@@ricardoartemusica European culture includes that debate demands Logos, but that rhetoric should also deliberately include Ethos (a form of Ad Hominem) and Pathos (Appeal to Emotion). This is a little f***ed up when you think about it; it means that when you talk to someone without expecting them to be able to respond, European culture not only permits, but also more or less requires you to sandwich your logical argument inside a bunch of other fallacious sh**.
my question of practice is how to de-colonize curriculum in middle school. It is not regarding theory as my students already learn through video, chordify, tabs, and other modern audio-visual techniques. It is how to bring about the learning of more culturally diverse music that is not pop-media dominant. It seems media is the newest mode of colonial dominance. What can I do to introduce, explore and develop alternative tone/harmony/rhythm with youngsters is my quest.
At first, congrats for your channel. Data venia, I will make some remarks about the decolonization subject: -The concept of “musical curriculum” is itself “colonial” (the idea of been musically educated is not culturally neutral). -The idea and social institution of faculty of music or conservatorium are colonial (and they were created by the needs of specialization of musical profession in the western culture). -“Musicology” as practiced in musical academy is a creation of colonial western thought. To reach a perfect “decolonization state” would imply to give up on all these things. These things are not just empty and neutral spaces to be fulfil by new “decolonized” contents; They are history too (!!) and they were created by certain musical practices. Taken logically, and not only as political rhetoric (and as a means of gaining power in educational institutions), the idea of decolonization is untenable. As a brazilian I would have to stop speaking portuguese to be a perfect decolonized being. Unfortunatelly, it is not a joke: I read an Spanish speaker latin-american guy expressing conflict about using his mother tongue when he was trying to become decolonized...!! That said, I should say that the amplification of the repertoire will be allways a good and interesting thing, and the possibility of mixing cultures is almost an human condition.
All points very true, though I think the goal being ‘full’ decolonization is rather unattainable and perhaps (trepidatiously) unattractive. ‘Going back’ is not really an option (assuming you accept time is linear), so indelible elements of coloniality are almost certain to persist (for better or worse). Freire has ideas, but there seems to be lack of will to engage earnestly by institutions, perhaps because of the massive upheaval his theories would require.
Thanks for this. I have stated on other channels that music majors in universities are only taught the music of white male Europeans. That would be fine if "western classical music" is being defined as only the music from Europe, and the USA. But Russia is also included as you mentioned. And on top of that, there are a number of "European" composers left out, namely those of color; Coleridge-Taylor, Boulogne, Meude-Monpas, and others all very talented and worthy of being studied. So, what is the curriculum really saying then? Leaving out non-whites, mixed race, and anyone in the "other" category, not to mention excluding women altogether save an honorable and brief mention of Clara Schumann, It becomes clear the only intention is to promote the music of select white male composers. Of course, no one comes right out and declares it openly. But it is a form of colonization to indoctrinate people with the notion that only certain types of people are capable of composing classical music. It also sends the message that these select composers are the only ones that academia and the music establishment are willing to respect. And then comes the flood of information on Joseph Boulogne along with a movie based on his life. A pertinent piece of information never shared in conservatory is how Mozart copied some of Boulogne's music. Not to mention he stole other music before. Yet, academia is determined to hail him a musical genius while ignoring the man he pirated music from. It's not an isolated incident. Handel is well known for pirating music written by other composers and of course he sits among the most celebrated from the baroque era. Naturally, when you start ruffling feathers of those that are complacent, you start making enemies. Congratulations on your video and I look forward to the next one.
Couldn't the opposite be said just as stridently? Why isn't the academization of non-European music an act of cultural appropriation? Why should traditional African or Asian music be subjected to Western criteria of music theory and practice? No serious musicologist would suggest today that European classical music is 'universal' as such, because no such thing as universal music exists. And while it is true that other types of music deserve more of our attention, I'm not sure why it should happen in the academia or in the musicological faculties that have utterly standardized music theory to the point of reification. Just as analysing the Quran through the lenses of modern Western literary criticism, while fascinating, would not be the ideal way of understanding it's contextual and historical significance and could be called by some even an act of appropriation or intellectual colonialism. It would be just as incongruous to analyze non-European music through the lenses of modern Western musicology or through the apparatus of the Western university.
A key concept that, to my mind, invaldiates this take is Anthony Giddens' double hermeneutic. In modern academe the people whose music are being studied will not only have the opportunity to observe but also to discuss the framing of the material. So long as this criterion is fulfilled in good faith, I don't think you can plausibly speak of cultural appropriation. The Quran is possibly a problematic counterexample because it is a religious text believed by some people to be a text of divine revelation. Whereas one can plausibly see people objecting to decontextualized studies of the Quran, isn't it a stretch to assume that the same would be true to music? My experience has at least been that cultural exchanges are appreciated so long as all parties act respectfully and in good faith. As far as music theory being standardized, that is true to a certain point, but I think there are other aspects that need to be taken into consideration here. Music studies have traditionally separated musicology and ethnomusicology - now THAT separation could be argued to be a relic from the colonial era! - so the study of such repertoires already exists within academe. However, over the last few decades ethnomusicological methods have been widely adopted my more traditional musicology. So the interplay between academic traditions dealing with these repertoires is far from new. What is more, here one might perhaps encounter a separate phenomenon that might also have been called a double hermeneutic. I take it from your phrasing that you find the "utter [standardization]" of music theory to be a problem. When doing analysis it is not uncommon for tenents of music theory to have to be adapted to a work, since art rarely accords entirely with theory. Meetings between music theory and new repertoires have a tendency of highlighting the things music theory does well and what it does less well, and to offer alternative modes of understanding. I think that we have already seen in the current decades that the broadening of what is deemed acceptable to study in musicology have led to a broadening and deepening of music theory (we are now, for instance, starting to get fairly complex and elaborate treatments of harmony in popular music that only adopt concepts from traditional, classical music theory to the extent that they are useful). I see no reason why this would be different for any non-European forms of music.
Okay, all very laudable. However, are there dangers of over-compensating for this and setting up new barriers in the name of 'de-colonisation? An example from the world of British folk music. Some years ago, the editor of an influential magazine started promoting folk singers from assorted African countries in preference over English ones, giving the impression that they were somehow 'more authentic' or more worthy musically directly because of their backgrounds rather than musical criteria. As a result, some English folk musicians' careers suffered as a result. Part of it may have been an abstruse reference to 'white privilege' (which I think is an insulting term for someone who may have lifted themselves from abject poverty even in a 'white' country) and a desire to promote such music as 'roots' music rather than 'folk' music, as if the term 'roots' is more credible - or was it a mere marketing ploy? Isn't such musical 'discrimination' (if that's the correct term) an inverse snobbery at the very least? I agree about the snobbery in classical music, as I've experienced it myself (right up to the present day in some cases) - when I was at music college in the 1970s I was regarded as totally beyond the pale for preferring Delius to Mozart (go figure). So even before you indulge in the luxury of de-colonisation, perhaps you might start looking at expanding the terms of reference for lasting merit in 'white, privileged music. Again, another example - it's been pointed out by (I think) Howard Goodall that film music in the late 60s and early 70s saved classical music from sinking into total irrelevance, yet there are still classical musicians who will argue about the merits of Birtwistle yet will deride John Williams (partly out of jealousy?) and say 'Oh, well that's only film music' as though it has lesser merit and worth. So perhaps the classical canon needs to put its own house in order long before it starts looking at music from other cultures and making value judgements about its worth? Just my 2p worth.....
A fundamental point re: decolonization is its interest in the recovery of killed knowledges, ways of knowing that have been intentionally suppressed to (near) extinction. As often as decolonization is framed in racial terms (mostly because ‘decolonization’ most specifically refers to the reparation from specific events of colonization which often predicated on colonizers erecting a racial divide between themselves and the incipient colonized), the less specific idea of decoloniality is interested in both access to British traditional music and to the great many African traditional musics, particularly within this context of education (versus, say, professional music). Decolonization (as a category of concepts) is much more interested in dismantling barriers than it is in erecting them, and it’s common to claim that decolonization is erecting barriers simply because it is currently pointing out and calling attention to barriers which have long existed, including to both lower class British people and immigrant/refugee Africans in the UK. That being said, considering Britian’s historical involvement in the rape and divide of Africa, and the legacy of African descendants, immigrants and refugees in the UK (particularly London where a high percentage of universities are), it does seem appropriate that a reparative emphasis on African knowledges that the British suppressed would be taking place now. As far as it ‘hurting’ English folk musicians, that is not an ideal outcome, but it should probably be contextualized within broader global interactions and history.
Hi! Nice comment. I'm from Chile...semi-white-privileged...In the case you mentioned, those folk musician were discriminated because (maybe) of class hate/colonial guilt...Anyways...I think one should bring some nationalistic-cynisism in those topics. Colonialism have shifted to other forms...let's say...global capitalism for example...So...the truly anti-capitalist/"decolonizers" are the ones who help musicians not to get eaten by world capital and to be able to AFFORD a living. For sure I'm not saying that african musicians didn't should be helped by rich countries or other countries!! Let's collaborate...but no in a global capitalistic way. Hope this brings something to the discussion...
@@pablovalle2244 Capitalism, and especially neoliberal capitalism, is definitely an extension or continuation of (neo)colonialism-the system relies on the exploitation of labour both globally and within a given nation. This is a big consideration in decolonizing the university, from a number of angles
Anything can potentially go too far. But what has already gone too far? Hyper-focus on white music. Doing nothing about it has already been tried for a while. What is there to try next?
@@morningcolossus but Florence Price stinks... IT Makes way more sense pay attention to the important modernists like Debussy, Ravel, Stravinsky or Schoenberg.
@@joshuabroyles7565 Decolonality doesn’t just entail inclusivity or just learning more about colonialism, it actually is about getting rid of ‘western’ , ‘European’ and ‘white’ influence . It’s part of postcolonial theory . newdiscourses.com/tftw-decolonize-decoloniality/ Decolonisation in Leicester University : m.th-cam.com/video/G8ezGw3ltfM/w-d-xo.html Classics .m.th-cam.com/video/1RzwAbWwZQA/w-d-xo.html In the end of the day , people are going to look what’s being *done* , not what is claimed . And they can quite clearly see that it’s an attempt to deconstruct our civilisation , not merely self-criticism.
@@joshuabroyles7565 ‘There’s no getting rid of white influence ‘. Well , it’s happening on the ground as we speak , so who am I suppose to believe ? You or the people decolonising on the ground ? ‘The point seems to get rid of inappropriate white influence . Why is that a problem ?’ ‘Seems’ is the key word here . You are suppose to believe that this is a benevolent endeavour when in actuality it is an attempt to deconstruct anything ‘white’ , ‘western’ or ‘European’. I recommend you read the books Explaining postmodernism and Cynical theories . You shouldn’t be surprised that people are rejecting this , they can clearly see that there is an agenda . Not a benign one at least ,irrespective of what’s being claimed outwardly .
@@JohnSmith-iu3ui It so happens that I am a Cynic, as a matter essentially separate from this. I think a lot like a Nihilist, but I consider that Nihilists don't adequately appreciate the principle of erring on the side of caution. Extremists only ever get less than what they push for, so it's not surprising that CRT extremists are pushing for so much. What is ultimately conceded to them will inevitably be decided by persons of more moderate perspective.
@@joshuabroyles7565 if we don’t stand up to the critical race and postcolonial theorists our civilisation is going to go down a bad path . The road to hell is paved for by good intentions.
i think ' decolonisation' is a totally inappropriate word for what you are describing. If you feel the need for more international styles to be included in the education that's fine. Decolonisation of a syllabus has a meaning in a colony who had the syllabus imposed on them. The UK never had a syllabus imposed on them and hence cant decolonise. Also your figures on India's percentage of world industrial output are a common but totally debunked stat . Indias industrial output continued to rise under colonialism- probably faster than if they hadnt been colonised- The reason their percentage of the worlds total output fell is that the industrial revolution caused the rest of the world to achieve a massive growth in industrial output
This seems like both a fundamental misunderstanding of the panoply of concepts that fall under ‘decolonization’ and an ignorance to how colonial structures exhibit colonial influence on ‘citizens of a nation’ as well as on ‘citizens of other nations’, falling along various lines of class, race, gender, sexuality, etc. These ‘internally colonial’ practices mirror the assimilative practices used on the ‘externally colonized’ and as such lend themselves to decolonial criticism just the same. With respect to education, it’s essentially the exact same curriculum used in either context, so one should ask why the internal British curricula were such an integral part of its global colonial effort. Marginalized UK residents both born and immigrant are affected by a lack of access to their own knowledges. I study music curricula in the UK: why do some universities in Scotland fail to offer any courses on (popular or traditional) Scottish music but prioritize offering those on English art song? I wouldn’t view Scotland as a ‘colony’, but at the same time they are campaigning for ‘independence’ from a rather unequal political union, so semantics seems a bit silly. My point is that decolonial theorists absolutely understand the banner of decolonization to include both local and global issues.
@@andrewlindsay4773 I’d be interested to look at some specific calls! A lot of times these things are implemented heavy handedly. People would rather score ‘diversity points’ than critically engage their curriculum. Mostly what I’ve seen has been along the lines of understanding the historical contexts of fields of math and their developments, as well as an understanding of the relative subjectivity of these fields, where ‘truths’ in one do not hold true in another, even in so-called ‘western’ mathematics. Both I think are good points, but I’m not a mathematician, so I am not highly engaged with the debate. I do know even things as simple as counting are culturally specific, so I’d love to know how this affects mathematical thinking, for example! Arguably that is no longer ‘true math’, though.
well we can agree on the heavy handed importance of scoring diversity points however the same logic behind that also insists that everything must be viewed through" power structures" and one or more groups must be considered 'marginalised' whether they are in real life or not. Question : if you went to China to study music would you be campaigning that it is outrageous that their teachings dont include enough traditional African music? ( as Africans are way more marginalised i China than they are in the west)
@@andrewlindsay4773 If I went to China, probably my number one relevant concern would be the suppression and caricaturization of Uyghur music as part of their secret-not-secret genocide. Also traditional Tibetan Buddhist music (which has a lovely notation system) would be a question. Obviously in real life I wouldn’t ask these things, but in a theoretical space, given China’s non-existent (?) involvement in the historical rape of Africa, I’d reserve that question for various European countries.
![ประสบการณ์ จ้าง Developer ที่ผมจะไม่มีวันลืม [ภาค1]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bzivN4KDg-k/mqdefault.jpg)
triggered whities in the comments lmao
No arguments? Just Ad hominem fallacy!!?? Well, at least it is coherent, since logical thinking is certainly a "colonial" thing...
@@ricardoartemusica European culture includes that debate demands Logos, but that rhetoric should also deliberately include Ethos (a form of Ad Hominem) and Pathos (Appeal to Emotion). This is a little f***ed up when you think about it; it means that when you talk to someone without expecting them to be able to respond, European culture not only permits, but also more or less requires you to sandwich your logical argument inside a bunch of other fallacious sh**.
this comment coming from "trad groyper" is so funny
my question of practice is how to de-colonize curriculum in middle school. It is not regarding theory as my students already learn through video, chordify, tabs, and other modern audio-visual techniques. It is how to bring about the learning of more culturally diverse music that is not pop-media dominant. It seems media is the newest mode of colonial dominance. What can I do to introduce, explore and develop alternative tone/harmony/rhythm with youngsters is my quest.
That Nazi composer Carl Orf can help :)
More university courses should be focused on the exploration and cultural and stylistic differences of traditional music from all over the world.
At first, congrats for your channel. Data venia, I will make some remarks about the decolonization subject:
-The concept of “musical curriculum” is itself “colonial” (the idea of been musically educated is not culturally neutral).
-The idea and social institution of faculty of music or conservatorium are colonial (and they were created by the needs of specialization of musical profession in the western culture).
-“Musicology” as practiced in musical academy is a creation of colonial western thought.
To reach a perfect “decolonization state” would imply to give up on all these things. These things are not just empty and neutral spaces to be fulfil by new “decolonized” contents; They are history too (!!) and they were created by certain musical practices. Taken logically, and not only as political rhetoric (and as a means of gaining power in educational institutions), the idea of decolonization is untenable.
As a brazilian I would have to stop speaking portuguese to be a perfect decolonized being. Unfortunatelly, it is not a joke: I read an Spanish speaker latin-american guy expressing conflict about using his mother tongue when he was trying to become decolonized...!!
That said, I should say that the amplification of the repertoire will be allways a good and interesting thing, and the possibility of mixing cultures is almost an human condition.
All points very true, though I think the goal being ‘full’ decolonization is rather unattainable and perhaps (trepidatiously) unattractive. ‘Going back’ is not really an option (assuming you accept time is linear), so indelible elements of coloniality are almost certain to persist (for better or worse). Freire has ideas, but there seems to be lack of will to engage earnestly by institutions, perhaps because of the massive upheaval his theories would require.
Thanks for this. I have stated on other channels that music majors in universities are only taught the music of white male Europeans. That would be fine if "western classical music" is being defined as only the music from Europe, and the USA. But Russia is also included as you mentioned. And on top of that, there are a number of "European" composers left out, namely those of color; Coleridge-Taylor, Boulogne, Meude-Monpas, and others all very talented and worthy of being studied.
So, what is the curriculum really saying then? Leaving out non-whites, mixed race, and anyone in the "other" category, not to mention excluding women altogether save an honorable and brief mention of Clara Schumann, It becomes clear the only intention is to promote the music of select white male composers. Of course, no one comes right out and declares it openly. But it is a form of colonization to indoctrinate people with the notion that only certain types of people are capable of composing classical music. It also sends the message that these select composers are the only ones that academia and the music establishment are willing to respect.
And then comes the flood of information on Joseph Boulogne along with a movie based on his life. A pertinent piece of information never shared in conservatory is how Mozart copied some of Boulogne's music. Not to mention he stole other music before. Yet, academia is determined to hail him a musical genius while ignoring the man he pirated music from.
It's not an isolated incident. Handel is well known for pirating music written by other composers and of course he sits among the most celebrated from the baroque era.
Naturally, when you start ruffling feathers of those that are complacent, you start making enemies. Congratulations on your video and I look forward to the next one.
could you please share some examples if it is happening on universities to change the curriculum?
Couldn't the opposite be said just as stridently? Why isn't the academization of non-European music an act of cultural appropriation? Why should traditional African or Asian music be subjected to Western criteria of music theory and practice? No serious musicologist would suggest today that European classical music is 'universal' as such, because no such thing as universal music exists. And while it is true that other types of music deserve more of our attention, I'm not sure why it should happen in the academia or in the musicological faculties that have utterly standardized music theory to the point of reification. Just as analysing the Quran through the lenses of modern Western literary criticism, while fascinating, would not be the ideal way of understanding it's contextual and historical significance and could be called by some even an act of appropriation or intellectual colonialism. It would be just as incongruous to analyze non-European music through the lenses of modern Western musicology or through the apparatus of the Western university.
A key concept that, to my mind, invaldiates this take is Anthony Giddens' double hermeneutic. In modern academe the people whose music are being studied will not only have the opportunity to observe but also to discuss the framing of the material. So long as this criterion is fulfilled in good faith, I don't think you can plausibly speak of cultural appropriation. The Quran is possibly a problematic counterexample because it is a religious text believed by some people to be a text of divine revelation. Whereas one can plausibly see people objecting to decontextualized studies of the Quran, isn't it a stretch to assume that the same would be true to music? My experience has at least been that cultural exchanges are appreciated so long as all parties act respectfully and in good faith.
As far as music theory being standardized, that is true to a certain point, but I think there are other aspects that need to be taken into consideration here. Music studies have traditionally separated musicology and ethnomusicology - now THAT separation could be argued to be a relic from the colonial era! - so the study of such repertoires already exists within academe. However, over the last few decades ethnomusicological methods have been widely adopted my more traditional musicology. So the interplay between academic traditions dealing with these repertoires is far from new. What is more, here one might perhaps encounter a separate phenomenon that might also have been called a double hermeneutic. I take it from your phrasing that you find the "utter [standardization]" of music theory to be a problem. When doing analysis it is not uncommon for tenents of music theory to have to be adapted to a work, since art rarely accords entirely with theory. Meetings between music theory and new repertoires have a tendency of highlighting the things music theory does well and what it does less well, and to offer alternative modes of understanding. I think that we have already seen in the current decades that the broadening of what is deemed acceptable to study in musicology have led to a broadening and deepening of music theory (we are now, for instance, starting to get fairly complex and elaborate treatments of harmony in popular music that only adopt concepts from traditional, classical music theory to the extent that they are useful). I see no reason why this would be different for any non-European forms of music.
Okay, all very laudable. However, are there dangers of over-compensating for this and setting up new barriers in the name of 'de-colonisation? An example from the world of British folk music. Some years ago, the editor of an influential magazine started promoting folk singers from assorted African countries in preference over English ones, giving the impression that they were somehow 'more authentic' or more worthy musically directly because of their backgrounds rather than musical criteria. As a result, some English folk musicians' careers suffered as a result. Part of it may have been an abstruse reference to 'white privilege' (which I think is an insulting term for someone who may have lifted themselves from abject poverty even in a 'white' country) and a desire to promote such music as 'roots' music rather than 'folk' music, as if the term 'roots' is more credible - or was it a mere marketing ploy? Isn't such musical 'discrimination' (if that's the correct term) an inverse snobbery at the very least? I agree about the snobbery in classical music, as I've experienced it myself (right up to the present day in some cases) - when I was at music college in the 1970s I was regarded as totally beyond the pale for preferring Delius to Mozart (go figure).
So even before you indulge in the luxury of de-colonisation, perhaps you might start looking at expanding the terms of reference for lasting merit in 'white, privileged music. Again, another example - it's been pointed out by (I think) Howard Goodall that film music in the late 60s and early 70s saved classical music from sinking into total irrelevance, yet there are still classical musicians who will argue about the merits of Birtwistle yet will deride John Williams (partly out of jealousy?) and say 'Oh, well that's only film music' as though it has lesser merit and worth. So perhaps the classical canon needs to put its own house in order long before it starts looking at music from other cultures and making value judgements about its worth? Just my 2p worth.....
A fundamental point re: decolonization is its interest in the recovery of killed knowledges, ways of knowing that have been intentionally suppressed to (near) extinction. As often as decolonization is framed in racial terms (mostly because ‘decolonization’ most specifically refers to the reparation from specific events of colonization which often predicated on colonizers erecting a racial divide between themselves and the incipient colonized), the less specific idea of decoloniality is interested in both access to British traditional music and to the great many African traditional musics, particularly within this context of education (versus, say, professional music). Decolonization (as a category of concepts) is much more interested in dismantling barriers than it is in erecting them, and it’s common to claim that decolonization is erecting barriers simply because it is currently pointing out and calling attention to barriers which have long existed, including to both lower class British people and immigrant/refugee Africans in the UK.
That being said, considering Britian’s historical involvement in the rape and divide of Africa, and the legacy of African descendants, immigrants and refugees in the UK (particularly London where a high percentage of universities are), it does seem appropriate that a reparative emphasis on African knowledges that the British suppressed would be taking place now. As far as it ‘hurting’ English folk musicians, that is not an ideal outcome, but it should probably be contextualized within broader global interactions and history.
Hi! Nice comment. I'm from Chile...semi-white-privileged...In the case you mentioned, those folk musician were discriminated because (maybe) of class hate/colonial guilt...Anyways...I think one should bring some nationalistic-cynisism in those topics. Colonialism have shifted to other forms...let's say...global capitalism for example...So...the truly anti-capitalist/"decolonizers" are the ones who help musicians not to get eaten by world capital and to be able to AFFORD a living. For sure I'm not saying that african musicians didn't should be helped by rich countries or other countries!! Let's collaborate...but no in a global capitalistic way. Hope this brings something to the discussion...
@@pablovalle2244 Capitalism, and especially neoliberal capitalism, is definitely an extension or continuation of (neo)colonialism-the system relies on the exploitation of labour both globally and within a given nation. This is a big consideration in decolonizing the university, from a number of angles
Anything can potentially go too far. But what has already gone too far? Hyper-focus on white music. Doing nothing about it has already been tried for a while. What is there to try next?
@@morningcolossus but Florence Price stinks... IT Makes way more sense pay attention to the important modernists like Debussy, Ravel, Stravinsky or Schoenberg.
Stop Woko Haram while you can. Or it will destroy you.
Please explain.
@@joshuabroyles7565
Decolonality doesn’t just entail inclusivity or just learning more about colonialism, it actually is about getting rid of ‘western’ , ‘European’ and ‘white’ influence . It’s part of postcolonial theory .
newdiscourses.com/tftw-decolonize-decoloniality/
Decolonisation in Leicester University : m.th-cam.com/video/G8ezGw3ltfM/w-d-xo.html
Classics .m.th-cam.com/video/1RzwAbWwZQA/w-d-xo.html
In the end of the day , people are going to look what’s being *done* , not what is claimed .
And they can quite clearly see that it’s an attempt to deconstruct our civilisation , not merely self-criticism.
@@joshuabroyles7565 ‘There’s no getting rid of white influence ‘.
Well , it’s happening on the ground as we speak , so who am I suppose to believe ? You or the people decolonising on the ground ?
‘The point seems to get rid of inappropriate white influence . Why is that a problem ?’
‘Seems’ is the key word here . You are suppose to believe that this is a benevolent endeavour when in actuality it is an attempt to deconstruct anything ‘white’ , ‘western’ or ‘European’.
I recommend you read the books Explaining postmodernism and Cynical theories .
You shouldn’t be surprised that people are rejecting this , they can clearly see that there is an agenda . Not a benign one at least ,irrespective of what’s being claimed outwardly .
@@JohnSmith-iu3ui It so happens that I am a Cynic, as a matter essentially separate from this. I think a lot like a Nihilist, but I consider that Nihilists don't adequately appreciate the principle of erring on the side of caution. Extremists only ever get less than what they push for, so it's not surprising that CRT extremists are pushing for so much. What is ultimately conceded to them will inevitably be decided by persons of more moderate perspective.
@@joshuabroyles7565 if we don’t stand up to the critical race and postcolonial theorists our civilisation is going to go down a bad path .
The road to hell is paved for by good intentions.
i think ' decolonisation' is a totally inappropriate word for what you are describing. If you feel the need for more international styles to be included in the education that's fine. Decolonisation of a syllabus has a meaning in a colony who had the syllabus imposed on them. The UK never had a syllabus imposed on them and hence cant decolonise. Also your figures on India's percentage of world industrial output are a common but totally debunked stat . Indias industrial output continued to rise under colonialism- probably faster than if they hadnt been colonised- The reason their percentage of the worlds total output fell is that the industrial revolution caused the rest of the world to achieve a massive growth in industrial output
This seems like both a fundamental misunderstanding of the panoply of concepts that fall under ‘decolonization’ and an ignorance to how colonial structures exhibit colonial influence on ‘citizens of a nation’ as well as on ‘citizens of other nations’, falling along various lines of class, race, gender, sexuality, etc. These ‘internally colonial’ practices mirror the assimilative practices used on the ‘externally colonized’ and as such lend themselves to decolonial criticism just the same. With respect to education, it’s essentially the exact same curriculum used in either context, so one should ask why the internal British curricula were such an integral part of its global colonial effort. Marginalized UK residents both born and immigrant are affected by a lack of access to their own knowledges. I study music curricula in the UK: why do some universities in Scotland fail to offer any courses on (popular or traditional) Scottish music but prioritize offering those on English art song? I wouldn’t view Scotland as a ‘colony’, but at the same time they are campaigning for ‘independence’ from a rather unequal political union, so semantics seems a bit silly. My point is that decolonial theorists absolutely understand the banner of decolonization to include both local and global issues.
One only has to look at calls to decolonise "mathematics" to see the true depths the decolonisation insanity
@@andrewlindsay4773 I’d be interested to look at some specific calls! A lot of times these things are implemented heavy handedly. People would rather score ‘diversity points’ than critically engage their curriculum.
Mostly what I’ve seen has been along the lines of understanding the historical contexts of fields of math and their developments, as well as an understanding of the relative subjectivity of these fields, where ‘truths’ in one do not hold true in another, even in so-called ‘western’ mathematics. Both I think are good points, but I’m not a mathematician, so I am not highly engaged with the debate. I do know even things as simple as counting are culturally specific, so I’d love to know how this affects mathematical thinking, for example! Arguably that is no longer ‘true math’, though.
well we can agree on the heavy handed importance of scoring diversity points however the same logic behind that also insists that everything must be viewed through" power structures" and one or more groups must be considered 'marginalised' whether they are in real life or not. Question : if you went to China to study music would you be campaigning that it is outrageous that their teachings dont include enough traditional African music? ( as Africans are way more marginalised i China than they are in the west)
@@andrewlindsay4773 If I went to China, probably my number one relevant concern would be the suppression and caricaturization of Uyghur music as part of their secret-not-secret genocide. Also traditional Tibetan Buddhist music (which has a lovely notation system) would be a question. Obviously in real life I wouldn’t ask these things, but in a theoretical space, given China’s non-existent (?) involvement in the historical rape of Africa, I’d reserve that question for various European countries.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂......You are a complete ignoramus