| Summary/Abstract |
One of the most outstanding historical developments of the twentieth century was the gaining of national independence from imperial rule by most of the formerly colonized countries, especially in Africa, Asia and the Pacific. Yet, rather surprisingly, many of the leading contributors to postcolonial theory, including Edward Said, Gayatri Spivak, Homi Bhabha and others, tend to minimize the significance of national independence and take a dim view of the nationalist movements, leaders and ideologies that struggled for it. The aim of this article is to probe the reasons for this, canvassing postcolonial theorists’ main arguments and outlining certain intellectual currents and commitments, notably poststructuralism, deconstruction and postmodernism, that have contributed to these negative stances. Some counterarguments are presented, as it is suggested that the achievements of nationalist revolutions in the former colonies should be reassessed more favourably. This could be a way of resisting the current hegemonic power of the ideology of globalization.
|