殖民主义对土著本体论的挪用——来自南非和埃塞俄比亚的启示

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 Q3 ETHNIC STUDIES Journal of Black Studies Pub Date : 2022-11-10 DOI:10.1177/00219347221134282
O. Eybers
{"title":"殖民主义对土著本体论的挪用——来自南非和埃塞俄比亚的启示","authors":"O. Eybers","doi":"10.1177/00219347221134282","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this investigation is to frame Global North colonialism in southern and eastern Africa as ontological appropriation. In the article’s conceptual framework, ontological appropriation is colonial claims to aspects of African realities without acknowledgment of their original sources and creators. In the case of southern Africa, Global North appropriation of Khoi and San agriculturalist ontologies is illustrated. Additionally, attempts by the Global North to claim origination of Ethiopia’s ancient ontologies are cited as evidence of colonial appropriation. In accordance, the methods of the investigation involved a review of scholarship related to indigenous ontologies in South and East Africa. Moreover, scholarly voices speaking to epistemic encounters between the Global North with Africans are observed. Thus, a thesis of ontological appropriation is generated. Results of the investigation indicate sustained Global North warfare, and epistemic assaults led to the fall of Khoi, San, hunter-gather, and pastoral ontologies in the South. In contrast, in the East Ethiopia’s ancient theocracy, and monarchies prevented Global North acquisition of land, and ontic dominance. The article concludes colonialism was a deliberate attempt to modify, and control African ontologies. As a result, in southern Africa Khoi San ontologies transformed from hunter-gatherers, and pastoralists to colonial servitude. In Ethiopia, however, monarchical, and theocratic ontologies are vibrant to the present age. Hence, this article’s contribution to new knowledge is its accentuation of divergent hunter-gatherer, pastoralist, and monarchical responses to colonialism in ways that enabled, and resisted colonial appropriation of indigenous ontologies.","PeriodicalId":47356,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Black Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Coloniality as Appropriation of Indigenous Ontologies: Insights From South Africa and Ethiopia\",\"authors\":\"O. Eybers\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00219347221134282\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The purpose of this investigation is to frame Global North colonialism in southern and eastern Africa as ontological appropriation. In the article’s conceptual framework, ontological appropriation is colonial claims to aspects of African realities without acknowledgment of their original sources and creators. In the case of southern Africa, Global North appropriation of Khoi and San agriculturalist ontologies is illustrated. Additionally, attempts by the Global North to claim origination of Ethiopia’s ancient ontologies are cited as evidence of colonial appropriation. In accordance, the methods of the investigation involved a review of scholarship related to indigenous ontologies in South and East Africa. Moreover, scholarly voices speaking to epistemic encounters between the Global North with Africans are observed. Thus, a thesis of ontological appropriation is generated. Results of the investigation indicate sustained Global North warfare, and epistemic assaults led to the fall of Khoi, San, hunter-gather, and pastoral ontologies in the South. In contrast, in the East Ethiopia’s ancient theocracy, and monarchies prevented Global North acquisition of land, and ontic dominance. The article concludes colonialism was a deliberate attempt to modify, and control African ontologies. As a result, in southern Africa Khoi San ontologies transformed from hunter-gatherers, and pastoralists to colonial servitude. In Ethiopia, however, monarchical, and theocratic ontologies are vibrant to the present age. Hence, this article’s contribution to new knowledge is its accentuation of divergent hunter-gatherer, pastoralist, and monarchical responses to colonialism in ways that enabled, and resisted colonial appropriation of indigenous ontologies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47356,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Black Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Black Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00219347221134282\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHNIC STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Black Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00219347221134282","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本研究的目的是将非洲南部和东部的全球北方殖民主义界定为本体论挪用。在文章的概念框架中,本体论挪用是对非洲现实各方面的殖民主义主张,而不承认其原始来源和创造者。以南部非洲为例,说明了全球北部对科伊和桑农业主义本体论的挪用。此外,全球北方试图声称埃塞俄比亚古代本体论的起源被认为是殖民侵占的证据。据此,调查方法包括审查与南非和东非土著本体论有关的学术研究。此外,还观察到学术界对全球北方人与非洲人之间的认识遭遇的声音。由此,产生了一个本体论挪用的命题。调查结果表明,持续的全球北方战争和认知攻击导致了南部Khoi、San、猎人聚集和游牧本体论的衰落。相比之下,在东部埃塞俄比亚的古代神权政治中,君主制阻止了全球北方对土地的获取和统治。文章得出结论,殖民主义是一种蓄意修改和控制非洲本体论的尝试。因此,在南部非洲,科伊桑本体论从狩猎采集者和牧民转变为殖民地奴役。然而,在埃塞俄比亚,君主和神权本体论一直活跃到今天。因此,这篇文章对新知识的贡献在于,它强调了狩猎采集者、牧民和君主对殖民主义的不同反应,以支持和抵制对土著本体论的殖民挪用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Coloniality as Appropriation of Indigenous Ontologies: Insights From South Africa and Ethiopia
The purpose of this investigation is to frame Global North colonialism in southern and eastern Africa as ontological appropriation. In the article’s conceptual framework, ontological appropriation is colonial claims to aspects of African realities without acknowledgment of their original sources and creators. In the case of southern Africa, Global North appropriation of Khoi and San agriculturalist ontologies is illustrated. Additionally, attempts by the Global North to claim origination of Ethiopia’s ancient ontologies are cited as evidence of colonial appropriation. In accordance, the methods of the investigation involved a review of scholarship related to indigenous ontologies in South and East Africa. Moreover, scholarly voices speaking to epistemic encounters between the Global North with Africans are observed. Thus, a thesis of ontological appropriation is generated. Results of the investigation indicate sustained Global North warfare, and epistemic assaults led to the fall of Khoi, San, hunter-gather, and pastoral ontologies in the South. In contrast, in the East Ethiopia’s ancient theocracy, and monarchies prevented Global North acquisition of land, and ontic dominance. The article concludes colonialism was a deliberate attempt to modify, and control African ontologies. As a result, in southern Africa Khoi San ontologies transformed from hunter-gatherers, and pastoralists to colonial servitude. In Ethiopia, however, monarchical, and theocratic ontologies are vibrant to the present age. Hence, this article’s contribution to new knowledge is its accentuation of divergent hunter-gatherer, pastoralist, and monarchical responses to colonialism in ways that enabled, and resisted colonial appropriation of indigenous ontologies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: For the last quarter of a century, the Journal of Black Studies has been the leading source for dynamic, innovative, and creative approach on the Black experience. Poised to remain at the forefront of the recent explosive growth in quality scholarship in the field of Black studies, the Journal of Black Studies is now published six times per year. This means a greater number of important and intellectually provocative articles exploring key issues facing African Americans and Blacks can now be given voice. The scholarship inside JBS covers a wide range of subject areas, including: society, social issues, Afrocentricity, economics, culture, media, literature, language, heritage, and biology.
期刊最新文献
Calling on Hope: Examining the Protective Nature of Hope on Mental Health Risk Factors in Black Women The Race-Gender-Equity-Leadership Matrix: Intersectionality and Its Application in Higher Education Literature Black Woman Victimhood: An Intersectional Analysis of Meg Thee Stallion’s Testimony Coloniality of Democracy and Algocracy in Africa: Vanhucracy as an Afrocentric Model for Politics Black Measurement: The Contributions of People Racialized as Black to the Field of Psychometrics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1