The need for (re)evaluation of postcolonial studies is currently on the intellectual scene at the cultural / postcolonial studies departments in Western universities. The eruption of cultural studies and postcolonial theories in the decade of the 1990s have not only brought a Tsunami in the humanities and social sciences programs across Western and non-Western universities, but have also changed our respective views on the orient and the occident. Certainly the West is forced to see what is wrong in its colonialism and imperialism, its slavery and genocide, its anti-Semitism and oppression of women, its suppression of minorities, homosexuals and the working classes, its destruction and insensitivity to indigenous cultural forms of life all over the world, and its cruel abuse of other cultural traditions and values. The surge goes on with a more vibrant ring in non-Western locations. People in the non-Western countries began to dig out their cultural pasts and to attempt to see the germs of colonialism and recent day's imperialism polluting their history, cultural and essential identity. From Conrad's Heart of Darkness to Foucault's History of Sexuality, from Darwin's The Origin of Species to Nietzsche's The Will to Power, they tried to trace the stereotypes and exclusive ideology embedded in the textual practices of the writers of colonial countries. All this development can certainly be understood as a positive phenomenon, which has not only challenged Western values as universal but has also set our identity in the decolonialized process in order to regain our essential identities and cultural values. Despite all these positive developments, the further initiative, as it appears to me, postcolonial studies ought to make (which it has not sufficiently done so far) is to encourage the people of non-Western countries in taking initiative for the nation-building and making them properly reread their cultural past more in self-referential terms--in terms of their own cultural achievements--striving towards their [true] identities. What we need more today is to rebuild our nations politically, economically, socially and culturally, rather than just decolonization. I mean, at least we cannot overshadow our former necessity with the latter. They can go together, but it is sad to say that we have not paid sufficient attention to nation-building. We preach for decolonization, but do not think about national (re)building. Our unstable political systems, superstitious belief systems, and cultural values are more responsible for our condition in some ways than the West's colonial exploitation. Therefore the causes of our backwardness are not wholly outside of us; they are more within us. Postcolonial studies now has to turn inward. So far it has more or less turned outward looking for causes of the impoverished situation and eclipsed identity of non-Western peoples. Also, our identities can be properly defined in self-referential values than by projecting them toward 'other.' We are not thereby good because others are evil. We are good (or evil) because historical testimonies establish and support our goodness--or do not. In this regard, I see an ingrained herd morality behind the postcolonial theoretical orientation, which is required to rethink after/beyond postcolonialism. As Nietzsche says, herds define themselves in terms of what others are: "You are evil, therefore I am good." To read it in terms of colonizer and colonialized for the present purpose we can say that it is our herd mentality that inclines us to say you are a colonialist, therefore I am a colonized (You are the cause, therefore I am the effect). I am what you made me. To elaborate with a popular illustration, I drink your Coca Cola and eat McDonalds, and the denounce it as an imperialist cococolization and mcdonaldization of me. But I cannot produce the drinks tastier than those you produce. I love to consume your drinks, emptying my pockets, and since your drinks empty my pocket you are an imperialist. …
Read full abstract