Abstract
In this imaginative book the authors argue that social theory ignores the role of colonialism in its own construction and that excluding colonialism from the teaching of social theory is a disservice to the mission of the university. The book begins with an introduction that argues that modernity has been associated with westernization and that society in Western Europe and the United States is placed at the core of contemporary sociology’s discourse to the exclusion of areas and societies outside these two core areas, which are seen as coextensive. The authors argue that the European empires that developed out of colonialism are somehow different from other Empires and that they are constitutive of modernity and not, as Schumpeter argued, an echo of feudalism.
The authors discuss the construction of the cannon of sociology in the decades that followed 1830. They point out that Marx, Durkheim, and Weber remained constant sources of tracts, while others rose and fell in terms of importance to the cannon. The current cannon was shaped by the evolutionary chronology of Talcott Parsons and saw the introduction of WEB Du Bois’ work into its texts. The book’s core methodology takes six crucial periods and their associated thinkers, scholars whose works are featured in the cannon of contemporary sociology, then Bhambra and Holmwood deconstruct these texts using methods derived from the Frankfurt school.
In the first main chapter, the authors cover the period from Hobbes to Hegel. The chapter shows how European thinkers created ideas that served to uphold the colonial and imperial projects and did so without reflection. The second chapter examines Alexis de Tocqueville’s liberal and imperialist voices which reflected his inner contradictions. In the third chapter, the authors discuss Marx and argue that his conception of class was Eurocentric. The fourth chapter addresses Weber’s idea that others must learn from the West.
In the fifth chapter, the authors address Durkheim’s treatment of the Jewish and Muslim communities within Europe, and note that he fails to mention their processes of colonialism and imperialism that led to their presence. They note that Du Bois understood that the construction of the color line inside the USA was dependent on the global color line imposed by colonialism and imperialism. The concluding chapter is an ode to post-modern thought centered on five fictions they would like to see addressed in Social Theory: (1) the fiction of stages of society; (2) liberty, autonomy, and modern subjectivity; (3) the idea of the nation state; (4) class and free labor; and (5) the fiction of sociological reasoning.
The book clearly has exposed a glaring hole in social theory, and to that extent, it constitutes a valuable work that should be read by faculty committees determining the content and the tone of social theory courses. It is well written and can be used as a textbook for second year undergraduate students. That said, there are some problems with the text that need addressing. First, the distinction between “western” and non-western empires is artificial and contradicts the quotation that the authors chose to introduce their conclusion with: “Unreasonable divisions of humankind seem to be born from reason itself, not from its opposite” (Karen Fields, as cited by the authors on page 213).
Second, the authors make a strong case for including Du Bois in the Social Theory cannon, but as both an American and a scholar trained in the pragmatic tradition of William James, he is ultimately as “western” as all the remaining scholars and schools criticized. Schumpeter opposed these practices both for their medievalism and cost. Third, with the rise of Japan, India, and China to great power and even superpower status, the world became a more diverse place than one centered on Europe and its North American extensions.
These states also appropriated the language of Westphalia and Nationalism and made it their own, in systematic speech acts that constructed their sense of self. Fourth, the authors do not appear to have grappled with the idea that many nation states precede Westphalia and are peopled and led by non-Europeans. Fifth, the authors ultimately rely on the legacy of the post-Second World War critical approaches in their project. Critical Theory itself is Eurocentric.
Many of its authors, with the notable exception of Fanon, remained indifferent or unmoved by the genocidal horror of colonialism until similar horrors appeared in Europe. The expansion of the cannon and its globalization should be the focus of any decolonizing project in social theory. Despite these criticisms, this book has real value and should be read widely.
