THE POLITICS OF MULTICULTURALISM AS REPARATION FOR WESTERN COLONIALISM: A CRITICAL APPROACH ON MODERNITY’S NORMATIVE PARADIGM

Leno Francisco Danner
{"title":"THE POLITICS OF MULTICULTURALISM AS REPARATION FOR WESTERN COLONIALISM: A CRITICAL APPROACH ON MODERNITY’S NORMATIVE PARADIGM","authors":"Leno Francisco Danner","doi":"10.20911/21769389V46N144P149/2019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study starts from a criticism against the naturalization and depo­liticization of the normative paradigm of modernity. Such criticism was made by some contemporary philosophical-sociological theories that associated mo­dernity directly with universalism and conceived it as the final stage of human evolution (in terms of epistemological-moral consciousness, culture and material organization), as opposed to traditionalism. The article argues that modernity is not a universalistic epistemological-moral paradigm or a material and societal organization from which multiculturalism can be embraced, promoted and gui­ded, particularly in the international context. Consequently, I reject the direct association, proposed by such philosophical-sociological theories, of universa­lism, cosmopolitanism and globalization with the epistemological, cultural and economic modernization. In other words, universalism does not mean moderni­zation, as it does not justify the totalizing pursuit of modernity as a paradigm and a material-institutional form of life for all contexts and as a condition for their stability. I therefore propose a reformulation of the paradigm of modernity with the concept of Western colonialism reparation, which must start from the recognition of the historical-sociological blindness concerning the intrinsic link between the normativity of modernity and the Realpolitik of modern colonialism. Such blindness implies the statement that modernity is inherently self-reflexive, justifying it as the basic paradigm for the context of modernity as well as for the sphere of international politics. This would reinforce its permanence as a universalistic paradigm and cosmopolitan ethical-political project. Based on that separation, modernity can always function as the starting point and as the point of arrival to universalism, transforming modernization into universalism itself.","PeriodicalId":210199,"journal":{"name":"Síntese: Revista de Filosofia","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Síntese: Revista de Filosofia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20911/21769389V46N144P149/2019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study starts from a criticism against the naturalization and depo­liticization of the normative paradigm of modernity. Such criticism was made by some contemporary philosophical-sociological theories that associated mo­dernity directly with universalism and conceived it as the final stage of human evolution (in terms of epistemological-moral consciousness, culture and material organization), as opposed to traditionalism. The article argues that modernity is not a universalistic epistemological-moral paradigm or a material and societal organization from which multiculturalism can be embraced, promoted and gui­ded, particularly in the international context. Consequently, I reject the direct association, proposed by such philosophical-sociological theories, of universa­lism, cosmopolitanism and globalization with the epistemological, cultural and economic modernization. In other words, universalism does not mean moderni­zation, as it does not justify the totalizing pursuit of modernity as a paradigm and a material-institutional form of life for all contexts and as a condition for their stability. I therefore propose a reformulation of the paradigm of modernity with the concept of Western colonialism reparation, which must start from the recognition of the historical-sociological blindness concerning the intrinsic link between the normativity of modernity and the Realpolitik of modern colonialism. Such blindness implies the statement that modernity is inherently self-reflexive, justifying it as the basic paradigm for the context of modernity as well as for the sphere of international politics. This would reinforce its permanence as a universalistic paradigm and cosmopolitan ethical-political project. Based on that separation, modernity can always function as the starting point and as the point of arrival to universalism, transforming modernization into universalism itself.
作为西方殖民主义补偿的多元文化主义政治:现代性规范范式的批判途径
本研究从批判现代性规范范式的归化与去政治化入手。这种批评是由一些当代哲学社会学理论提出的,这些理论将现代性与普遍主义直接联系在一起,并将其视为人类进化的最后阶段(就认识论-道德意识,文化和物质组织而言),而不是传统主义。本文认为,现代性不是一种普遍的认识论-道德范式,也不是一种物质和社会组织,从中可以接受、促进和指导多元文化,特别是在国际背景下。因此,我拒绝将这种哲学社会学理论所提出的普遍主义、世界主义和全球化与认识论、文化和经济现代化直接联系起来。换句话说,普遍主义并不意味着现代化,因为它并没有证明将现代性作为一种范式和一种物质制度形式的生活形式,以及作为其稳定的条件,而对现代性的总体追求是合理的。因此,我建议用西方殖民主义赔偿的概念来重新制定现代性范式,这必须从认识到历史社会学对现代性的规范性与现代殖民主义的现实政治之间内在联系的盲点开始。这种盲目暗示了现代性本质上是自我反思的说法,证明它是现代性语境和国际政治领域的基本范式。这将加强其作为一种普遍主义范式和世界性伦理-政治项目的持久性。基于这种分离,现代性始终可以作为普世主义的起点和终点,将现代化转化为普世主义本身。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信