This conclusion explains how creolizing political theory is different from the comparative political theory of Fred Dallmayr, Roxanne Euben, Michaelle Browers, Leigh Jenco, Farah Godrej, and Andrew March, on the one hand, and work on processes of disavowal by Sibylle Fischer and on moments of universal history by Susan Buck-Morss, on the other. While creating professional space to study political thought beyond the U.S. and Western Europe, focus in comparative political theory has been monopolized by East Asia, East India, and Muslim worlds to the exclusion of African, Caribbean, Latin and Native American ones. Work on disavowal and universal history has illuminated the larger historical patterns of such exclusions but often with some skepticism about the possibility of forging more viable, inclusive political collectivities. Creolization then draws on both academic developments while being far less reluctant about how we can forge new creolizing alternatives. Finally, creolized approaches are compared with problem-driven research within political science.
Fordham Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.