Summary
Scholar whose critique of Israel’s purported postcoloniality is singled out in Shtetl Colonialism: First and Last Impressions of Indigeneity by Colonised Colonisers as convincing, and accepted in full, even as the article adopts a postcolonial framework through postcolonial Jewish studies (Shtetl Colonialism: First and Last Impressions of Indigeneity by Colonised Colonisers, PDF p.4-5 / printed p.42-43).
Details
- Shohat’s main critique, as Pappé reports it, is directed against the ahistorical and universalising nature of the term ‘postcolonial’, which leads to its de-politicisation: there was no linguistic necessity for its usage, neo-colonialism was good enough in many cases; it implies colonialism is over; it lumps together too many distinct and diverse phenomena, leaving a strong sense of ambiguity; and it does not leave one with political agency (Shtetl Colonialism: First and Last Impressions of Indigeneity by Colonised Colonisers, PDF p.5 / printed p.43).
- Pappé’s response, in his own words in the article: he fully accepts this critical approach, and argues the case of the Jews’ transformation from victims to victimisers can still benefit from the perspective of postcolonial Jewish studies (PDF p.5).
Related pages
Shtetl Colonialism: First and Last Impressions of Indigeneity by Colonised Colonisers, Postcolonial Jewish Studies, Gabriel Piterberg