Nehru barred imperialist-critique discussion at Bandung as a governmental gathering

Evidence

The actual activities of the imperialist countries could not be discussed in the sessions of the Conference because it was a Conference of governments, Nehru said emphatically, to general approval. It was not proper, he said, for representatives of governments to discuss the policies of governments of those other states which were also members of the United Nations; no one, of course, controlled the informal discussions. None of the senses in which the term ‘Third World’ is now used – non-alignment, a global space other than capitalism and socialism, the tricontinent – would apply to this event. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 559

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s knowledge of postcolonial diplomacy and the gap between rhetorical and actual state practice — parallels the ‘states vs peoples’ theme in the law-merchant work on constituted vs grassroots institutions. — connects to: Neoliberal intellectuals saw Bandung as a resource against Western colonialism — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 275; Cold War superpower rivalry froze UN membership and pushed new states to Bandung. — Philip Mirowski & Dieter Plehwe (eds.), The Road from Mont Pèlerin: The Making…, 1293

Related

• Bandung was not an expression of abstract Third-World nationalism (similarity 0.86)
• Neoliberal intellectuals saw Bandung as a resource against Western colonialism (similarity 0.81)
• No current meaning of Third World applies to Bandung Conference (similarity 0.81)
• Cold War superpower rivalry froze UN membership and pushed new states to Bandung. (similarity 0.78)