Rinzin & Sadaf: Cafe Blog Post 6

One thing Sadaf and I agreed on upon talking about this article is that the meaning and the name “postcolonial countries” which did not sit well with us.

Rinzin: “I understand why Selmon used postcolonialism in this article as there needs to be something to describe countries that are free of colonies. However, upon reading this article, I found it strange that knowing once a country has been colonized but no longer under the rule is called postcolonialism countries. Reading this, I understood that there is no such thing as a country free of post colonials. It made me realize how uneducated I was because I never thought it in depth about the effect of postcolonialism countries.

Sadaf: “ To me, after further discussion with other professors, there is no such thing as post colonialism in the way that the article initially makes it out to be. Rinzin and I both agreed that in terms of sovereignty as defined legally and internationally, yes countries are in a postcolonial state in that they have gained their freedom and formation of their own governments. However, like the article states, the term postcolonial itself is contentious simply because the involvement and influence that countries like England once had over their colonies has not completely ended. Furthermore, the acquisition of territories itself is an extension of colonialism that is not defined as such in modern day. Personally, as a government major this term is frustrating for me to acknowledge.

Rinzin: “Even Selmon mentions in the article that once a colonized country leaves, there will always be the effect of the colonist country. This can be seen systematically and culturally. Selmon mentions in the article that although the people that once ruled or governed leaves, the ideology, and the structure are the same but replaced by the natives. An example would be when Britain left India, there were many things that were left from the ruling and culture of Britain. The buildings in school are the same even today. I went to a boarding school in India and the buildings are built of red bricks which is a very similar structure like the ones of Britain classroom and design.

Sadaf: “ Yes, and with the way the British ruled India, the remnants do remain, especially with the caste system. If you think about it, the way that the British was able to divide and conquer the people of India still remains today, as one caste is prioritized over another. Also, the linear way in which the histories of countries like India and other histories of colonial countries have developed seems to set the world up in binaries, of a colonial world and then a postcolonial world. Therefore, India was a colonized country and now it’s not. It is the over-simplification and centering of history around a European history is yet another issue in the ideology of postcolonialism. Therefore, postcolonialism and those who support the term and believe in such a progression of history fail to see the way in which other histories prior to colonization and Eurocentrism have developed. Postcolonialism directly relates to Prakash and his discussion of the subaltern. When looking at postcolonialism it is apparent that the Eurocentric ideology of the progression of history erases and covers up the history of countries like India prior to colonization.


The Question that we wanted to pose was: Is postcolonialism a reality? And if not, to what extent is it true and to what extent is it not?


This entry was posted in Cafe Discussion Posts. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply