雨果·格劳秀斯的殖民差异:理性人、奴隶制与土著被剥夺

IF 1.2 3区 社会学 Q2 CULTURAL STUDIES
Mikki Stelder
{"title":"雨果·格劳秀斯的殖民差异:理性人、奴隶制与土著被剥夺","authors":"Mikki Stelder","doi":"10.1080/13688790.2021.1979297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT (Post)colonial Dutch historiography remains saturated with the myth of the Dutch as benevolent and sometimes even reluctant imperialists geared toward trade rather than settlement. In this article, I seek to unsettle some common presumptions made on the basis of this myth through a re-reading of the work of Dutch lawyer, humanist and state ideologue Hugo Grotius. In particular, I hone in on his writings on slavery and Indigenous (dis)possession to show how colonial and racial violence structure his construction of the free sovereign subject. In doing so, I seek to intervene in existing critical scholarship on Grotius that continues to position the undifferentiated sovereign subject at the heart of his legal thought and positions him as a friend of Indigenous peoples. Applying colonial difference as a lens for reading Grotius’s work, I argue that his legal framework set up the very conditions of possibility for colonial conquest by constructing a Dutch propertied subject as universal.","PeriodicalId":46334,"journal":{"name":"Postcolonial Studies","volume":"122 1","pages":"564 - 583"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The colonial difference in Hugo Grotius: rational man, slavery and Indigenous dispossession\",\"authors\":\"Mikki Stelder\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13688790.2021.1979297\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT (Post)colonial Dutch historiography remains saturated with the myth of the Dutch as benevolent and sometimes even reluctant imperialists geared toward trade rather than settlement. In this article, I seek to unsettle some common presumptions made on the basis of this myth through a re-reading of the work of Dutch lawyer, humanist and state ideologue Hugo Grotius. In particular, I hone in on his writings on slavery and Indigenous (dis)possession to show how colonial and racial violence structure his construction of the free sovereign subject. In doing so, I seek to intervene in existing critical scholarship on Grotius that continues to position the undifferentiated sovereign subject at the heart of his legal thought and positions him as a friend of Indigenous peoples. Applying colonial difference as a lens for reading Grotius’s work, I argue that his legal framework set up the very conditions of possibility for colonial conquest by constructing a Dutch propertied subject as universal.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46334,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Postcolonial Studies\",\"volume\":\"122 1\",\"pages\":\"564 - 583\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Postcolonial Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13688790.2021.1979297\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CULTURAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Postcolonial Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13688790.2021.1979297","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CULTURAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

(后)殖民时期的荷兰史学仍然充斥着这样的神话:荷兰人是仁慈的,有时甚至是不情愿的帝国主义者,他们倾向于贸易而不是殖民。在这篇文章中,我试图通过重读荷兰律师、人道主义者和国家理论家雨果·格劳秀斯(Hugo Grotius)的作品,来动摇基于这个神话的一些常见假设。我特别关注他关于奴隶制和土著(非)占有的著作,以展示殖民和种族暴力是如何构建他对自由主权主体的建构的。在这样做的过程中,我试图介入现有的关于格劳秀斯的批判性学术,这些学术继续将无差别的主权主体置于他的法律思想的核心,并将他定位为土著人民的朋友。我将殖民差异作为解读格劳修斯作品的视角,认为他的法律框架通过将荷兰有产权主体构建为普遍性,为殖民征服的可能性创造了条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The colonial difference in Hugo Grotius: rational man, slavery and Indigenous dispossession
ABSTRACT (Post)colonial Dutch historiography remains saturated with the myth of the Dutch as benevolent and sometimes even reluctant imperialists geared toward trade rather than settlement. In this article, I seek to unsettle some common presumptions made on the basis of this myth through a re-reading of the work of Dutch lawyer, humanist and state ideologue Hugo Grotius. In particular, I hone in on his writings on slavery and Indigenous (dis)possession to show how colonial and racial violence structure his construction of the free sovereign subject. In doing so, I seek to intervene in existing critical scholarship on Grotius that continues to position the undifferentiated sovereign subject at the heart of his legal thought and positions him as a friend of Indigenous peoples. Applying colonial difference as a lens for reading Grotius’s work, I argue that his legal framework set up the very conditions of possibility for colonial conquest by constructing a Dutch propertied subject as universal.
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
2.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
30
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信