher education supported by international financial organisations and universities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Anibal Quijano: (Dis)entangling the geopolitics and coloniality of curriculum

Fúnez-Flores

2023

The Curriculum Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay reviews and builds upon Aníbal Quijano's contribution to decolonial theory to sketch out what I refer to as the geopolitics and coloniality of curriculum, broadly understood as an imperial doctrine and a pedagogical mode of domination aimed at producing a modern/colonial subjectivity. It argues that the geopolitics and coloniality of the curriculum reveal the relationship between geopolitical designs, colonialism, and curriculum, thereby contributing to the interrogation of how dominant ways of knowing are propagated discursively and pedagogically. The article focuses on how the geopolitics and coloniality of curriculum enable the reading, interpretation and unsettling of curricular discourses and pedagogical practices reproducing Euro‐Anglo‐American ways of being (ontological violence), individualist ways of knowing (epistemic violence) and racialised affective grammars. It concludes by gesturing towards ways to think, be, act, relate and do otherwise.

show abstract

Section: Geopolitics and Coloniality Of Curriculum As A Planetary Fra...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anibal Quijano: (Dis)entangling the geopolitics and coloniality of curriculum

Fúnez-Flores

2023

The Curriculum Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because educational curricula provide a kind of political legitimation function for a society (Apple and Aasen, 2003), one can begin to reimagine whole cloth the very foundations of an education that rejects a kind of white supremacist, extractivist, settler colonial project. Indeed, scholars working across indigenous studies (e.g., Bang et al, 2022), decolonial studies (Fúnez-Flores, 2022), and environmental education (Martusewicz et al, 2014) have already begun laying the groundwork for this kind of educational project.…”

Section: Achieving Climate Justice As a Superordinate Concern Or Suff...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate change as superordinate curriculum?

Long

Henderson

2023

Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite being one of the largest carbon emitters in the world, the United States has little direct emphasis on climate change in its schools. Even where there is desire to teach climate change, the politicization of climate change sees school leaders steering teachers away from the topic. This piece examines what we know about climate change education in the U.S., what types of curriculum we have had, what historical conditions saw the U.S. curriculum change, and asks whether and how climate change can and should be a superordinate concern of U.S. schooling. As U.S. schools on whole have never been a site of equity concerning matters of race, class, gender, and many other issues, we ask whether climate change will be subsumed or taken up as a concern. We pose two alternate futures: one in which the scale of climate change as a problem sees changes in how we educate our young and affect the future, or another where the potential for a healthy climate becomes a prime concern of burgeoning revanchist, fascistic leaning governments worldwide and ecofascist social movements within them.

show abstract

“…4). Nor do we bring any conceptual or theoretical innovation to 'anticolonial', 'decolonial' or 'decolonising' critiques and praxes across social and political studies (e.g., Sabaratnam 2011;Bhambra 2014;Pham & Shilliam 2016;Staeger 2016;Blaney & Tickner 2017;Capan 2017;Motta 2017;Sabaratnam 2017;Woons & Weier 2017;Bhambra et al 2018;Zondi 2018;Haastrup 2020;Kamola 2020;Patel 2020;Shilliam 2021;Bhambra 2022;Fúnez-Flores 2022;Evans & Petropoulou Ionescu, this issue). Instead, we engage briefly with the notion of decoloniality in an effort to recast our understanding of EU trade policy by centring knowledges from and for the global souths (Muñoz García, Lira & Loncón 2022).…”

Section: Decoloniality As An Optionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More broadly within heterodox approaches to the study of Europe and the EU, we hope our contribution will complicate ongoing conversations around EU trade policy in the context of the 'decolonial project for Europe' (Bhambra 2022), the 'decentring agenda' for the EU as a post-colonial power (Onar & Nicolaïdis 2013;Keukeleire & Lecocq 2018;Lecocq & Keukeleire 2023), the 'Critical European Studies' project (Bigo et al 2020), the 'Decolonising Europe in International Politics' initiative 4 and the Decolonial Europe Day project. 5 Beyond the decolonising strategies we have advocated here, there exist more institutional/curricular impediments to address when it comes to the (geo)politics of knowledge (see Bhambra et al 2018;Fúnez-Flores 2022;Evans & Petropoulou Ionescu 2023). As a field, we ought to take a hard look in the mirror and ask what the problem really is in terms of how we teach Europe, who gets to be in our classrooms, why some research projects are considered more desirable than others, how our scholarship is judged, who gets to make this judgement, how the EU is taught and learned Eurocentrically in the global souths, and so on.…”

Section: Disruption As Dialoguementioning

confidence: 99%

Decolonising EU Trade Relations with the Global Souths?

Alcazar III,

Nessel,

Orbie

2023

JCER

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

That the European Union’s common commercial relations with ex-colonies and more broadly the ‘tiers monde’ now rest variously on benevolence, depoliticised practices, equal partnerships and values fuels reigning foundational myths about the EU in global politics. Efforts to disrupt these received presuppositions have come from interpretivist, postcolonial, post-development, post-structuralist and other heterodox research traditions. Yet the academy has been largely impervious to knowledges that genuinely question and subvert, in both theory and praxis, Eurocentric ways of seeing the world and understanding the EU as a ‘benevolent’ trade actor on the world stage. In dialogue with existing heterodox approaches, this article asks how we might puncture the coloniality of dominant knowledge regimes about EU trade relations vis-à-vis the global souths, i.e., peoples and places that the EU deems peripheral and, as such, in need of trade-related interventions in the name of development. To this end, we propose different ‘subject-positions’ with which to unthink and rethink our ways of knowing EU trade policy and the Eurocentrism lurking behind it by turning to decolonial thought. We borrow heavily from the work of Meera Sabaratnam whose ‘decolonising strategies’ in studying world politics we attempt to exemplify through a critical interrogation of the canonical scholarship around three distinct ‘policy worlds’ of EU external trade relations: Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs), Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP) and Trade and Sustainable Development (TSD) chapters in free trade agreements. Finally, we think reflexively about the decolonial option and the ruptures it triggers as to what EU trade policy is and the colonial logics sustaining ‘normative’ and ‘geopolitical’ narratives on/by the EU as a trade power.

show abstract

Toward decolonial globalisation studies

Cited by 20 publications

References 58 publications

Anibal Quijano: (Dis)entangling the geopolitics and coloniality of curriculum

Anibal Quijano: (Dis)entangling the geopolitics and coloniality of curriculum

Climate change as superordinate curriculum?

Decolonising EU Trade Relations with the Global Souths?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About