Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Coloniality of power is based on a Eurocentric system of knowledge, in which race is seen as "naturalization of colonial relations between Europeans and non-Europeans. [12] The Eurocentric system of knowledge assigned production of knowledge to Europeans and prioritized the use of European ways of knowledge production.
At the same time, these institutions are also consequences of political institutions – especially how de facto and de jure political power is allocated. To explain the different colonial cases, we thus need to look first into the political institutions that shaped the economic institutions.
Consequently, it mattered greatly to the later political culture of the United States that England, rather than Spain or France, eventually dominated colonization north of Florida. By the start of the American Revolution , the thirteen colonies had developed political systems featuring a governor exercising executive power and a bicameral ...
The colonial assembly shared power with a royally appointed governor. On a more local level, governmental power was invested in county courts, which were self-perpetuating (the incumbents filled any vacancies and there never were popular elections). As cash crop producers, Chesapeake plantations were heavily dependent on trade with England.
It refers to the ongoing effects that colonial encounters, dispossession and power have in shaping the familiar structures (social, political, spatial, uneven global interdependencies) of the present world. Postcolonialism, in itself, questions the end of colonialism. [72]
A colonial empire is a state engaging in colonization, possibly establishing or maintaing colonies, infused with some form of coloniality and colonialism. Such states can expand contiguous as well as overseas. Colonial empires may set up colonies as settler colonies. [1]
Often, with the support of the colonial authority, natives gained more power under indirect colonial rule than they had in the pre-colonial period. [3] Mamdani points out that indirect rule was the dominant form of colonialism and therefore most who were colonized bore colonial rule that was delivered by their fellow natives. [28]
The power transfer was an influential step to creating a theocratic Massachusetts. Political power was held by the staunch Puritanical fellow believers. [3] In 1684, the royal charter was taken away, splitting the Massachusetts Bay company and the colony. In 1691, Plymouth Colony and Maine were absorbed in a new royal charter. [3]