РАЗГОВОР О НЕКЛАССИЧЕСКОМ КОЛОНИАЛИЗМЕ – Ii БЛИЦ-ИНТЕРВЬЮ С ЯНОМ КЕНЕВИЧЕМ

Abstract

SUMMARY: Marina Mogilner (MM) points out to Jan Kinewicz (JK) that his key categories such as intelligentsia and civilizational pressure do not exclude “colonialist” interpretation. Yet, these categories remain limited to East European intellectuals and do not feature prominently in postcolonial critiques. Kinewicz responds that he does not consider postcolonial studies particularly useful for East European studies because each society responds to domination in a particular way. “Eastern Europe” is not a geographic category, and East European peoples seek their identification within Europe, whereas postcolonial studies describe the subjugation of non-European societies by Europeans. MM asks about the compatibility of the “civilizational approach,” which became prominent in post-Soviet Russia, with postcolonial studies. JK responds that unlike adherents to the civilizational approach in Russia he does not believe in the closed civilizations that correspond to nations. He suggests “culture circles” may be a better term. MM asks if democratic society based on the principles of nationhood is the only form of social and political organization that would not be perceived as “alien” or “imposed” by the Polish intelligentsia? Such a question follows from JK’s interpretation, in which the Polish intelligentsia is described as experiencing “civilizational pressures” from the Russian empire and the Polish socialist regime. JK points out that the ruling party in socialist Poland widely used nationalist discourse yet it remained an alien regime for the intelligentsia due to its dependence on the outside force. At the same time, he suggests that democratic society, which the intelligentsia demands, drastically reduces the intelligentsia’s ability to influence authorities, which he sees as the intelligentsia’s major – and universal – dilemma. MM asks JK about his opinion of the concept of the “Second World.” He responds that he views it with cautious interest. He points out the Cold War origins of the term and suggests that its use may be reductionist (e.g., nationalized economies of the socialist camp). He also raises doubts about the use of the concept by Maksim Waldstein (in Ab Imperio 1/2010) and suggests that there may be potential for discussion in comparing Soviet domination to the colonial British empire, especially as it compels one to review East European history.