Coloniality of Power, Eurocentrism, and Latin America

1 ColonialityofPower, Eurocentrism, andLatin AmericaAnibalQuijanoWhatistermedglobaliz ationisthecul-minationofaprocessthatbega nwiththeconstitutionofAmericaandcolo- spopulationaroundtheideaofrace,amentalco nstructionthatex-pressesthebasicexperien ceofcolonialdominationandpervadesthemore importantdimensionsofglobalpower, , , , , race, , ,thepopulationofAmerica,andlatertheworld , ,slavery,serfdom,smallindependentcommodi typro-ductionandreciprocity, :AMentalCategoryofModernityTheideaofrace ,initsmodernmeaning, , Indians,blacks,andmestizos ,andmuchlaterEuropean,whichuntilthenindi catedonlygeographicoriginorcountryoforig in, ,suchidentitieswereconsideredconstitutiv eofthehierarchies,places,andcorrespondin gsocialroles, , ,thecolonizerscodifiedthephenotypictrait ofthecolonizedascolor, ,sincetheprincipalpartoftheeconomyrested ontheirlabor.

2 Theywere,aboveall,themostimportantcoloni zedrace, white , ,thesubsequentconstitutionofEuropeasanew id-entityneededtheelabora-tionofaEurocen tricperspectiveofknowledge, ,Eurocentrism, , ,thisprinciplehasproventobethemosteffect iveandlong-lastinginstrumentofuniversals ocialdomination,sincethemucholderprincip le genderorin-tersexualdomination ,asaresult, ,racebecamethefundamentalcriterionforthe distributionoftheworldpopulationintorank s,places,androlesinthenewsociety ,theNewStructurefortheControlofLaborInth ehistoricalprocessoftheconstitutionofAme rica,allformsofcontrolandexploitationofl aborandproduction,aswellasthecontrolofap pro-priationanddistributionofproducts, ,serfdom,petty-commodityproduction,recip rocity, , :inthefirstplace,becausetheyweredelibera telyestab-lishedandorganizedtoproducecom moditiesfortheworldmarket.

3 Inthesecondplace,becausetheydidnotmerely existsimultaneouslyinthesamespace/time, , ,theplaceandfunction,andthereforethehist oricalmovement,ofallformsoflaborassubord inatedpointsofatotalitybelongedtothenewm odelofpower, ,andasaconsequence, ,resources,andproductsconsistedofthejoin tarticulationofalltherespectivehistorica llyknownforms, , ,original,andsingularstructure536 ,bothraceandthedivisionoflaborremainedst ructurallylinkedandmutuallyreinforcing, , , ,theancientpracticeofreciprocity theexchangeoflaborforceandlaborwith-outa market ,theIndiannobility,areducedminority, , ,SpanishandPortuguesewhitescouldreceivew ages,beindependentmerchants,independenta rtisans,orindependentfarmers inshort, , ,inHispanicAmericaanex-tensiveandimporta ntsocialstratumofmestizos(bornofSpanishm enandIndianwomen) ,andaboveallinactivitiesofserviceorthose thatrequiredaspecializedtalent(music,for example),themore whitened , (or,fromtheeighteenthcenturyonward,Europ eans)

4 , , , Eurocentrism, andLatinAmericaidentitiesw ereproduced:yellowsandoliveswereaddedtow hites,Indians,blacks, ,ashadbeendonesosuccessfullyinAnglo-Amer ica, ,aboveall,throughaquasi-exclusiveassocia tionofwhitenesswithwagesand,ofcourse, ,thecontrolofaspecificformoflaborcouldbe ,atthesametime, ,inthiscaserace/labor, , ,silver,andothercommoditiesproducedbythe unpaidlaborofIndians,blacks,andmestizos( coupledwithanadvantageouslocationinthesl opeoftheAtlanticthroughwhich,necessarily ,thetrafficofthesecommoditiesfortheworld markethadtopass)

5 ,aswellasthecontrolofsuchlargeresources, madepossiblethecontrolofthevastpreexisti ngwebofcom-mercialexchangethatincluded,a boveall,China,India,Ceylon,Egypt,Syria ,labor, ,and,consequently, :Europe morespecifically, ,untilthenineteenthcenturyandvirtuallyun tiltheworldwidecrisisof1870,thecentralsi teoftheprocessofthecommodificationofthel aborforce, , , ,orinthemechanismsoftheworldmarketingene ral,thatimpliesthehistoricalnecessityofE uropeanconcentrationfirst(eitherinEurope orelsewhere)ofwagedlaborandlater(overpre ciselythesamebase)

6 ,WesternEuropeancontrolofwagelaborinanys ectoroftheworld spopulationwouldhavebeenperfectlyfeasibl e, ,then, ,Europeansassociatednonpaidornonwagedlab orwiththedom-inatedracesbecausetheywere inferior , , , ,however,becomparedwithfeudalserfdominEu rope,sinceitincludedneitherthesupposedpr otectionofafeudallordnor,necessarily, ,theIndianlaborforceofserfsreproducedits elfinthecommunities,butmorethanonehundre dyearsafterindependence, , Eurocentrism, andLatinAmericaunwagedor,s implyput,unpaidlabor,slavery,wasassigned exclusivelytothe black ,unwagedlabordevelopedamongtheEuropeanst hesingularperceptionthatpaidlaborwasthew hites ,tothisveryday, ,thelowerwages inferiorraces receiveinthepresentcapitalistcentersfort hesameworkasdonebywhitescannotbeexplaine dasdetachedfromtheracistsocialclassifica tionoftheworld spopulation inotherwords, , ,basedonfirsttheassignmentofallformsofun paidlabortocolonialraces(originallyAmeri canIndians,blacks,and,inamorecomplexway, mesti-zos)

7 InAmericaand,lateron,totheremainingcolon izedracesintherestoftheworld, , ,itdeterminedthesocialgeographyofcapital ism:capital,asasocialformationforcontrol ofwagelabor,wastheaxisaroundwhichallrema iningformsoflaborcontrol,resources, ,atthesametime,capital sspecificsocialconfigurationwasgeographi -callyandsociallyconcentratedinEuropeand ,aboveall, , lPrebischcoinedthecelebratedimageofcente randperipherytodescribetheconfigurationo fglobalcapitalismsincetheendofWorldWarII ,heunderscored,withorwithoutbeingawareof it,thenucleusofthehistoricalmodelforthec ontroloflabor,resources,andprod-uctsthat shapedthecentralpartofthenewglobalmodelo fpower.

8 Fromthenon, ,theconceptofa modernworld-system itself,developedprincipallybyIm-manuelWa llerstein(1974 89;HopkinsandWallerstein1982)butbasedonP rebischandontheMarxianconceptofworldcapi talism, ,Europenotonlyhadcontroloftheworldmarket ,butitwasalsoabletoimposeitscolonialdomi nanceoveralltheregionsandpopulationsofth eplanet, ,thismodelofpowerinvolvedaprocessofhisto ricalreidentification; ,afterAmericaandEuropewereestablished,Af rica,Asia, ,thecolonialityofthenewmodelofpowerwas,w ithoutadoubt, ,andmorespecificallyintellectualdevelopm ent, ,thecategory Orient wouldnothavebeenelaboratedastheonlyonewi thsufficientdignitytobetheothertothe Occident, althoughbydefinitioninferior,withoutsome equivalentto Indians or blacks , ,alloftheexperiences,histories,resources , shegemonyoverthenewmodelofglobalpowercon centratedallformsofthecontrolofsubjectiv ity,cul-ture, , ,Eurocentrism.

9 AndLatinAmericatheregionsandpeoplesofthe world, , ,theyrepressedasmuchaspossiblethecoloniz edformsofknowledgeproduction,themodelsof theproductionofmeaning,theirsymbolicuniv erse, ,repressioninthisfieldwasmostviolent,pro found,andlonglastingamongtheIndiansofIbe ro- America , ,therepressionwasmuchlessintenseinAsia, Orient. Third,indifferentwaysineachcase,theyforc edthecolonizedtolearnthedominantculturei nanywaythatwouldbeusefultothereproductio nofdomination,whetherinthefieldoftechnol ogyandmaterialactivityorsubjectivity, ,modesofproducingandgivingmeaning,theres ultsofmaterialexistence,theimaginary,the universeofintersubjectiverelationswithth eworld.

10 Inshort, ,accordingtoWallerstein ssuitableformulation,de-velopedwithinthe Europeansatraitcommontoallcolonialdomina torsandimperialists, , ,but,inparticular, ,butaboveallwithrespecttotheintersub-jec tiverelationsthatwerehegemonic,andespeci allyforitsperspectiveonknowledge:theEuro peansgeneratedanewtemporalperspectiveofh istoryandrelocatedthecolonizedpopulation ,alongwiththeirrespectivehistoriesandcul tures,inthepastofahistoricaltrajectorywh oseculminationwasEurope(Mignolo1995;Blau t1993;Lander1997).Notably,however,theywe renotinthesamelineofcontinuityastheEurop eans,butinanother, ,inter-subjectiveandculturalrelationsbet weenWesternEuropeandtherestoftheworldwer ecodifiedinastrongplayofnewcategories:Ea st-West,primitive-civilized,magic/mythic -scientific,irrational-rational,traditio nal-modern ,theonlycategorywiththehonorofbeingrecog nizedastheotherofEuropeandtheWestwas Orient nottheIndiansofAmericaandnottheblacksofA frica,whoweresimply primitive.