Suchergebnisse

1. Introduction -- 2. White Ghost's Burden and Colonial Adventures -- 3. International Solidarity and Swedish Foreign Policy -- 4. Apartheid and Antiracism -- 5. The Women's Movements and Gender Politics -- 6. Conclusion: When the Phantom Became Swedish. .

Introduction : interculturality for whom? -- Epistemological privilege in intercultural education : from cultural differences to a colonial difference -- The construction of a European identity in European Union policies on interculturality -- Intercultural studies and the commitment to bridging otherness -- The double bind of interculturality in academic textbooks -- Interculturalidad, or voices from the underside of the colonial difference -- Conclusion

The Phantom, an American comic about a superhero of British heritage set in a fictional African country, is held in highest esteem elsewhere, regarded as a national institution in Australia, New Zealand and much of Scandinavia. Since the early 1960s, officially licensed scripts have been produced by the Swedish-based scriptwriters of 'Team Fantomen' who today remain the major suppliers of adventures to the Phantom comics around the world. This essay suggests that this shift in the scripts' geographical origin also altered the politics of the comic: in the hands of Team Fantomen, the masked hero is instilled with political doctrines reflected in Swedish foreign policy during the late 1960s and early 1970s. This ideological shift means that the masked hero moves away from the role of colonialist fantasy prevalent in the American scripts to become a supporter of decolonization, social justice, and equality. The Phantom becomes an avatar of democratic socialist ideology, the episodes offering a direct commentary on Sweden's perception of its own role in the world as a leading proponent of international solidarity.

This essay seeks to wean interculturality from its comfort zone of flat substitutability across cultural differences by pushing for the possibility of other ways of thinking about the concept depending on where (the geopolitics of knowledge) and by whom (the bodypolitics of knowledge) it is being articulated. In order to make a case for the importance of always considering the geopolitical and bodypolitical dimension of knowledge production within interculturality, this essay shifts focus away from policies of the European Union and UNESCO to the Andean region of Latin America. In that part of the world the notion of interculturalidad – translation: interculturality – is not only a subject on the educational agenda, it has also become a core component among indigenous social movements in their push for decolonization. With reference points drawn from a decolonial perspective and the concept of "colonial difference", this essay makes the case that interculturalidad, with its roots in the historical experience of colonialism and in the particular, rather than in assertions of universality, offers another perspective on interculturality bringing into the picture other epistemologies. It concludes by arguing for the requirement to start seeing interculturality as inter-epistemic rather than simply inter-cultural.

Interculturality is a notion that has come to dominate the debate on cultural diversity among supranational bodies such as the European Union and UNESCO in recent years. The EU goes so far as to identify interculturality as a key cultural and linguistic characteristic of a union which, it argues, acts as an inspiration to other parts of the world. At the same time, the very notion of interculturality is a core component of indigenous movements in the Andean region of Latin America in their struggles for decolonization. Every bit as contingent as any other concept, it is apparent that several translations of interculturality are simultaneously in play. Through interviews with students and teachers in a course on interculturality run by indigenous alliances, my aim in this essay is to study how the notion is translated in the socio-political context of the Andes. With reference points drawn from the works of Walter Mignolo and the concept of delinking, I will engage in a discussion about the potential for interculturality to break out of the prison-house of colonial vocabulary – modernization, progress, salvation – that lingers on in official memory. Engagement in such an interchange of experiences, memories and significations provides not only recognition of other forms of subjectivity, knowledge systems and visions of the future but also a possible contribution to an understanding of how any attempt to invoke a universal reach for interculturality, as in the case of the EU and UNESCO, risks echoing the imperial order that the notion in another context attempts to overcome.

An increasing number of educational policies, academic studies, and university courses today propagate 'interculturality' as a method for approaching 'the Other' and reconciling universal values and cultural specificities. Based on a thorough discussion of Europe's colonial past and the hierarchies of knowledge that colonialism established, this dissertation interrogates the definitions of intercultural knowledge put forth by EU policy discourse, academic textbooks on interculturality, and students who have completed a university course on the subject. Taking a decolonial approach that makes its central concern the ways in which differences are formed and sustained through references to cultural identities, this study shows that interculturality, as defined in these texts, runs the risk of affirming a singular European outlook on the world, and of elevating this outlook into a universal law. Contrary to its selfproclaimed goal of learning from the Other, interculturality may in fact contribute to the repression of the Other by silencing those who are already muted. The dissertation suggests an alternative definition of interculturality, which is not framed in terms of cultural differences but in terms of colonial difference. This argument is substantiated by an analysis of the Latin American concept of interculturalidad, which derives from the struggles for public and political recognition among indigenous social movements in Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru. By bringing interculturalidad into the picture, with its roots in the particular and with strong reverberations of the historical experience of colonialism, this study explores the possibility of decentring the discourse of interculturality and its Eurocentric outlook. In this way, the dissertation argues that an emancipation from colonial legacies requires that we start seeing interculturality as inter-epistemic rather than simply inter-cultural. ; Fokus för denna avhandling är spridningen av begreppet interkulturalitet inom utbildning. Utbildningspolicy, akademisk litteratur och mängden kurser i högre utbildning ägnade åt begreppet vittnar alla om dess betydelse i försöken att förena det kulturellt partikulära med det universella. Med Europas koloniala förflutna i åtanke och dess skapande av hierarkier mellan vad som definieras som kunskap, ämnar denna avhandling undersöka vilka kunskaper som krävs för att bli interkulturell. Syftet är framför allt att besvara frågan vad som händer med interkulturalitet om kulturella skillnader istället förstås som koloniala skillnader. Utifrån ett dekolonialt perspektiv som fokuserar på hur skillnader skapas och upprätthålls utifrån föreställningar om kulturella identiteter, analyseras EU-policy, akademisk litteratur samt intervjuer med studenter som avklarat en kurs i interkulturalitet. Analysen visar på hur interkulturalitet, i dess nuvarande tappning, riskerar fastna i en singulär europeisk utblick på världen upphöjd till universell lag. Snarare än att mildra eller förändra maktrelationer och skapa möjligheter till mellanmänskliga möten, riskerar därför interkulturaliteten att bidra till fortsatt förtryck av den som anses kulturellt annorlunda. En alternativ utgångspunkt står att finna i en annan översättning av interkulturalitet – interculturalidad – hämtad från ursprungsbefolkningarnas kamp för att bli synliggjorda, att dela makten, på den offentliga arenan i Bolivia, Ecuador och Peru. Genom att lyfta fram begreppet interculturalidad, som just har sitt ursprung i singulariteten och bär med sig själva erfarenheten av kolonialism, tillförs en möjlig distansering från interkulturalitet med dess implicita eurocentrism. Avslutningsvis argumenteras för att befrielse från kolonialismens ok kräver att interkulturalitet omkodas som inter-epistemisk.

Academic courses on interculturality have become a rapidly growing discipline in the West, where supranational bodies such as the European Union and UNESCO promote intercultural education as a path towards improved global cultural relations. Through interviews with students who completed a university course on interculturality, this essay investigates the tenets of interculturality and problematises whether this discourse merely reproduces a classificatory logic embedded in modernity that insists on differences among cultures. The argument put forward is that in the analysed context, interculturality tends to reproduce the very colonial ideas that it seeks to oppose. In doing so, interculturality reinforces the collective 'we' as the location of modernity by deciding who is culturally different and who is in a position that must be bridged to the mainstream by engaging in intercultural dialogue.

El presente artículo se centra en la problematización de reclamación de la Unión Europea, según la cual, el diálogo intercultural constituye un método para hablar a través de las fronteras culturales, basadas en la empatía mutua y no la dominación. Más precisamente, el objetivo es analizar qué se está construyendo como contraparte del diálogo intercultural a través del discurso producido por la Unión Europea. Para responder a la pregunta, los documentos de la política europea sobre el diálogo intercultural se analizan sobre la base de una perspectiva poscolonial. Como una interpretación, la Unión Europea se apropia de los símbolos históricos y figuras del pensamiento colonial para autorizar y legitimar sus objetivos actuales. En el ámbito de la Unión Europea, los europeos son retratados como una existencia a priori histórica, mientras que los excluidos de este concepto son evocados para demostrar su diferencia en comparación con el europeo. Sin embargo, los resultados muestran que los sujetos no considerados como europeos sirven como marcadores de la actual multiculturalidad del espacio europeo. Por lo tanto, el diálogo intercultural parece consolidar las diferencias entre europeo y Otro -el "nosotros" y el "ellos" en el diálogo– y no, como en línea con su objetivo, acercar a sujetos entre sí. ; The present article focuses on problematizing the European Union's claim that intercultural dialogue constitutes an advocated method of talking through cultural boundaries based on mutual empathy and non-domination. More precisely, the aim is to analyze who is being constructed as counterparts of the intercultural dialogue through the discourse produced by the EU. To answer the question, European policy documents on intercultural dialogue are analyzed drawing on a postcolonial perspective. As an interpretation, the EU appropriates historical symbols and colonial figures of thought to authorize its current objectives. Within the realm of the EU, Europeans are portrayed as having an a priori historical existence, while the ones excluded from this notion are evoked to demonstrate its difference in comparison to the European one. The results show that subjects not considered as Europeans serve as markers of the multicultural present of the space. Thus, intercultural dialogue seems to consolidate differences between European and Other – the 'We' and 'Them' in the dialogue – rather than, as in line with its purpose, bringing subjects together.

The present essay focuses on problematizing the European Union's claim that interculturaldialogue constitutes an advocated method of talking through cultural boundaries—inside as wellas outside the classroom—based on mutual empathy and non-domination. More precisely, theaim is to analyze who is being constructed as counterparts of the intercultural dialogue throughthe discourse produced by the EU in policies on education, culture and intercultural dialogue.Within the Union, Europeans are portrayed as having an a priori historical existence, whilethe ones excluded from this notion are evoked to demonstrate its difference in comparison to theEuropean one.The results show that subjects not considered as Europeans serve as markers of themulticultural present of the space. Thus, intercultural dialogue seems to consolidate differencesbetween European and Other—the'We' and 'Them' in the dialogue—rather than, as in line withits purpose, bringing subjects together.

El presente artículo se centra en la problematización de reclamación de la Unión Europea, según la cual, el diálogo intercultural constituye un método para hablar a través de las fronteras culturales, basadas en la empatía mutua y no la dominación. Más precisamente, el objetivo es analizar qué se está construyendo como contraparte del diálogo intercultural a través del discurso producido por la Unión Europea. Para responder a la pregunta, los documentos de la política europea sobre el diálogo intercultural se analizan sobre la base de una perspectiva postcolonial. Como una interpretación, la Unión Europea se apropia de los símbolos históricos y figuras del pensamiento colonial para autorizar y legitimar sus objetivos actuales. En el ámbito de la Unión Europea, los europeos son retratados como una existencia a priori histórica, mientras que los excluidos de este concepto son evocados para demostrar su diferencia en comparación con el europeo. Sin embargo, los resultados muestran que los sujetos no considerados como europeos sirven como marcadores de la actual multiculturalidad del espacio europeo. Por lo tanto, el diálogo intercultural parece consolidar las diferencias entre europeo y Otro - el "nosotros" y el "ellos" en el diálogo - y no, como en línea con su objetivo, acercar a sujetos entre sí. ; The present article focuses on problematizing the European Union's claim that intercultural dialogue constitutes an advocated method of talking through cultural boundaries based on mutual empathy and non-domination. More precisely, the aim is to analyze who is being constructed as counterparts of the intercultural dialogue through the discourse produced by the EU. To answer the question, European policy documents on intercultural dialogue are analyzed drawing on a postcolonial perspective. As an interpretation, the EU appropriates historical symbols and colonial figures of thought to authorize its current objectives. Within the realm of the EU, Europeans are portrayed as having an a priori historical existence, while the ones excluded from this notion are evoked to demonstrate its difference in comparison to the European one. The results show that subjects not considered as Europeans serve as markers of the multicultural present of the space. Thus, intercultural dialogue seems to consolidate differences between European and Other - the 'We' and 'Them' in the dialogue - rather than, as in line with its purpose, bringing subjects together.

El presente artículo se centra en la problematización de reclamación de la Unión Europea, según la cual, el diá- logo intercultural constituye un método para hablar a través de las fronteras culturales, basadas en la empatía mutua y no la dominación. Más precisamente, el objetivo es analizar qué se está construyendo como contrapar- te del diálogo intercultural a través del discurso producido por la Unión Europea. Para responder a la pregunta, los documentos de la política europea sobre el diálogo intercultural se analizan sobre la base de una perspecti- va poscolonial. Como una interpretación, la Unión Europea se apropia de los símbolos históricos y figuras del pensamiento colonial para autorizar y legitimar sus objetivos actuales. En el ámbito de la Unión Europea, los europeos son retratados como una existencia a priori histórica, mientras que los excluidos de este concepto son evocados para demostrar su diferencia en comparación con el europeo. Sin embargo, los resultados muestran que los sujetos no considerados como europeos sirven como marcadores de la actual multiculturalidad del espacio europeo. Por lo tanto, el diálogo intercultural parece consolidar las diferencias entre europeo y Otro -el "nosotros" y el "ellos" en el diálogo– y no, como en línea con su objetivo, acercar a sujetos entre sí. ; The present article focuses on problematizing the European Union's claim that intercultural dialogue cons- titutes an advocated method of talking through cultural boundaries based on mutual empathy and non-do- mination. More precisely, the aim is to analyze who is being constructed as counterparts of the intercultural dialogue through the discourse produced by the EU. To answer the question, European policy documents on intercultural dialogue are analyzed drawing on a postcolonial perspective. As an interpretation, the EU appropriates historical symbols and colonial figures of thought to authorize its current objectives. Within the realm of the EU, Europeans are portrayed as having an a priori historical existence, while the ones excluded from this notion are evoked to demonstrate its difference in comparison to the European one. The results show that subjects not considered as Europeans serve as markers of the multicultural present of the space. Thus, intercultural dialogue seems to consolidate differences between European and Other – the 'We' and 'Them' in the dialogue – rather than, as in line with its purpose, bringing subjects together.

This book explores diverse contemporary paradigms of educational praxis and learning in Latin America, both non-formal and formal. Each contributor, from different geographical locations, focuses on theoretical and empirical positions, discusses the broader theme of how in times of historical ruptures, political reconstructions and epistemic formations, the production of paradigms rooted in 'other' logics, cosmologies and realities may renegotiate and redefine concepts of education, learning and knowledge.