Decolonization & Nationalism

This article focuses on the role of ethnic ideological polarization in consociational democracies. Theories usually present ethnic discourses as a potential impediment to the success of consociation, which therefore has to be contended. But in the case of Mauritius, where consociation was the political tool used to ease the transition from plural society to independence (achieved in 1968), ethnic propaganda, mainly embodied in an alleged “Hindu menace” and its counterparts, played a regulatory role in the setting up of the Mauritian model of democracy.

Cet article a pour objectif d’examiner le rôle des arguments identitaires de type ethnique dans la mise en place de la démocratie consociative, à partir du cas mauricien. Les théories de la consociation présentent généralement la surenchère identitaire comme une dérive des systèmes consociatifs. Mais nous verrons qu’à l’île Maurice, où la consociation a permis la transition politique de la société plurale vers l’indépendance (1947–1968), l’argument d’un “péril hindou”, agité par les opposants à l’indépendance, a constitué, malgré son caractère stigmatisant, un mécanisme à part entière, voire même un régulateur du fonctionnement de la démocratie mauricienne.

During the interwar years, Moroccan anti-colonial activists organized a propaganda campaign abroad to discredit the French and Spanish protectorates that had been established in 1912. Yet it was not the famous nationalist leaders from the country's major urban centres but a small group from the marginalized northern city of Tetuan that played a pivotal role in the internationalization of the Moroccan question. This article demonstrates that, by analysing the emergence of Morocco's nationalist movement through a transnational framework, rather than within the confines of the nation-state, we can rearrange the geographical and political hierarchies of local history as previously disregarded individuals and locations suddenly emerge to the forefront of the narrative.

Veteran politician, inveterate rebel, self-styled defender of progressive values; Mian Iftikhar-ud-Din remains one of the most intriguing individuals to have been associated with the Pakistan movement and the Muslim League. As an outspoken advocate of Muslim self-determination and Pakistan, the inclusion of Mian Iftikhar-ud-Din in this volume might seem like an odd choice indeed. And yet, his political journey reveals much about the tense political climate of the 1940s and the impossible choices that many were confronted with at the time. More importantly, though, his politics also provides an insight into the varied dreams and aspirations that were tied to the idea of Pakistan. In doing so, Mian Iftikhar-ud-Din's political trajectory also contributes to a deeper understanding of relatively neglected aspects of the Pakistan movement and the early years of the nascent post-colonial state when many of those utopian dreams turned sour.

In den 1990er und 2000er Jahren diskutierten britische Politiker, Akademiker und Journalisten öffentlich über die Definition britischer nationaler Identität, kurz Britishness. Aus der Perspektive der neuen Ideengeschichte versteht diese Studie die Debatte als Teil eines seit den späten 1960er Jahren andauernden Aushandlungsprozesses. Fragen nationaler und gesellschaftlicher Zugehörigkeit wurden zur Chiffre im Umgang mit wirtschaftlichen, politischen und demographischen Veränderungen wie dem Ende des Empire, den Forderungen nach schottischer und walisischer Selbstbestimmung sowie der Sorge um die Konsequenzen postkolonialer Einwanderung, die die bis dahin bestehende Sozialordnung in Frage stellten. Almuth Ebke ordnet dabei nicht nur die einzelnen Debattenstränge in den historischen Kontext ein, sondern untersucht auch den damit zusammenhängenden Wandel der Begriffe, die zur Beschreibung sozialer Zugehörigkeit verwendet wurden. Aus dieser Perspektive gelingt es nicht nur, bis heute verwendete Analysekategorien wie „nationale Identität“ historisch zu verorten. Aktuelle Debatten wie um den Brexit werden darüber hinaus als gegenwärtige Ausprägungen einer schon viel länger ablaufenden Selbstverständigungsdebatte in Großbritannien sichtbar.

Le rôle des citoyens mauriciens dans la construction de la République. Conférence de Catherine Boudet à Port-Louis, le 10 mars 2020 dans le cadre de la table-ronde sur "Maurice, sommes-nous en République ?". Après 52 ans d'indépendance et 28 ans de République, on constate en 2020 que le républicanisme mauricien n'existe que sur le papier. L'accession de Maurice au statut de République en 1992 est resté essentiellement technique. La Constitution reste élitiste et défend davantage les intérêts de la classe politique que l'intérêt général, tandis que la plupart des lois restent répressives envers les citoyens au lieu d'assurer leur protection. Cette présentation vise, tout en présentant les principes du républicanisme, à questionner quel peut être le rôle des citoyens mauriciens dans la mise en oeuvre d'une République effective, qui reste encore à construire.

This article studied the international apartheid debate in the early 1960s, putting precedence on how African and Afrikaner nationalists competed to define political 'order' after second-wave decolonization. It won the 2010 Stuart L. Bernath prize for best article in the field of American foreign relations history.

"By establishing the dangerous limitations of postcolonial theory, this essay explores the invisibility of Puerto Rico’s colonial status. Mainly, it argues that postcolonial theory has enabled U.S. Congress to keep Puerto Rico as a territory. Using selected quotes from the last three Congressional Hearings on the status of the island, this paper illustrates two basic patterns by which this is done: by employing rhetoric of a caring and compassionate democracy and by employing a “tied hands and loose mouths” approach. The paper concludes that in order to decolonize a territory like Puerto Rico, modifying a political status alone is not enough if other colonial aspects remain in place."