Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 18:16:38 -0500 From: "Kimberly A. Nance" <kanance-AT-rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu> Subject: Re: The trouble with nations WAS Re: Is the US postcolonial >> Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky wrote: >> > In order to be post-colonial you must have been colonial at least >> > once before, you must have passed through a national liberation >> > struggle, you must have attained formal independence, and _you >> > must still be dependent in spite of formal independence_. >> Someone questioned: >> I wonder: If Englishmen went to a part of Africa as colonists, >> killed as many blacks as they could, (maybe with a governmental >> policy of sending soldiers to bayonette their babies and >> grandmothers, "the only good black is a dead black") and put the >> rest in camps; and then announced independence from the Crown - >> would those Englishmen be "post colonial"? It doesn't seem to fit? >> For that area to be "post colonial" wouldn't it be necessary for the >> people who had been colonized to have regained their independence? Certainly an argument against the US as postcolonial--and in terms of postcolonial classification, where would this leave Argentina, or some of the other places in Latin America where one might substitute "espa=F1oles" for Englishmen and indigenous peoples for "blacks" in the above formulation? The situation is complicated, of course, by the rapid replacement of Spanish imperialism by the US version. _________________________________________________________________ Kimberly A. Nance kanance-AT-ilstu.edu Director of Graduate Studies office 309.438.8178 Department of Foreign Languages fax 309.438.8038 Illinois State University Normal IL 61790-4300 --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005