Provincializing Frankfurt: A Postcolonial Rereading of Habermasian Theory

The terms postcolonialism and decoloniality are used for a wide variety of critical theories that have one premise in common: the conviction that the world as we know it has been shaped by European colonialism, that it continues to be shaped by colonialism's post- or neocolonial afterlife, and that this process is violent, oppressive, and should come to an end—a constellation for which Quijano (2007) coined the term coloniality. In this article, I will refer to all these approaches collectively as postcolonial critique.1 The implications postcolonial critique has for political theory and its methodology have already been discussed by various authors (e.g., Kerner 2018, 2022, 2024; Dhawan 2014). In this article, I build on their works but pursue a question that is much narrower but at the same time goes somewhat further. I not only discuss what aspects of mainstream theories appear to be “critical” from a postcolonial perspective, but I also use a specific example to explain what should be done with these theories once they have been subjected to postcolonial critique: Should we still read them, and if so, how? How should they be altered? And to what extent can they still be useful? As an example for this discussion, I choose Habermasian theory. I do so for two reasons. The first reason derives from the theory itself, namely, from the proximity between postcolonial critique and critical theory (Kerner 2018, 617–623). This proximity raises hope for fruitful engagement. The second reason is more subjective and idiosyncratic. Being socialized in Habermasian theory and willing to take postcolonial critique seriously, I want to find out what I should do with the critical theory I inherited. I mention this reference to a subjective and idiosyncratic motivation to avoid a possible misleading impression: I do not want to suggest that the quest for a postcolonial rereading of Habermasian theory is among the prime concerns of postcolonial critique. It is not. Nevertheless, postcolonial theory can be read with this question in mind—as I argue with fruitful results. The remainder of the article consists of four sections. I begin by sketching the two aspects that seem most critical about mainstream political theory from a postcolonial perspective: first, the entanglement between the discourse of emancipation and the discourse of inequality in the Western tradition, and second, the ethnocentric treatment of global heterogeneity (Section 2). I then go on to deliver a sketch of Habermasian theory and lay out which aspects of this theory could appear critical from a postcolonial perspective (Section 3). Next, I present four types of postcolonial critique. These are the minimally invasive approach of selective historicization (Section 4.1), Amy Allen's notion of decolonization as a return to metanormative contextualism (Section 4.2), Walter Mignolo's notion of decolonization as border thinking and decoupling (Section 4.3), and a conception of provincialization found in the works of Gayatri Spivak, Dipesh Chakrabarty, and Paul Gilroy (Section 4.4). Because the latter approach calls for a thorough rereading of Western texts, the article ends with such a discussion of Habermasian theory, naming six steps that should be taken to provincialize Frankfurt and make critical theory better suited to deal with postcolonial heterogeneity (Section 5). The relationship between postcolonial critique on the one side and the different universalist theories from the Western tradition on the other side is a complicated one. Both sides avowedly pursue a fundamental critique of domination and strive for the self-determination of all human beings. Hence, some postcolonial critics regularly make positive references to the “universals enshrined in post-Enlightenment rationalism or humanism” (Chakrabarty 2007, 70). Yet, the relationship gets complicated, mainly due to two factors. The first is the fact that the very same theoretical tradition that produced these universalisms has been entangled with colonial domination and its legitimation. Some of the very same normative theories that promote the universal self-determination of free and equal human beings are closely linked to anthropological theories of inequality that assert essential differences between human groups and thereby explicitly or implicitly contribute to the justification of unequal treatment and (colonial) domination. I will refer to the former as the discourse of emancipation and the latter as the discourse of inequality. One of the first steps the postcolonial critique of mainstream theory usually takes is to show that prominent theorists of the discourse of emancipation, such as John Locke, John Stuart Mill, or Immanuel Kant, also contributed to the discourse of inequality, proving that both discourses are entangled (Eze 1997a, 1997b; Mills 1999; McCarthy 2009, 25–27; Quijano 2007). Thus, the question arises: What consequences should this entanglement have for the way we read these historical works and their more recent successor theories? The second factor complicating the relationship between postcolonial critique and the universalist theories from the Western tradition is the ethnocentric and ignorant treatment of global heterogeneity within many of these theories. Two axes of heterogeneity are relevant here; each is associated with a geographical metaphor that should not be taken too literally. The West/non-West to the of and among which the Western is one. to the postcolonial of this heterogeneity is the that among other an and process in which the Western tradition other or Quijano 2014). The global on the other to differences produced by The former colonial as as the that from their are to as the global the are to as the global heterogeneity should be in but is heterogeneity on both the one a heterogeneity of with a that and by but which continues to on the other a heterogeneity of produced by and its post- or neocolonial Both axes with each an heterogeneity of The and the to a which is I will refer to as the both are both postcolonial critique to a among mainstream theories to a as that are on the and of the to be theories of or in This not only the the but also the fact that an of and the of is at the same time and as the appear at all in the theoretical they regularly do so in the of that as the of a other that the of the The are usually as and in the which to the justification of a domination This is regularly linked to a conception of human or in which the is the most due to its the or are in As the are this with the of in which have from so that that have been appear to be Kerner 2022, global heterogeneity these two some to be is a that the and are as that are on the to the from one and postcolonial critique has been that the is the and that are by and heterogeneity should not be as a of postcolonial critique to global it is not about a on a but about of inequality that have been shaped by of domination and Quijano 2007). the between global and global should not be with a between the and the Both sides are by within the are and have been an of postcolonial the between and is all but only the of the One should these in but it to for the heterogeneity of the postcolonial world on both axes a for the discussion of the consequences such postcolonial should have for this a sketch of Habermasian theory and then the aspects that are the most of postcolonial critique. the theory takes the of of with a universalist and normative notion of reason with a conception of historical as a process and a of historical The normative of this conception is by the linked of and derives the of reason from a discussion of the of These can be and then be in The use of to an of or that to is the of human The of the is from the of and and to the to The is the of the and These which usually in the of can the of of or that are usually taken for can be and then by more and a of the that can be as a This conception of and is in the theory of and and works to this the of reason and the of historical as a process of and the normative of Habermasian theory. The of reason on an that some to the to and the of an they implicitly the conception of The of and to this that reason as the normative to the of and this is not or This that is not but in historical theory on these be It to the of an more and an more This in the question of this on not avoid such the of as a the of as a The of as a from the perspective, that as it to the as the of The of as a from the perspective, that as it from the of as a that be both and the relationship between both is with as to the of as be the same the in which this is can to as to it be that be or that be Hence, is or we do not in on then goes on to sketch a of in as and as a very of namely, or a and The are by of between and as as within each of In the of as is by the of two and that are from the and These a from the of the process of thereby a of that this process is but in by and that is a historical process in these that can be as a process of goes on to a political theory of the as a of and that is on a of this aspects of this conception seem the of postcolonial they are on the specific of postcolonial critique as I discuss in to have out a universal conception of and emancipation postcolonial that only have a from one tradition the fact that theory of in to the of historical as a process of and is an for postcolonial critique. historical is to to be with the of in all too of the theories of historical at the of the entanglement between the discourse of emancipation and the discourse of inequality 2007, theory of and on of that can be read as a of the historical discourse of inequality in the are found in the first two of the of In an on the of reason and the of the to the of of to this is the that the of the other are the of In discussion of historical on of the that already more at the time and which with more recent the the to in the and on the by the fact taken the of and a the or of as are a of postcolonial critique theory is as a theory of and political theory as a political theory of and the same both are to and The heterogeneity of the postcolonial world is of theory by postcolonial critique and at all in only prominent is as a In the of the by its and the of not discuss the of most the world by European its consequences for in and and the of it The extent to which each of these aspects is as as the implications this has for the Habermasian approach in on the specific of postcolonial critique that is some the are and only of the from other the are fundamental and make approach In this I four of with postcolonial in and political theories. The first way of with postcolonial is minimally invasive and consists of an to the discourse of emancipation from the discourse of inequality, the former and the The entanglement with the discourse of inequality is then as an of historical that not the of the discourse of of the discourse of inequality or the justification of colonial one in the of a from the discourse of emancipation are then as an to the of their theory. This can be and the which is This minimally invasive approach is usually not by postcolonial critics but in to postcolonial to of and one to such an approach to the Habermasian one that are some that seem by but the The approach of and theories is in are at or this approach can only be if the aspects are of inequality that are as one not know which to could one that of the theory these aspects This the in and human (Eze 1997b; McCarthy 2009, are that have more the of the and that the European a for other a of but are not as and is can be used to and the that such an will only In other and historicization is only a if the between the discourse of emancipation and the discourse of inequality is the latter a for the so that the former the then and be and the of the is not a This can also be by the in the works of and In the the on the one side and the relevant normative theories on the other side are found in different Thus, one can make a for the of the In the discussion of the and the of the of different can be found in the and have a for the theory of and the of as a process of from the theoretical the selective of a from the discourse of inequality with a that theory itself, the of and postcolonial only by of selective the to postcolonial be to a of the normative that their and a in the very same that at the very same time it Some postcolonial critics such an as an It is for this reason that that the former colonial can only if they an equal by of a by of the question of the entanglement between the discourses of emancipation and inequality is or the continues to have The second way of with postcolonial in theory can be found in Amy Allen's The of the of to most other postcolonial in this article, at as one of its And a in critical theory with Allen's critique is among the most It is the to lay out the normative of critical theory as it by and by and each of a the entanglement between the discourse of emancipation and the discourse of inequality is not Hence, it a critical theorists the of these entangled discourses by normative in a or that both and in fact all to normative are ethnocentric and colonial on the of of reason as and then this conception of reason as a for normative the that such an can only a way of thinking as on the other the historical of as the of universal which also the of make both the of (colonial) domination as and one could of this perspective, of both justification is and is entangled in colonial thinking at its normative all aspects seem normative to be of other and as is one of this and is not but essential to theory. Allen's is critique of universalist rationalism is a and not a that and the of a and that this has been time and this not that reason not or that it be an of domination. a to the question by the theories How can critical theory its critical can the question to it by to a of with that by critique or metanormative contextualism theory then have to take the normative in a their and in with a more As an to the of emancipation in to the a from their that is fundamental but the of they for and contributed to its Hence, critical theory can this as and in with these the should critique take the of as its reference and not some other such as that The latter can also be as fundamental of the same that are only a or that these and for their not be as an of critique and an of as emancipation This raises the that Allen's critique only to be in fact on that not for in to avoid the of One could argue that critical theory will by only with the of for emancipation and and that the will be out not in but in an with these a postcolonial with from the global if one the premise that critical theory by at emancipation and this not the are of emancipation and and are many different from the global to for emancipation or with some of these to one Hence, a critical the of relevant it to on these in a and to as if they do not The way of with the postcolonial is found in Walter Mignolo's conception of Mignolo's is the that the theories of the Western tradition are One could in to these and in this these theories are closely entangled with the this reference 2007, references the entanglement between the discourses of emancipation and of inequality that too not to be but essential Kerner of a of and a of 2007, it is the universalist of the theories that the side of coloniality. this with an that one and one can the normative for the of all in all goes on to argue that as as this side of the colonial be on a political decolonization be by decolonization in to decolonization to take thinking the Western this as a process of two steps to as border thinking and thinking is a from As its border thinking should take that the of and as its These other and are to be taken and to an to the Western In the of these other and should their with the Western these two the former could of 2007, Kerner a process of decolonization is then to the of a world in which is This world be by one universalist and but be by a of and that to on a global a the or to Kerner that conception is not one of This is as is not that are only in the in which they out a critique of and to which the of a tradition is and What implications this notion of decolonization have for some the latter for that not if one takes the perspective of Mignolo's of is also one have to that an with is not of if one decolonization as is to from not one still with all aspects as seem theory of theory, and political theory all appear to be prime of the of the of The most one still find are of critique could with the and of groups as and use as for border thinking and The of Mignolo's conception in a way of with the of the of and an decolonization as by former colonial not have to in a of the that once their the groups normative from other in a the of This is Mignolo's approach also has a of fundamental Kerner One is the in the conception of In Mignolo's the of different each with their and as once the has been conception of is not out in It it avoid the usually discussed in such a that the in to make with the of and within these Mignolo's that is not a is for an to these to have to be universalist in a not in the of one and one but in the of some on different and can universalist for in such as notion of an or treatment of the between and This not that one be a it that one make that are to and that one thereby entangled in the same of that to this very The way of with postcolonial of theory is what I I use this term to refer to postcolonial of theories that are more thorough selective historicization but more of these theories Allen's or Mignolo's of I refer to Dipesh Chakrabarty, the term as as Gayatri and Paul Gilroy that I with These that or the is only one among many and universalist theories within this for of the same they are of some of these and in a can be and its if the in question has a of The theorists of provincialization that postcolonial other at and can do from the tradition of and in the (Chakrabarty 2007, Gilroy they do not only the of these theories but also explicitly of some of their normative of as that we not the theorists of provincialization they do not only do so in the but also in the of for of the justification of and The approach of provincialization that the Western tradition the in the discourse of emancipation by the decolonization it not the entanglement between the discourses of emancipation and inequality to be it not the discourse of emancipation but to it by the relevant theories to their it goes selective historicization but not as as Allen's or Mignolo's of I take one each from Spivak, Chakrabarty, and In I refer to the first of of In the postcolonial of and historical by for of the in of the Western the term of the a metaphor for of the other that appear in the of the and are as a for their of more a on in the and their relationship to the as as a that the of or the of is not second, the of a by in the on to which the is in the of historical reason the of an of as a historical that to and to Spivak, these of have a in the they are not The theories the of as the of in Thus, they for the fact that this universal can only be in one of the other The of as ends in the of the make it possible to the in these other and to the of European with the universal of is not to and the and their but to pursue an Kerner of to find out the can be discussion of is most not only out the but also goes on to a of that not the of a this should not be as a on to a free as it is in of to use notion of a as that can have both and and be as a with that can be by of (e.g., theory and that can have as as The this at all and which of its are in specific and are and political is not the only but one among a one. other of are historical ends In I refer to the critique of the way in which theories deal with historical out in the of theories to in the as all from this in other as a of or as that be to a to an approach the that could be that from in Western but should still be by the same (Chakrabarty 2007, Spivak, this with from the tradition and also a way to it a different of this two of to that are produced by and which could not be One example is the of and of to that are in the process of and within but have relationship to One example is all with a of the same they can each have different of to be Hence, all of be by the same in is not a question of in which all or the it is a question of between different and (Chakrabarty 2007, Paul I a of to of theories lay a to theories of in but about colonialism, and the to these are of and the theories to make on their to theories of Gilroy that a theory of for and as as for the as that are relevant to the of In to the of which a on and should be taken in theories of 2007, can be to The and the can be read as in historical ends on the of human that only to the most on their the by Chakrabarty, in the with It that critique of the of and to as it is one of Yet, to the two approaches of decolonization discussed the critique from the approach of provincialization not have to be a fundamental of of Habermasian theory could in a that I discuss what such a of Frankfurt I the of the The provincialization approach the approach of selective historicization by the entanglement between the discourses of emancipation and inequality much more As provincialization not and rationalism in it can also the in Allen's and Mignolo's approaches to at the of the discourse of emancipation with all its normative are with The authors of the provincialization approach time what of normative they and for what they do with that it is or a of for what And should to this the of the of and One possible that is with the provincialization approach be notion of The the of the discourse of emancipation is if the former colonial this discourse by a it their The theorists of provincialization do not only out within the they but they also explain these could be by the This to the question of what a of Habermasian theory could have been some with Habermasian theory on which such an of provincialization can the one some are to have approach in a way that it more with postcolonial critique McCarthy the other are various of Habermasian theory that or from and The normative of Habermasian theory, that of and of and can this process of to and the theorists of provincialization are explicitly to universalist theories from the Western The Habermasian approach to to be it is to the normative of various postcolonial theories. critique of as as to with a notion of implicitly a normative to which it is for to have a to make their in an equal This is with the Habermasian if one takes on the of with discourse and the in on and if one on to the Habermasian notion of reason and one should be much more with the of of different or is in of one should to on and the of the of and the of this McCarthy 2009, more of the of and be perspective on and as these appear to the the of and only they the of and begin the in the of In a theory, and should be should be the between and if is of the the and of and can a of for 2009, with Spivak, with the decoupling of the is a that is and can have as as The in all shaped by in the should be as and as as in or in as as in the two in In both the global and the global the to and to normative such as that of human should be taken Gilroy McCarthy 2009, The should be as one of many of the world 2009, The theoretical of the should have a on global differences and the of the a of and in some but a of and in so that the and of the are among the different such a or it is on which it Should such an and be or in the global The by in terms be and critique discuss the extent to which this normative political theory the out by that only in the these the of other of the And the specific among the and the 2007, And what all of this for the normative theory of in as as in The of the from and be for as a that very to notion of The of the of the normative of emancipation is the question of choose to make this their they have the In more recent to some of these one Habermasian theory as one can also the other way what a Frankfurt could to postcolonial critique. Two to of a to and explain the normative taken in postcolonial critique Spivak, for of human and as that one not want and consequences of as and as what is by these and they are a Habermasian theory a theory of and which is found in postcolonial theories. One should not too a among postcolonial critics for such all too Habermasian critics have to be of normative theories and theories of one could still make such a provincialization of Frankfurt one at have a critical theory of that is more to a postcolonial world and its The has to and by The of