All posts by Aden Knaap

CFP: Anti-Catholicism in Europe & America, 1520-1900 (Newcastle, UK, 11-13 September 2018)

A three-day workshop on anti-Catholicism in Europe and America will be held at Newcastle University 11-13 September 2018. The aims of the workshop are to compare and contrast the anti-Catholic traditions of a range of countries and regions across Europe and America from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century; to see how definitions of ‘popery’ changed according to the political/religious context in which they were situated; and to assess how, why, and to what extent anti-Catholicism might be seen to have contributed to wider historical processes such as the Reformation, Enlightenment, empire, state building, and the formation of national identities.

The workshop will not be run via a series of formal papers, but will encourage discussion, exchange and interdisciplinary debate. We would like to encourage historians, art historians, theologians, and literature scholars, and those from other disciplines and at all stages of their careers to participate in this workshop. If you are interested in contributing, please submit a 300 word abstract of your research interests and how they relate to one or more of the following themes to adam.morton@newcastle.ac.uk by April 30th 2018:

  • Anti-Catholicism and National Identities
  • Anti-Catholicism and the Atlantic World
  • Anti-Catholicism in America
  • Anti-Catholicism and the Reformation
  • Anti-Catholicism and the Enlightenment
  • Anti-Catholic readings of the past
  • Conspiracy Theories
  • Stereotypes
  • Representations of ‘papists’
  • Anti-Catholicism and politics/political thought
  • Anti-Catholic violence, unrest, and riot
  • Change and continuity in concepts of anti-Catholicism
  • Catholic reactions to anti-Catholicism

It is expected that proceedings from the workshop will be published at a later date.

The workshop is being organised by the Arts and Humanities Research Council funded network, ‘Anti-Catholicism in British History: c. 1520-1900’. The aim of this network is to outline the history of anti-Catholicism in Britain by focussing on how it contributed to political, cultural, and religious movements during moments of crisis, by tracing the roles which stereotypes and conspiracy theories played in maintaining anti-Catholic ideology, and by assessing the ways in which anti-Catholicism changed across the centuries and how vital this change was to ensuring that it remained a significant part of ‘British’ and ‘Protestant’ identities. This workshop on Europe and America is intended to draw comparisons between nations: anti-Catholicism is often cited as being crucial to national identity, but was it, perhaps, a supra-national ideology? Given that so many countries and groups claimed it as a hallmark of their identity, can it be seen as a ‘national’ phenomenon in any meaningful sense?

If you would like to join the network or participate in its workshops and events, please send a brief outline of your research interests to adam.morton@newcastle.ac.uk

Job Post: Assistant Professor, International Studies (University of California, Irvine)

The International Studies Program at the University of California, Irvine invites applications from outstanding scholars involved in critical interdisciplinary global research with substantive foci in political, sociocultural, historical, legal, geographical and economic issues to apply for a tenure-track assistant professor position. All candidates with a research agenda that engages complex global issues and cuts across foci in creative ways will be considered. The successful candidate will hold a PhD in a relevant discipline in the social sciences or humanities. Candidates should address explicitly how critical and global perspectives are deployed and/or local-global dimensions feature in their research. Candidates should have an outstanding record of research, publication, teaching and professional service.

The International Studies Program is planning to become a full department with a unique doctoral program. The candidate will be involved in building an innovative, interdisciplinary and diverse intellectual environment and developing curriculum around global theory, research, and pressing regional and transnational issues.

Applicants should submit a cover letter highlighting qualifications, evidence of teaching excellence, statement of teaching, curriculum vitae, up to three publications and ensure three letters of reference are submitted by the deadline. A separate statement that addresses past and/or potential contributions to diversity, equity and inclusion must also be included in the application materials. Applicants must apply online at: https://recruit.ap.uci.edu/apply/JPF04275.

These materials should be directed to Professor Eve Darian-Smith, Director, International Studies, University of California, Irvine CA 92697-5100.

Review of applications will begin on November 1, 2017 and continue until the post is filled.

Preference may be given to those candidates who demonstrate a sustained commitment to advance equitable access to higher education, and who have performed public and university service that addresses the needs of underrepresented minority populations.

The University of California, Irvine is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer advancing inclusive excellence. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, disability, age, protected veteran status, or other protected categories covered by the UC nondiscrimination policy. A recipient of an NSF ADVANCE Award for gender equity, UCI is responsive to the needs of dual career couples, supports work-life balance through an array of family-friendly policies, and is dedicated to broadening participation in higher education.

How to Start an Empire: An Interview with Steven Press

Dr. Steven Press

Open a world map. Chances are it carves the world into a multi-colored jigsaw of national territories.  We’re used to thinking of the contemporary international order as composed of regular nation-states. But what happens if we imagine a different map—one made up of irregular, overlapping, and contested claims, not just to territories, but to languages and peoples as well? A cartography of international disorder would emerge.

For starters, the large landmass conventionally thought of as Australia would be overlaid with the black, yellow, and red flag of the Aboriginal Provisional Government (APG). The APG claims Aborigines never ceded sovereignty over Australia; that they “are and always have been a sovereign people.” The APG has enacted Aboriginal sovereignty by issuing birth certificates and Aboriginal passports (which have been accepted in Libya, Norway, Switzerland, and the Mohawk nation), and sending diplomatic delegations overseas. Just off the coast of Australia, a small set of mostly uninhabited islands and reefs would feature the rainbow coloring of the Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands. In 2004, the Kingdom’s soon-to-be Emperor, Dale Parker Anderson, raised the rainbow flag on one of the islands, claiming them “as homeland for the gay and lesbian peoples of the world.” The Kingdom has adopted the rainbow pride flag as its official ensign, the Euro as its official currency, and issued its own stamps. And what about the territory beyond Earth? Zoom out and you would see the proposed Space Kingdom of Asgardia. Its Head of Nation, Russian-Azerbaijani scientist and businessman Igor Ashurbeyli, plans to create a new nation in outer space, with orbiting satellites serving as the space nation’s initial capital.

We might be tempted to dismiss these claims to sovereignty as oddities of the contemporary world. Not so, according to Steven Press’ new book, Rogue Empires: Contracts and Conmen in Europe’s Scramble for Africa (Harvard University Press, 2017). In Rogue Empires, Press offers a pre-history to these claims to sovereignty, taking his readers back to a time in the mid-nineteenth century when empires across South Asia and Africa were started and governed by companies and adventurers. Many of these individuals were what Press deems “disreputable types”: men like James Brooke, a British East India Company veteran who, by agreement with the Sultan of Brunei, became rajah of Sarawak on the island of Borneo in 1841. In Press’ telling, the ventures of private actors like Brooke culminated in the Berlin Conference of 1884–1885, where Belgium’s King Leopold and the German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck extended the imprimatur of European legitimacy to these “rogue empires.” The European powers would later rely on these private entities as precedents for establishing and extending colonies in Niger, South Africa, the Congo, Namibia, Cameroon, and beyond.

We recently spoke with Steven Press from his office in California. Press explained his interest in territorial anomalies and “disreputable” individuals, and foreshadowed his current book project on the afterlives of these rogue empires. Press is Assistant Professor of History at Stanford University. Rogue Empires is his first book.

—Aden Knaap Continue reading

Fellowship: Fung Global Fellows Program at the Princeton Institute for International and Regional Studies

Princeton University is pleased to announce the call for applications to the Fung Global Fellows Program at the Princeton Institute for International and Regional Studies (PIIRS). Each year the program selects six scholars from around the world to be in residence at Princeton for an academic year and to engage in research and discussion around a common theme. Fellowships are awarded to scholars employed outside the United States who are expected to return to their positions, and who have demonstrated outstanding scholarly achievement and exhibit unusual intellectual promise but who are still early in their careers.

During the academic year 2018-19, the Fung Global Fellows Program theme will be “Interdependence.” Food, clothes, entertainment, and the security and health of the planet depend on what distant people do for, with, and against others. Sometimes, recognition of interdependence has led to cooperation, other times to conquest or competition, and frequently to a mixture of all three. Oftentimes, new social identities and movements, national, regional, and religious, emerge in response to rising interdependence and the convergences and inequities it has produced. The goal of the 2018-19 Fung Global Fellows cohort will be to explore the ways people learned to rely on or to reject strangers far away, as well as to imagine how global relationships came to be and could be different. We invite applications from scholars whose work addresses this topic in any historical period or world region and from any disciplinary background.

Applications are due on November 1, 2017. To be eligible,
applicants must have received their Ph.D. or equivalent no earlier
than September 1, 2008. Fellowships will be awarded on the strength of a candidate’s proposed research project, the relationship of the project to the program theme, the candidate’s scholarly record and ability to contribute to the intellectual life of the program. For more information on eligibility requirements and the application process, see http://piirs.princeton.edu/funggfp.

Princeton University is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer and all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to age, race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, disability status, protected veteran status, or any other characteristic protected by law.

Conference: Global Histories of Capital: New Perspectives on the Global South (New York City, October 6-7, 2017)

From our friends at The New School and New York University comes this conference on Global Histories of Capital: New Perspectives on the Global South. The conference will be held at NYU on the 6th of October 2017 and at The New School on the 7th. For more information, visit their website or read this post from the organizers:

A major outcome of the 2008 financial crisis has been a growing public conversation on the future of capitalism. Invariably, this conversation has had as one of its major axes the waning of European and U.S. economic power, and the rise of so-called BRICS nations to global prominence. This way of looking at things is predicated on the assumption that capitalism has historically had a center, and that this center has been the U.S. and Western Europe. Historians of the global south have had a long and varied tradition of contesting this center of gravity, proposing alternative viewpoints to any singular genitive account of what capitalism is, where it is located, and what exactly makes it global.

Our conference aims to address the one-sidedness of the recent European and U.S. historiographic turn to the “history of capitalism” by providing one of the first venues to direct comparative investigations of emergent scholarship on the history of capital in the non-west. Our conference assembles a range of scholars from across areas of study including Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East. Collectively, these projects attempt a reorientation to the study of capital in the non-west from earlier analyses that have focused on the extractive and destabilizing processes of accumulation within the antinomial framing of capitalism/empire and culture/community, to critical analyses that highlight the dynamic and contradictory reconfigurations of social and cultural practices in the non-west in and as a history of capitalism.

A central intellectual question framing the intervention of this conference is the status of political economy as a method for doing global history. Although the history of capitalism has animated many debates by scholars working in the global south, it was precisely earlier iterations of this history that gave rise to the postcolonial critique of political economy as an historical method. Our conference works substantively within the far-reaching implications of this critique, but seeks renewed interpretative engagement with political economy as a means of addressing historical questions raised by the political, economic and ecological crises of our present. If capital or capitalism can be used to describe or contextualize a broad range of phenomena from Accra to the Hejaz to Tokyo, we suggest there must be productive ground to explain the historically specific connections, structures and forms of social practice that render capital a relevant analytic of historical inquiry in the non-west. Here, we aim to locate the sustained relevance of categories such as the “global south” and the “non-west” not in preconceived geographies of difference, but as meaningful realities produced within the forms of order, patterns of accumulation and histories of domination integral to modern capitalism.

The Conference Organizers

Meghna Chaudhuri (New York University), Aaron Jakes (The New School), Emma Park (The New School), Matthew Shutzer (New York University)

CFP: The Pacific in the World, Harvard Graduate Student Conference on International History (March 22-23, 2018)

The organizing committee for the Harvard Graduate Student Conference on International History (Con-IH) invites graduate students to submit proposals for its eighteenth annual conference. This year’s theme is the Pacific in the World. The conference will take place at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts on March 22-23, 2018.

By geographic area, the Pacific Ocean is the largest in the world. It has been the site of unique ecological and environmental patterns, protracted political contestations, grand imperial dreams and diverse movements of resistance. It has facilitated the movement of labor and goods so foundational to contemporary international orders. Additionally, the Pacific World has been central to forging modern constructs of race, gender, and sexuality. Con-IH 18 will provide a forum for the discussion of cutting-edge studies that examine the multifaceted histories of the Pacific, and in the process, push the boundaries of international and global history, in terms of both content and methodology.

We welcome submissions that address one or more of the following themes, but the list is suggestive only:

  1. Indigeneity and Sovereignty
  2. Colonial Encounters and Empire
  3. The Economy
  4. Decolonization
  5. Race, Gender, and Labor
  6. War and Militarization
  7. Environmental and Climate History

We consider as an integral part of “The Pacific in the World” research that is situated in one or more of the following regions: the Pacific Islands and Oceania, East and Southeast Asia, North and South America, or any other part of the globe in contact with the Pacific Ocean, broadly defined. We especially welcome projects that integrates into Pacific history the areas and actors traditionally overlooked in histories of the Pacific, as well as those that adopt a comparative oceanic lens.

Accepted papers will be grouped for presentation within three or four panels each composed of graduate students and one faculty commentator for each presenter. Participation in Con-IH thus presents an unparalleled opportunity to engage in lively and lengthy discussions with an emerging cohort of researchers-in-training from around the world, as well as with faculty from Harvard and elsewhere.

Graduate students interested in participating in the conference should submit a 300-word proposal and one-page Curriculum Vitae (in either Word or PDF format) to conih@fas.harvard.edu. Proposals must be received by November 15, 2017 in order to be considered. We anticipate being able to reimburse reasonable travel and lodging expenses for all participants. As the date approaches, additional information will be posted on the conference website at con-ih.com.

Apply now to become an Editor-at-Large

Works of past interviewees

We welcome applications for the position of Editor-at-Large from graduate students and advanced undergraduates.

The Toynbee Prize Foundation’s Global History Blog features a mix of long-form interviews with global historians, historiographical pieces, and short-form material of interest to our readers: job posts, cross-postings from other blogs, and recently published articles.

Editors-at-Large will gain exposure to one of the most vibrant fields in the discipline today while staying up-to-date with current work in the field of global history. Most notably, they have the opportunity to interview pioneers of global history: from younger academics who have released innovative new works to more established intellectual trailblazers. Editors-at-Large either pitch their own interviews or are assigned interviews to undertake. Past interviewees include Susan Pedersen and Adam Tooze (Columbia University), Cemil Aydin (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill), Vanessa Ogle (University of California, Berkeley), William Rankin (Yale University), Seema Alavi (University of Delhi), and Sebastian Conrad (Freie Universität Berlin), among others. We are especially interested in interviewing scholars working on or located in the Global South.

To apply, send your CV and a brief description of your experience and interest to toynbeefoundation@gmail.com.

CFP: Bids for Autonomy in the Condition of Globality (Columbia University, 13-14 April 2018)

In the nineteenth century, globalization acquired a new intensity which has persisted until this day. As the world became more integrated and interconnected, successive attempts were made by states, peoples, social movements, religions, classes, corporations and regions to assert their autonomy against real and prospective forms of domination, discipline and uniformity imposed by exterior forces and actors. Resistance to globalization has not been an occasional irritant, but a constant presence around the world for more than two centuries. When not challenged outright, dissent has taken the forms of attempts to renegotiate the terms of global integration.

Yet the force of the global has consisted exactly in undermining the very possibility of fully autonomous development for human collectivities everywhere. This two-day conference will examine these bids for autonomy since the 1800s. It takes its inspiration from the work of Michael Geyer and Charles Bright, who in a series of groundbreaking essays since the late 1980s have advanced the idea of a ‘condition of globality’. What Geyer and Bright’s research agenda articulates is how to understand the intensification of
processes of globalization, world-making and global ordering from the mid-nineteenth century onward in their totality without reducing their concrete elements and components to discredited
deterministic master narratives such as Westernization, modernization, or homogenization.

How do we think and write world history in our current moment? How do we use the experience of the last two centuries of globality to articulate a philosophy of history that possesses intelligibility without teleology? The current historical conjuncture of 2007-2017—which is being interpreted in various ways as a backlash against globalization, a global crisis of populism, the breakdown of the post-WWII liberal international order, the end of the American Century—
poses this question with special force.

The conference invites scholars to contribute papers on specific bids for autonomy since 1800. Its aim is both to test and to criticize the globality framework, as well as to thicken it and to clarify some of its historiographical and philosophical implications. Papers can take the form of case studies examining the efforts of particular groups to resist, navigate, or negotiate globality, comparisons across societies or across time periods, or thematically-focused explorations of
important axes of globalization and their effects in particular parts of the world. These globalizing themes include, but are not limited to:

* industrial and agricultural production between interdependence and self-sufficiency
* the national politics of international finance
* the domestic sources of state power in the international sphere
* ideological self-assertion and reproduction
* military thinking and independence in armaments and raw material supply
* state-society and civil-military relations
* bids for intellectual, cultural and religious autonomy
* race and its (re)articulation in processes of globalization

The organizers hope to solicit papers covering every region of the globe and a variety of time periods over the last two centuries, and will gladly consider proposals from advanced graduate students to senior scholars. The two-day conference will consist partly of panel discussions of pre- circulated papers, and partly of curated, seminar-style discussions of pre-circulated readings.

Applicants should send their paper abstracts (max. 400 words) and a short CV (1 page) to bidsforautonomy2018@gmail.com by October 1, 2017. Invited participants will be notified by November.

The conference organizers: Ted Fertik (Yale, History), Nick Mulder (Columbia, History), Adam Tooze (Columbia History)

The organizers have set up a website (https://bidsforautonomy.wordpress.com/) where they will be posting relevant material and curating guest contributions in the run-up to the conference to stimulate an ongoing conversation about the history of attempts to recapture and reassert independence in the face of the global.

CFP: Contested Borders? Practising Empire, Nation and Region in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (London, 26-28 April 2018)

For scholars interested in the historical practice of belonging in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, please see the following call for papers. Abstracts are due by 16 October 2017:

 

Conference at the German Historical Institute London, 26–28 April 2018

Brexit, the Basque country, Kashmir – the drawing of social and spatial boundaries, the question of belonging, and the creation of identity are at the heart of many current debates. They are based on general political, social, and economic developments and the historical experience of individuals. This is why the drawing and negotiating of borders is a relevant topic for historical research. Although borders (are intended to) define geographical and cultural spaces and possibly also political communities, there is nothing ‘natural’ about them. Rather, they are the outcomes of specific historical conditions. Thus the emergence of the European nation-states and empires was accompanied not only by the drawing of borders, but also by the establishment of political and social borders, and boundaries relating to identity politics. Nation-states and empires, therefore, are seen as the central categories of European modernity and beyond. We argue, however, that processes that occurred before and beyond the creation of nation-states equally influenced inclusion and exclusion. The categories of belonging and non-belonging were created at (post)-imperial, national, regional, and local levels, and involved various actors. For some years, the social sciences have used ‘belonging’ as a productive concept in researching these processes of negotiation. At a theoretical level and as a methodological instrument, however, ‘belonging’ has not been clearly defined.

This conference intends systematically (1) to contribute to the definition of ‘belonging’ as a research concept, (2) to explore the region as a category of historical research, and (3) to combine regional analyses consistently with perspectives drawn from the nation-state and (post)imperialism, as has been repeatedly demanded in recent literature, (4) to contribute to overcoming a widely criticized ‘methodological nationalism’ via transregional and transnational approaches. We will examine how belonging is created, as well as instances of suppressed or prevented belonging, and the political, social, and personal hierarchies associated with them. How were inclusion and exclusion created? What role did the different forms of boundaries between empires, states, nations, and regions play? What actors were involved in the creation of belonging, in the drawing of borders, and in crossing them? Fractures, resistance, and interrogations can be used to reveal lines of conflict and demonstrate the elementary functioning of the politics of belonging, and the logic behind them. We are interested both in specific local/regional and state practices of belonging, and in the concepts inherent in them.

In the nineteenth century continental Europe was characterized by dynastic developments, a number of wars, and shifting boundaries that thus became, in part, ambiguous. Both the Franco-German border and the borders of (and within) the Habsburg monarchy and the Russian empire can be described as ‘entangled borderlands’ during this period. Their ambiguities had a considerable impact on the economy, politics, and social structure, and they were changed, among other things, by cross-border migrations. After the First World War the right of popular self-determi­nation placed the drawing of borders on to a new legal footing. In its specific application as a legal principle, this new instrument had varying and sometimes paradoxical effects on the negotiation of borders and nationality. This can be traced, for example, by looking at the British Empire, which from the outset was a complex system of hybrid affiliations. With the transition to the Commonwealth, the question of belonging was complicated in a new way, for example, when India had to position itself between ‘Western values’ and non-aligned status, or when newly created republics in Africa were represented by the Queen along with the monarchies of the Commonwealth. Moreover, (sociological and ethnographic) research on migration and citizenship is increasingly examining these everyday processes of negotiation and focusing on its actors (migrants, marginalized groups, civil society, authorities etc.).

On the basis of (comparative) case studies of border regions and the processes of drawing and crossing borders in Europe, in the British Empire/Commonwealth and beyond, during the conference the concept of belonging is applied to historical research, theoretically and methodologically, at micro-level, meso-level, and macro-level, while existing research on nationalism is expanded by transregional and post-imperial perspectives. In order to pursue the questions outlined above, we would like contributions from the following subject areas and or related topics:

central terms and concepts: (1) transnational, transregional, and translocal approaches in historical research; (2) belonging and the politics of belonging in historical research;
(non‑)belonging, exclusion, and inclusion in colonial and de-colonialized contexts;
contemporary descriptions, treatment, and practices of regions, nation-states, and empires in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries and their different functions;
the representation, emotionalization, and politicization of empire, nation-state, and region;
the creation of spatial, social, and political borders and border-crossings;
social inequalities and belonging (migration, marginalized groups);
agency and actors in these processes.

Confirmed keynote speakers are Floya Anthias (London) and Philip Murphy (London). We are planning to have sections on, among other things, transnational and transregional case studies, constructions of difference, representations, and (post)colonial history.

The conference ‘Contested Borders? Practising Empire, Nation and Region in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries’ is intended to discuss current research questions with the help of case studies and theoretical-methodological works, and to explore the overarching themes, narratives, and perspectives of research as a whole. In order to make the discussions more intense, participants will be asked to submit their papers (maximum 3,000 words) before the conference, by 2 April 2018. Each paper will then be sent to a commentator. All participants are asked to take on the role of a commentator and chair a panel.

Please email suggestions for papers not to exceed 25 minutes in length along with an abstract (maximum 500 words) and a brief biography including main publications (maximum 1 page) to reach Levke Harders (levke.harders@uni-bielefeld.de) and Falko Schnicke (schnicke@ghil.ac.uk) by 16 October 2017. The German Historical Institute London will reimburse travel and accommodation costs for speakers.

A reviewed English-language publication of selected papers is envisaged, so we ask for original contributions only.

Contact Info:
Dr Levke Harders (Bielefeld University, levke.harders@uni-bielefeld.de); Dr Falko Schnicke (German Historical Institute London, schnicke@ghil.ac.uk)

Contact Email: levke.harders@uni-bielefeld.de

Call for Contributions: Global South Studies

Global South Studies, a digital platform sponsored by the Global South journal, is soliciting contributions. See Dr. Anne Garland Mahler’s introduction to the Global South heuristic here (and excerpted below):

The Global South as a critical concept has three primary definitions. First, it has traditionally been used within intergovernmental development organizations –– primarily those that originated in the Non-Aligned Movement­ ­–– to refer to economically disadvantaged nation-states and as a post-cold war alternative to “Third World.” However, in recent years and within a variety of fields, the Global South is employed in a post-national sense to address spaces and peoples negatively impacted by contemporary capitalist globalization.

In this second definition, the Global South captures a deterritorialized geography of capitalism’s externalities and means to account for subjugated peoples within the borders of wealthier countries, such that there are economic Souths in the geographic North and Norths in the geographic South. While this usage relies on a longer tradition of analysis of the North’s geographic Souths­ ­–– wherein the South represents an internal periphery and subaltern relational position –– the epithet “global” is used to unhinge the South from a one-to-one relation to geography.

It is through this deterritorial conceptualization that a third meaning is attributed to the Global South in which it refers to the resistant imaginary of a transnational political subject that results from a shared experience of subjugation under contemporary global capitalism. This subject is forged when the world’s “Souths” recognize one another and view their conditions as shared (López 2007; Prashad 2012). The use of the Global South to refer to a political subjectivity draws from the rhetoric of the so-called Third World Project, or the non-aligned and radical internationalist discourses of the cold war. In this sense, the Global South may productively be considered a direct response to the category of postcoloniality in that it captures both a political collectivity and ideological formulation that arises from lateral solidarities among the world’s multiple Souths and moves beyond the analysis of the operation of power through colonial difference towards networked theories of power within contemporary global capitalism.

Critical scholarship that falls under the rubric of Global South Studies is invested in the analysis of the formation of a Global South subjectivity, the study of power and racialization within global capitalism in ways that transcend the nation-state as the unit of comparative analysis, and in tracing both contemporary South-South relations –– or relations among subaltern groups across national, linguistic, racial, and ethnic lines –– as well as the histories of those relations in prior forms of South-South exchange.