Topos

DECOLONIZING KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION IN BELARUS AND UKRAINE

2024-11-14T15:28:45+00:00

DECOLONIZING KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION IN BELARUS AND UKRAINE

EXPLANATORY POTENTIAL OF THE POSTCOLONIAL APPROACH FOR UNDERSTANDING THE RUSSIA–UKRAINE WAR

2024-11-14T15:30:50+00:00

Abstract. The escalation of the Russia–Ukraine confrontation into a fullscale war in 2022 reinforced questions about the deficiencies of the mainstream IR theoretical paradigms in exploring and explaining the development in Eastern Europe. In this article, we examine the explanatory potential that the postcolonial approach in IR can contribute to elucidating Russia’s aggressive behaviour and, no less importantly, Ukraine’s desperate resistance to the invasion. This includes examining the coloniser–colonised dichotomy within the historical context of Russia–Ukraine relations, the Russian neocolonial agenda in independent Ukraine, and the applicability of the concepts of the Other and Subaltern to Russian perceptions of Ukrainians. We offer substantiation of the premise that, although
the status of Ukrainians within the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union differed from the experiences of overseas colonies, there are still common features — such as predatory exploitation of human and natural resources, enslavement and forced relocations, and cultural suppression and marginalization of indigenous people — that support the application of a postcolonial approach. The perspective highlighted with the help of the postcolonial lens fills in the gaps inherent in other theoretical approaches,
addressing the coloniser’s tendency to use power to retain hegemony and revealing how Russian hybrid perception of Ukrainians as the same people to Russians, but subaltern, shaped Ukrainian culture of resistance to oppression.
Keywords: International Relations, Postcolonialism, Neocolonialism, Ukraine, Russia–Ukraine war.

DIALECTICS OF INTERNAL COLONIZATION

2024-11-14T15:31:59+00:00

Abstract: The postcolonial paradigm has evolved through various conceptual advancements, from the anthropological concept of “skin” as the basis of dual oppression based on class and race to the semiotic treatment of “skin” as a social interface constructed in practices of “writing on bodies” and discourses. The decolonization in our region raises a new set of problems. On the one hand, it refers to a complex cultural palimpsest. As a basic text of modernity, we have the colonization of the countryside by the city. But on top of the division of the city and the countryside other dividing lines are superimposed: ethnolinguistic divisions (Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian) and the divisions of imperial and democratic forces. On the other hand, the figure of the Russian colonizer has a specific, neurotic character — a “neurotic view” of its position in the world, the fear of being colonized. And this neurotic fear is displaced from external enemies to internal ones. The Russian Empire, confronting external forces, constantly encounters not only an imaginary enemy, but imperceptibly turns back to itself as a colonized colonizer.
Keywords: Postcolonialism, Decolonization, Discursive “skin”, Cultural Palimpsest.

DECOLONIZATION OF HISTORICAL MEMORY IN UKRAINE DURING THE RUSSO-UKRAINIAN WAR: MONUMENTS AND TOPONYMS

2024-11-14T15:33:01+00:00

Abstract: The article discusses the politics of memory in Ukraine during the war. The main component of Ukraine’s politics of memory during the war is Decolonization, as a continuation of Decommunization, which began in 2015, and Derussification, which began at the initiative of some local authorities and right-wing activists after the full-scale Russian invasion. Decolonization of memory involves the removal of symbols — names and memorial signs, which are considered markers of Russian imperial policy — from the public space. Ukraine wants to get away from the influence of Russian historiography, to shape its own national historical narrative and politics of memory, connected with the European tradition. The expected result of Decolonization is to destroy any cultural and historical
connections between Ukraine and Russia so that no one considers Ukrainians and Russians to be either “one nation” or “brotherly nations.” I see decolonization as a reactive process to the Russian invasion and Putin’s de-Ukrainianization policy, which had no preconditions in Ukrainian society. The article analyses the destruction or appropriation of Soviet/Russian monuments and the renaming of toponyms. Monuments and toponyms associated with Russia and the USSR, with the beginning of a full-scale invasion, began to be perceived as markers of the invader, with which the empire “branded” its own territory. It is believed that by destroying them the victim can fight back by breaking historical ties with the aggressor. A key concept used in Ukrainian narratives in the context
of Soviet/Russian monuments and toponyms was the cleansing of sacred land desecrated by enemy markings as well as the cancellation of Russian culture and language.
Keywords: Ukraine, Retrotopia, Decommunization, Historical Memory, Memory Politics.

“BE NOT WISE IN YOUR OWN CONCEITS”: IS DECOLONIZING ACADEMIC HUMANITARIAN STUDIES POSSIBLE IN BELARUS? (a historian’s perspective)

2024-11-14T20:21:02+00:00

Abstract. This article reflects on the possibilities of decolonizing academic research in Belarus. The text is built on the discussions held during the conference The Decolonization of Education and Research in Belarus and Ukraine: Theoretical Challenges and Practical Tasks in Vilnius (September 2023), as well as the analysis of academic research and the author’s work experience of more than ten years in a state university. The author discusses the impact of initial and technical-procedural factors on the success of decolonization of Belarusian studies. The situation of the memory war, attacks on history, and the current Belarusian academic environment are referred to the former group of factors, while an ambivalent receptivity of Belarusian scholars and lecturers to new ideas, as well as the uncertainty about the the foundations for a new postcolonial discourse make up the latter group. The paper concludes that positive changes are possible subject to the success of the following processes: the staff of state universities and academic institutions overcomes their habit to uncritically follow orders from “above”, the lustration of personnel is carried out, a common language is found that facilitates dialogue with the public, and new research topics are explored (filling in the “knowledge gaps”). Otherwise, decolonial ideas could be quickly discredited and limited to a narrow intellectual sect while also preserving the foundations of the old system.
Keywords: Academic Research, Belarus, Decolonization, Memory War, Self-colonizing, Reforms

ПОСТКОЛОНІАЛЬНІ СИНДРОМИ: ПСИХОЛОГІЧНИЙ ВПЛИВ НА ВИБІР МОВИ В УКРАЇНСЬКО-РОСІЙСЬКОМУ ДВОМОВНОМУ СЕРЕДОВИЩІ

2024-11-14T15:35:40+00:00

Abstract: The article presents the results of a survey that is a follow up of research on Ukrainian-Russian bilingualism, which began in 2011 in Vinnytsia (Central Ukraine). The target audience comprised high school students aged 15–18 (483 respondents). In this survey, we aimed to determine whether there have been changes in the psychological factors influencing language choice in bilingual settings compared to a similar survey run in 2016. The survey was conducted using a questionnaire distribution method. The survey results reveal an increase in interest in the Ukrainian language compared to 2016. According to the findings, most students identify Ukrainian as their mother tongue. Throughout the observation period, the percentage of students recognizing Ukrainian as their native language has remained high (from 87 % in 2011 to 96 % in 2024). Regarding language tolerance, the latest survey indicates that the number
of Ukrainian-speaking respondents switching to Russian when addressed in Russian has sharply decreased: in 2016, 31 % of respondents stated they would respond in Ukrainian, while in 2024, this figure was 67 %. Since 2018, the percentage of high school students starting a conversation with a stranger in Ukrainian has increased from 70 % to 94 %. A comparison of psychological factors indicates polarization of attitudes between Ukrainian-speaking and Russian-speaking high school students. Among Ukrainian speakers, the three main reasons why respondents do not use Russian are: 1) “no need to use Russian” (59 % in 2016 and 73 % in 2024); 2) “secondary unattractive language” (increased from 24 % in 2016 to 62 % in 2024); 3) “consider Russian language unprestigious” (13 % in 2016 and 45 % in 2024). External factors (war with Russia) and internal factors (willingness/unwillingness to be tolerant towards someone who speaks another language) affect the change of attitude towards the choice of language in bilingual conditions.
Keywords: Ukrainian-Russian bilingualism, Bilingualism, Psychological Factors Influencing Bilingualism Formation, Language Tolerance, Language
stability, language prestige, language pendulum effect.

“THE PAST IS IN FRONT OF US”, OR APPROACHING ONE POSSIBLE HISTORY OF BELARUSIAN THEATRE

2024-11-14T15:36:47+00:00

Abstract: The article navigates both the existing models of the Belarusian theatre history, challenging the narratives constructed by Soviet historiography, and the nationally oriented models that emerged during the post-Soviet era. By focusing on the decolonial methodology and performative theory, particularly the bodily approach, the author suggests a reevaluation of key concepts such as “tradition” and “experiment” as the primary categories for structuring the theatre framework concept. The central argument is that decolonizing the theatre history goes beyond the emancipation of the cultural narrative within the geopolitical binary “centre-periphery”. The issue is more complex, as it involves a mode of imagination including the emancipation/decolonization/decentralization of theatrical production methods. This approach might facilitate the emergence of multiple historical narratives.
Keywords: Belarusian Theatre, History, Decoloniality, Body, Performance

EXPLAINING THE “WESTSPLAINERS”: CAN A WESTERN SCHOLAR BE AN EXPERT ON CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE?

2024-11-14T15:37:57+00:00

Abstract: Following the 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the terms “Westsplaining” and “Westsplainer” gained momentum. They are used as a reaction to commentaries that are delivered by established Western intellectuals who lack proper knowledge of the region. Many people from Central and Eastern Europe, as well as some of their Western colleagues, tend to find such commentaries not only useless but also harmful. Far from being a purely theoretical academic contemplation, this type of commentary uses influential Western media forums to provide policy advice that is often based on false assumptions and projections. At the same time, some Westerners may feel wronged here, as the term “Westsplaining” could sound as a strong attempt to deny them the right to participate in expert debate based solely on their personal background. Without claiming a monopoly on the definition, the author attempts to explain why the term makes sense and how it can be used critically without being reduced to a vulgar ad hominem.
Keywords: Belarus, Central and Eastern Europe, Knowledge Production, Russia, Ukraine, Westsplaining

UKRAINIAN CULTURAL STUDIES AS A “RISKY PROJECT”: REVISION OF THE POST-COLONIAL EXPERIENCE

2024-11-14T15:39:07+00:00

Abstract: The article explores the current state of Ukrainian cultural studies, tracing its origins from the late 1980s and its development within Ukrainian universities and the cultural market, with an emphasis on decolonisation processes. It seeks to validate discussions among representatives of various cultural studies schools (Kharkiv, Kyiv, Odesa, Lviv, Ostroh), offering insights into the challenges and progress in the field. The analysis draws from two key discussions: the Vilnius conference “The Decolonisation of Education and Research in Belarus and Ukraine” (September 2023) and the UAC Lviv event “Culturology as a Risky Project” (December 2023). Despite the establishment of cultural studies following Ukraine obtaining independence in 1991, the field continues to grapple with its objectives in the context of ongoing social and cultural shifts. The article questions whether cultural studies can liberate itself from the legacy of colonised discourse and speculates on its future trajectory amid decolonisation efforts. By examining political and methodological factors, the authors conclude that Ukrainian cultural studies navigate a complex landscape of evolving educational paradigms and societal expectations, defining the unique experience of the “Culturology project” in Ukraine.
Keywords: Cultural Studies in Ukraine, Culturology, Decolonisation, Post-colonial Studies, Post-Soviet Thinking, Ukraine, Education, Ukrainian Association of Cultural Studies (UAC), Decolonising Practices.

DEVELOPING FUNCTIONAL MULTILINGUALISM IN STUDENT AUDIENCES WITH BELARUSIAN MAJORITY: PRACTICAL PROPOSAL

2024-11-14T20:13:02+00:00

Abstract: The proposal contained in the title is linked to the development of multilingualism in student audiences with a Belarusian majority, regardless of the students’ main (first, native, etc.) language. The advantageousness of multilingualism in the educational process is a matter of wide consensus in the thematic literature. The idea of perceiving the entire linguistic repertoire of students as a valuable resource is developed based on approaches such as systemic functional linguistics, translanguaging and linguistic anthropology in education. The text considers the specifics of the application of these approaches in the Belarusian context. Multilingualism in Belarusian education is rather a declared condition than the real one, despite a high social need for it in society. The recommendations formulated in this paper deal with the main aspects of the organization of teaching aimed at the development of multilingual skills in Belarusian students. It is suggested that, in the first place, the practical level of language proficiency must be identified at university, since the school marks often fall short of indicating the actual ability to use the language. The proposals then elaborate on the formulation, together with students, of motivations for learning languages – and in particular, the Belarusian
language. It is argued that young people often find such motivations beyond identitarian discourses of preserving the culture, history, or traditions, increasingly focusing instead on access to social capital, technology, mobility, artworks, and popular culture. The principle of multimodality in educational process is proposed, which can bring multilingualism into the new media dominated routine of young people. The capacity of the Belarusian language to serve for intercultural communication is discussed. It is argued that both the theory and empiric data should be multilingual to avoid hierarchical diglossia. Development of multilingualism among students also requires that teachers acquire and improve the necessary skills.
Keywords: Multilingualism, Inclusive Education, Translanguaging, Emancipatory
pedagogy; Belarusian language; practical recommendations.

UNIVERSALIST CLAIMS VS. LOCAL PERSPECTIVES: DECOLONISING “ACADEMIC WRITING IN ENGLISH”

2024-11-14T15:41:17+00:00

Abstract: Many scholars and university students whose first language is not English need to write in English to publish in international journals and to attend international conferences. Gatekeepers — editors and conference organizers — screen submissions for linguistic competence but also for adherence to certain internationally accepted norms, such as writing that is argument-driven rather than descriptive or data-driven. Courses and training sessions I have taught under the general rubric “Academic Writing in English” (AWE) sought to improve students’ chances with international publications and conferences by encouraging them to strengthen their central arguments. While confident of the benefits of AWE instruction, I had an uneasy conscience about its not so hidden universalist claim that forms of Anglo-American academic inquiry are superior to others. Such claims, coupled with the presumption of their universal applicability, are today being challenged by decolonising critiques. Bluntly put, is Academic Writing in English guilty of neo-colonialism because it recommends norms developed in the global (north)west? There is more to academic writing in English, of course, than attention to an argument-driven structure. However, it is the promotion of such standards that makes AWE instruction vulnerable to the decolonising critique. To apply the critique to AWE pedagogy, this article reviews the impact of the decoloniality literature on education and research in Belarus and Ukraine, and highlights resistance in those countries against Russian cultural hegemony. After framing the topic and reviewing the cultural struggle in Belarus and Ukraine, I argue that for Academic Writing in English to be truly beneficial,
instruction must be self-critical, allowing and encouraging participants to engage in collective self-reflection to enable informed decisions regarding cultural norms. The focus on Academic Writing in English as taught in Eastern Europe suggests broader comparisons regarding the clash between universalist claims and local perspectives in other regions of the world.
Keywords: Academic Writing in English, Decolonisation, Decoloniality, Universalist Claims, Education and Research in Belarus and Ukraine.

PARVULESCU, ANCA, and MANUELA BOATCĂ. Creolizing the Modern: Transylvania across Empires. Cornell University Press, 2022.

2024-11-14T15:42:26+00:00

PARVULESCU, ANCA, and MANUELA BOATCĂ. Creolizing the Modern: Transylvania across Empires. Cornell University Press, 2022.

Download the full issue

2024-11-14T15:04:01+00:00

2024-11-20T16:07:25+00:00

Topos

DECOLONIZING KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION IN BELARUS AND UKRAINE

EXPLANATORY POTENTIAL OF THE POSTCOLONIAL APPROACH FOR UNDERSTANDING THE RUSSIA–UKRAINE WAR

DIALECTICS OF INTERNAL COLONIZATION

DECOLONIZATION OF HISTORICAL MEMORY IN UKRAINE DURING THE RUSSO-UKRAINIAN WAR: MONUMENTS AND TOPONYMS

“BE NOT WISE IN YOUR OWN CONCEITS”: IS DECOLONIZING ACADEMIC HUMANITARIAN STUDIES POSSIBLE IN BELARUS? (a historian’s perspective)

ПОСТКОЛОНІАЛЬНІ СИНДРОМИ: ПСИХОЛОГІЧНИЙ ВПЛИВ НА ВИБІР МОВИ В УКРАЇНСЬКО-РОСІЙСЬКОМУ ДВОМОВНОМУ СЕРЕДОВИЩІ

“THE PAST IS IN FRONT OF US”, OR APPROACHING ONE POSSIBLE HISTORY OF BELARUSIAN THEATRE

EXPLAINING THE “WESTSPLAINERS”: CAN A WESTERN SCHOLAR BE AN EXPERT ON CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE?

UKRAINIAN CULTURAL STUDIES AS A “RISKY PROJECT”: REVISION OF THE POST-COLONIAL EXPERIENCE

DEVELOPING FUNCTIONAL MULTILINGUALISM IN STUDENT AUDIENCES WITH BELARUSIAN MAJORITY: PRACTICAL PROPOSAL

UNIVERSALIST CLAIMS VS. LOCAL PERSPECTIVES: DECOLONISING “ACADEMIC WRITING IN ENGLISH”

PARVULESCU, ANCA, and MANUELA BOATCĂ. Creolizing the Modern: Transylvania across Empires. Cornell University Press, 2022.

Download the full issue

Contents