Neo-imperial domination now operates through ideological consent, not military force

Evidence

A more reasonable construal of the term takes its prefix in less cavalier fashion, to denote a historical period where decolonization has indeed occurred, but neo-imperial domination persists — no longer directly based on military force, but on forms of ideological consent that call for new kinds of political and cultural resistance. This version of the idea of postcolonialism clearly reflects more of the reality of the contemporary world, even if the second sign in the term still misses part of its target, since such major states as China — the specific object of this reinterpretation — or Iran were never colonized, and most of Latin America ceased to be so nearly two centuries ago. — Perry Anderson, The Origins of Postmodernity, 282

Categorization

• DEFINE: Offers the more defensible definition of postcolonialism: decolonization achieved but neo-imperial domination persisting via consent.
• XREF: Echoes Gramscian hegemony and the contemporary debate over informal empire and cultural consent in the modern system. — connects to: Imperial domination operates through seduction and consent; Domination operates through consent won by leadership, not force alone; Hegemony is not the same thing as ideological domination — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 755 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Imperial domination operates through seduction and consent #corroborates (0.92)
• Hegemony via consent, not domination, gives Orientalism its durability and strength #corroborates (0.85)
• Hegemony is not the same thing as ideological domination #complicates (0.80) — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 755
• Domination operates through consent won by leadership, not force alone #corroborates (0.78)
• Normal parliamentary hegemony pairs force with consent so force appears majority-backed #qualifies (0.72)