Colonial social imaginaries were mutually productive with specific sentiments

Evidence

Fewer have pursued a key correlate: such senses of the social were productive of, and produced by, specific sentiments that were fundamental to the vocabulary of colonial states, and as consequential as was the imperative of “reason” to a “modern-day sense of polity.” — Ann Laura Stoler, Along the Archival Grain_ Epistemic…, 357

Categorization

Category: Causal Relationships

• XREF: Reciprocal production of social imaginary and sentiment parallels the figure-ground relationship of soundscape theory and the constitutive-received dialectic in communication studies.

Related

• Colonial state vocabularies were built on sentiments, not just reason (similarity 0.87)
• Colonial authorities understood sentiment’s governance role before scholars did (similarity 0.83)
• Colonial officials generated transnational social categories through anxious analogies among colonies (similarity 0.81)
• Colonial political contexts generated rather than absorbed philosophical questions (similarity 0.81)
• Colonial sensibilities remain poorly understood despite scholarly confidence otherwise (similarity 0.80)
• Colonial regimes deliberately cultivated habits and redirected sentiments, a neglected topic. (similarity 0.80)
• Colonial fears centered durable resentments rather than momentary passions (similarity 0.80)
• Affective criteria silently indexed social origins within racialized colonial hierarchies. (similarity 0.79)
• Colonial sentiment discipline targeted colonizers themselves, not only the colonized (similarity 0.79)
• Colonial welfare visions managed sentiment as closely as labor. (similarity 0.79)
• Colonial report narratives steered political conclusions via their cultural framing. (similarity 0.79)
• Colonial authorities feared steady sensibilities more than emotional outbursts (similarity 0.78)
• Affective ties between colonizers and colonized were empire’s core, not its fringe (similarity 0.78)