Crossing the imperial divide enables critique that maintains barriers cannot produce

Evidence

Beginning in the twenties, and from one end of the Third World to the other, the response to empire and imperialism has been dialectical. By the time of the Bandung Conference in 1955 the entire Orient had gained its political independence from the Western empires and confronted a new configuration of imperial powers, the United States and the Soviet Union. Unable to recognize “its” Orient in the new Third World, Orientalism now faced a challenging and politically armed Orient. Two alternatives opened before Orientalism. One was to carry on as if nothing had happened. The second was to adapt the old ways to the new. But to the Orientalist, who believes the Orient never changes, the new is simply the old betrayed by new, misunderstanding dis-Orientals (we can permit ourselves the neologism). — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 293 (#exemplifies, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Orientalism’s paradigms confirm rather than contest imperial domination; Ideological critique alone cannot resolve; only revolutionary praxis can; Decolonization confronted Orientalism with a politically armed Orient it could not recognize — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 293

Related

• Decolonization confronted Orientalism with a politically armed Orient it could not recognize (similarity 0.91)
• Interwar decolonization struggles made the Orient a challenge to Western spirit and imperium (similarity 0.84)
• Orientalism persists by being internalized by the Orient itself and by new imperialism (similarity 0.84)
• Orientalist ideas can circulate without imperial power structures (similarity 0.84)
• Postwar postcolonial critiques transformed Orientalism’s meaning from scholarship into ideology of empire (similarity 0.83)
• Post-1945 critics transformed Orientalism from scholarship into a concept of imperial institution (similarity 0.83)
• Orientalism rose as colonial-control ideology under British capitalist imperialism (similarity 0.83)
• Orientalism’s totalizing discourse critique erases all sites of resistance and liberation (similarity 0.82)
• Generalizing knowledge-power critique would erase Orientalism’s special status (similarity 0.82)
• Anti-colonial movements disproved the mosque-state-fusion Orientalist stereotype (similarity 0.82)
• Orientalism’s intent was critique, not affirmation of antithetical identities (similarity 0.82)
• Orientalism rests on a fixed distinction between Western superiority and Oriental inferiority (similarity 0.82)
• Western cultural discourse about the Orient is a formidable structure of domination. (similarity 0.82)
• Orientalism expanded from scholarly practice to signify imperialist ideology (similarity 0.82)
• Orientalist scholarship is inseparable from imperial power and its orthodox attitudes (similarity 0.82)

Broader Connections

• Decolonization confronted Orientalism with a politically armed Orient it could not recognize #exemplifies (0.80) — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 293
• Orientalism’s paradigms confirm rather than contest imperial domination #exemplifies (0.75)
• Ideological critique alone cannot resolve; only revolutionary praxis can #qualifies (0.72)