{"title":"Critical theory and North American indigenous thought","authors":"Samuel Piccolo","doi":"10.1177/14748851231177171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, critical theorists such as Amy Allen and Robert Nichols have aimed to “decolonize critical theory,” by which they mean to make the tradition of critical theory less hostile to, and more compatible with, the ideas and movements of Indigenous peoples. In this article, however, I argue these efforts have failed to consider the relationship of two key elements of critical theory with Indigenous thought: that all normativity is generated immanently to historically and socially located struggle, and that normativity is negatively defined. These two elements, I argue, are not fully endorsed in the work of many Indigenous thinkers. By drawing on the work of a diverse group of contemporary Indigenous scholars, I show, first, that nature is generally a relevant normative category in Indigenous thinking in a way that is irreducible to historical location. Second, I argue that for many Native scholars, right action is not simply a matter of resisting colonialism. While resistance features heavily, of course, I suggest that Indigenous thinking often includes a substantive positive vision of living well that has not—as of yet—been considered by critical theorists.","PeriodicalId":46183,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Political Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Political Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14748851231177171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
In recent years, critical theorists such as Amy Allen and Robert Nichols have aimed to “decolonize critical theory,” by which they mean to make the tradition of critical theory less hostile to, and more compatible with, the ideas and movements of Indigenous peoples. In this article, however, I argue these efforts have failed to consider the relationship of two key elements of critical theory with Indigenous thought: that all normativity is generated immanently to historically and socially located struggle, and that normativity is negatively defined. These two elements, I argue, are not fully endorsed in the work of many Indigenous thinkers. By drawing on the work of a diverse group of contemporary Indigenous scholars, I show, first, that nature is generally a relevant normative category in Indigenous thinking in a way that is irreducible to historical location. Second, I argue that for many Native scholars, right action is not simply a matter of resisting colonialism. While resistance features heavily, of course, I suggest that Indigenous thinking often includes a substantive positive vision of living well that has not—as of yet—been considered by critical theorists.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Political Theory provides a high profile research forum. Broad in scope and international in readership, the Journal is named after its geographical location, but is committed to advancing original debates in political theory in the widest possible sense--geographical, historical, and ideological. The Journal publishes contributions in analytic political philosophy, political theory, comparative political thought, and the history of ideas of any tradition. Work that challenges orthodoxies and disrupts entrenched debates is particularly encouraged. All research articles are subject to triple-blind peer-review by internationally renowned scholars in order to ensure the highest standards of quality and impartiality.