Page 67 - Vinkler, Jonatan, Ana Beguš and Marcello Potocco. Eds. 2019. Ideology in the 20th Century: Studies of literary and social discourses and practices. Koper: University of Primorska Press
P. 67
Epistemology, Ideology, and Literature ... 67
ing, at the same time, one single point of view from which it is observed.
In his works, Walter D. Mignolo calls for a radical ‘delinking’ from co-
lonial epistemology, which is not possible in the frame of Marxism, be-
cause it offers only a different content, not a different logic (cf. Mignolo
2012, 90–91).6 In his opinion, a delinked Marxism would not be Marx-
ism any more (Mignolo 2012, 91).7 For the decolonial studies colonialism
is not just a byproduct of a certain stage of capitalism but its prerequi-
site, its constitutive part, the dark side of the modern age. The ‘delinking’
needs to happen on a deeper level than it is possible in the frame of Marx-
ism that developed within the imperial logic. For this reason, it enables
only emancipatory movements in its own realm. “The delinking starts
with the disbelief and the doubt about the illusion that the imperial mind
could create the liberating mind” (Mignolo 2012, 96).8
An ambivalent relation to Marxism is also a characteristic of certain
Native American literary texts that more or less explicitly formulate a cri-
tique of colonialism and capitalism on the one hand,9 and on the oth-
er a doubt about the belief that Marxism could be a viable alternative.
This critique of capitalism and colonialism is plausible as they gave rise
to the genocide in both Americas—probably the greatest genocide in hu-
man history. The poet Paula Gunn Allen identifies another cause for the
genocide: “The physical and cultural genocide of American Indian tribes
is and was mostly about patriarchal fear of gynocracy” (Allen 1992, 3).
She states “Traditional tribal lifestyles are more often gynocratic than not
and they are never patriarchal” (Allen 1992, 2). The ‘fear of gynocracy’
might be closely connected with the fear of anti-capitalist movements, as
for Engels early communistic social structures were “the material foun-
dation of that supremacy of the women which was general in primitive
times” (Engels 2000, 27). However, these assumptions have no reliable
6 I refer to the German translation of the Spanish original Desobediencia Epistémica
(2010), because the English text Delinking: The Rhetoric of Modernity, the Logic of
Coloniality, and the Grammar of Decoloniality is an earlier, shorter preliminary ver-
sion.
7 “In dem Augenblick, in dem der Marxismus die Entkoppelung in Erwägung zieht und
sich auf sie hin entwirft, wird er kein Marxismus mehr sein.” Jens Kastner and Tom Wai-
bel on the other hand emphasize the elements of Marxism in Mignolo’s work (cf.
31–35). Mignolo himself does not deny the influence of South American Marxist
thought on his work, but he still clearly distances himself from it.
8 “Die Entkoppelung beginnt mit dem Unglauben und dem Zweifel an der Illusion,
dass die imperiale Vernunft zugleich die befreiende Vernunft hervorbringen könnte.”
9 Cf. for example the article on the work of Simon Ortiz by Dyck (2009).
ing, at the same time, one single point of view from which it is observed.
In his works, Walter D. Mignolo calls for a radical ‘delinking’ from co-
lonial epistemology, which is not possible in the frame of Marxism, be-
cause it offers only a different content, not a different logic (cf. Mignolo
2012, 90–91).6 In his opinion, a delinked Marxism would not be Marx-
ism any more (Mignolo 2012, 91).7 For the decolonial studies colonialism
is not just a byproduct of a certain stage of capitalism but its prerequi-
site, its constitutive part, the dark side of the modern age. The ‘delinking’
needs to happen on a deeper level than it is possible in the frame of Marx-
ism that developed within the imperial logic. For this reason, it enables
only emancipatory movements in its own realm. “The delinking starts
with the disbelief and the doubt about the illusion that the imperial mind
could create the liberating mind” (Mignolo 2012, 96).8
An ambivalent relation to Marxism is also a characteristic of certain
Native American literary texts that more or less explicitly formulate a cri-
tique of colonialism and capitalism on the one hand,9 and on the oth-
er a doubt about the belief that Marxism could be a viable alternative.
This critique of capitalism and colonialism is plausible as they gave rise
to the genocide in both Americas—probably the greatest genocide in hu-
man history. The poet Paula Gunn Allen identifies another cause for the
genocide: “The physical and cultural genocide of American Indian tribes
is and was mostly about patriarchal fear of gynocracy” (Allen 1992, 3).
She states “Traditional tribal lifestyles are more often gynocratic than not
and they are never patriarchal” (Allen 1992, 2). The ‘fear of gynocracy’
might be closely connected with the fear of anti-capitalist movements, as
for Engels early communistic social structures were “the material foun-
dation of that supremacy of the women which was general in primitive
times” (Engels 2000, 27). However, these assumptions have no reliable
6 I refer to the German translation of the Spanish original Desobediencia Epistémica
(2010), because the English text Delinking: The Rhetoric of Modernity, the Logic of
Coloniality, and the Grammar of Decoloniality is an earlier, shorter preliminary ver-
sion.
7 “In dem Augenblick, in dem der Marxismus die Entkoppelung in Erwägung zieht und
sich auf sie hin entwirft, wird er kein Marxismus mehr sein.” Jens Kastner and Tom Wai-
bel on the other hand emphasize the elements of Marxism in Mignolo’s work (cf.
31–35). Mignolo himself does not deny the influence of South American Marxist
thought on his work, but he still clearly distances himself from it.
8 “Die Entkoppelung beginnt mit dem Unglauben und dem Zweifel an der Illusion,
dass die imperiale Vernunft zugleich die befreiende Vernunft hervorbringen könnte.”
9 Cf. for example the article on the work of Simon Ortiz by Dyck (2009).
