scholarly journals The Political History of Hydraulic Fracturing’s Expansion Across the West

Author(s):  
Robert E. Forbis
October ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 174 ◽  
pp. 3-125
Author(s):  
Huey Copeland ◽  
Hal Foster ◽  
David Joselit ◽  
Pamela M. Lee

The term decolonize has gained a new life in recent art activism, as a radical challenge to the Eurocentrism of museums (in light of Native, Indigenous, and other epistemological perspectives) as well as in the museum's structural relation to violence (either in its ties to oligarchic trustees or to corporations engaged in the business of war or environmental depredation). In calling forth the mid-twentieth-century period of decolonization as its historical point of reference, the word's emphatic return is rhetorically powerful, and it corresponds to a parallel interest among scholars in a plural field of postcolonial or global modernisms. The exhortation to decolonize, however, is not uncontroversial-some believe it still carries a Eurocentric bias. Indeed, it has been proposed that, for the West, de-imperialization is perhaps even more urgent than decolonization. What does the term decolonize mean to you in your work in activism, criticism, art, and/or scholarship? Why has it come to play such an urgent role in the neoliberal West? How can we link it historically with the political history of decolonization, and how does it work to translate postcolonial theory into a critique of the neocolonial contemporary art world? Respondents include Nana Adusei-Poku, Brook Andrew, Sampada Aranke, Ian Bethell-Bennett, Kader Attia, Andrea Carlson, Elise Y. Chagas, ISUMA, Iftikhar Dadi, Janet Dees, Nitasha Dhillon, Hannah Feldman, Josh T. Franco, David Garneau, Renee Green, Iman Issa, Arnold J. Kemp, Thomas Lax, Nancy Luxon, Nelson Maldonado-Torres, Saloni Mathur, Tiona Nekkia McClodden, Alan Michelson, Partha Mitter, Isabela Muci Barradas, Steven Nelson, Ugochukwu-Smooth C. Nzewi, Alessandro Petti, Paulina Pineda, Christopher Pinney, Elizabeth Povinelli, Ryan Rice, Andrew Ross, Paul Chaat Smith, Nancy Spector, Francoise Verges, Rocio Zambrana, and Joseph R. Zordan.


2011 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Faaeza Jasdanwalla

Abstract This paper discusses the political history of the Indian princely state of Janjira on the west coast of India. It was ruled by Sidis (Africans) from the early seventeenth century until the merger of princely states immediately after the independence of India in 1947. The Sidi rulers of Janjira were of African origin, having initially entered India as traders and serving in administrative capacities with the medieval Deccan kingdoms. The emphasis of this paper will be on the manner in which the rulers of Janjira were elected by a group of African Sidi chiefs or Sardars from amongst them for almost two centuries, as opposed to relying on hereditary primogeniture as a system of succession, and the implications that such a system had on the history of Janjira.


1992 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-122
Author(s):  
M'hammad Benaboud

This book presents a remarkable account of the political history of Andalusia(Muslim Spain) during the last phase of its existence. The author adoptsa cyclical approach in the sense that he traces the creation of the Banu Nasrkingdom in Granada, its development, and its decline and fall. He studies theperiod of each ruler in chronological order from the establishment of thekingdom of Granada to its collapse. Instead of limiting himself to descriptionor repetition, he chooses to adopt an analytical approach which permits himto deepen our insight regarding the period of each ruler. He reproduces a clearpicture which combines internal political developments and external relationswith the Christians.The author studies the history of the Muslims of Granada as well as thosein Christian Spain up to the Christian conquest of Granada. He is correct inincluding these two categories, for the religious, cultural, and linguistic criteriaunite these two groups, and also because their fates became similar after thefall of Granada in 1492. Thus both groups can be considered “Moriscos,” a topicwhich Harvey started working on over thirty years ago.The book is not easy to read, because it reflects many years of researchand has tremendous cultural weight. To the author’s obvious strenuous intellectualeffort, one may add his intellectual integrity as a distinguished scholarwho is credible in the West and in the East alike, somethmg which not all orientalistscan claim. He is critical of the history which he studies and its sourceswithout being offensive; the distorting influence of a personal dimension foundin other historians is here minimized. The author criticizes himself before beingcritical of others. His manner of presenting and interpreting history is convincing,as his intentions are exclusively scholarly. The author is a memberof a breed that is not very common in the politically oriented European andNorth American universities with regards to anything related to Islam andMuslims. This is not to say that he is beyond criticism, however, as the bookcould be faulted for not having relied directly on some of the fundamental andprimary Andalusian sources. We could disagree with his approach and suggestother approaches. Fortunately for his readers, the author is perhaps moreconscious of his limitations than anybody else, which is also why he did whathe proposed to do so admirably ...


Author(s):  
Rembert Lutjeharms

This chapter introduces the main themes of the book—Kavikarṇapūra, theology, Sanskrit poetry, and Sanskrit poetics—and provides an overview of each chapter. It briefly highlights the importance of the practice of poetry for the Caitanya Vaiṣṇava tradition, places Kavikarṇapūra in the (political) history of sixteenth‐century Bengal and Orissa as well as sketches his place in the early developments of the Caitanya Vaiṣṇava tradition (a topic more fully explored in Chapter 1). The chapter also reflects more generally on the nature of both his poetry and poetics, and highlights the way Kavikarṇapūra has so far been studied in modern scholarship.


2016 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 550-576 ◽  
Author(s):  
Assef Ashraf

AbstractThis article uses gift-giving practices in early nineteenth-century Iran as a window onto statecraft, governance, and center-periphery relations in the early Qajar state (1785–1925). It first demonstrates that gifts have a long history in the administrative and political history of Iran, the Persianate world, and broader Eurasia, before highlighting specific features found in Iran. The article argues that the pīshkish, a tributary gift-giving ceremony, constituted a central role in the political culture and economy of Qajar Iran, and was part of the process of presenting Qajar rule as a continuation of previous Iranian royal dynasties. Nevertheless, pīshkish ceremonies also illustrated the challenges Qajar rulers faced in exerting power in the provinces and winning the loyalty of provincial elites. Qajar statesmen viewed gifts and bribes, at least at a discursive level, in different terms, with the former clearly understood as an acceptable practice. Gifts and honors, like the khil‘at, presented to society were part of Qajar rulers' strategy of presenting themselves as just and legitimate. Finally, the article considers the use of gifts to influence diplomacy and ease relations between Iranians and foreign envoys, as well as the ways in which an inadequate gift could cause offense.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document