Against National Sovereignty: The Postcolonial New World Order and the Containment of Decolonization

In this paper, I examine the growing reliance on discourses of autochthony in nationalisms throughout the world. Native-ness (or indigeneity) is increasingly being made a key criterion for claiming national sovereignty over territory, as well as the more amorphous – but no less consequential – clai...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Nandita Sharma
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Brock University 2021-01-01
Series:Studies in Social Justice
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journals.library.brocku.ca/index.php/SSJ/article/view/2286
id doaj-c9f6513d4e8c4feab3c57b2caeb69975
record_format Article
spelling doaj-c9f6513d4e8c4feab3c57b2caeb699752021-01-26T07:00:07ZengBrock UniversityStudies in Social Justice1911-47882021-01-0114210.26522/ssj.v14i2.2286Against National Sovereignty: The Postcolonial New World Order and the Containment of DecolonizationNandita Sharma0University of Hawaii at Manoa In this paper, I examine the growing reliance on discourses of autochthony in nationalisms throughout the world. Native-ness (or indigeneity) is increasingly being made a key criterion for claiming national sovereignty over territory, as well as the more amorphous – but no less consequential – claim to national membership. By examining the crucial colonial genealogy of autochthonous discursive practices, I argue that claims to autochthony are metaphysical and, as such, deeply depoliticizing of the exclusions they produce. Drawing upon historical studies showing how imperial-states deployed autocthonous discourses to divide those they categorized as Natives and Migrants from one another in an effort to maintain their imperial rule, I show the continuities of such practices in the Postcolonial New World Order of nation-states. Despite their rhetoric, I argue that contemporary, nationalist discourses of autochthonies have not – and cannot – succeed in realizing decolonization, precisely because of their reliance on modes of political, economic, and social exclusion based on the separation of people categorized as either Native-Nationals or as Migrants. The material force of ideas of Native-Nationalism(s), because they are premised on territorial sovereignty and not on the end of practices of expropriation and exploitation across the planet, are part of the worldwide relations of ruling and not threats to it. https://journals.library.brocku.ca/index.php/SSJ/article/view/2286autochthonysettler-colonialismnational sovereigntypostcolonialism
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Nandita Sharma
spellingShingle Nandita Sharma
Against National Sovereignty: The Postcolonial New World Order and the Containment of Decolonization
Studies in Social Justice
autochthony
settler-colonialism
national sovereignty
postcolonialism
author_facet Nandita Sharma
author_sort Nandita Sharma
title Against National Sovereignty: The Postcolonial New World Order and the Containment of Decolonization
title_short Against National Sovereignty: The Postcolonial New World Order and the Containment of Decolonization
title_full Against National Sovereignty: The Postcolonial New World Order and the Containment of Decolonization
title_fullStr Against National Sovereignty: The Postcolonial New World Order and the Containment of Decolonization
title_full_unstemmed Against National Sovereignty: The Postcolonial New World Order and the Containment of Decolonization
title_sort against national sovereignty: the postcolonial new world order and the containment of decolonization
publisher Brock University
series Studies in Social Justice
issn 1911-4788
publishDate 2021-01-01
description In this paper, I examine the growing reliance on discourses of autochthony in nationalisms throughout the world. Native-ness (or indigeneity) is increasingly being made a key criterion for claiming national sovereignty over territory, as well as the more amorphous – but no less consequential – claim to national membership. By examining the crucial colonial genealogy of autochthonous discursive practices, I argue that claims to autochthony are metaphysical and, as such, deeply depoliticizing of the exclusions they produce. Drawing upon historical studies showing how imperial-states deployed autocthonous discourses to divide those they categorized as Natives and Migrants from one another in an effort to maintain their imperial rule, I show the continuities of such practices in the Postcolonial New World Order of nation-states. Despite their rhetoric, I argue that contemporary, nationalist discourses of autochthonies have not – and cannot – succeed in realizing decolonization, precisely because of their reliance on modes of political, economic, and social exclusion based on the separation of people categorized as either Native-Nationals or as Migrants. The material force of ideas of Native-Nationalism(s), because they are premised on territorial sovereignty and not on the end of practices of expropriation and exploitation across the planet, are part of the worldwide relations of ruling and not threats to it.
topic autochthony
settler-colonialism
national sovereignty
postcolonialism
url https://journals.library.brocku.ca/index.php/SSJ/article/view/2286
work_keys_str_mv AT nanditasharma againstnationalsovereigntythepostcolonialnewworldorderandthecontainmentofdecolonization
_version_ 1724323393564573696