What do you think?
Rate this book
Against Decolonization: Taking African Agency Seriously
Decolonisation has lost its way. Originally a struggle to escape the West’s direct political and economic control, it has become a catch-all idea, often for performing ‘morality’ or ‘authenticity’; it suffocates African thought and denies African agency.
Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò fiercely rejects the indiscriminate application of ‘decolonisation’ to everything from literature, language and philosophy to sociology, psychology and medicine. He argues that the decolonisation industry, obsessed with cataloguing wrongs, is seriously harming scholarship on and in Africa. He finds ‘decolonisation’ of culture intellectually unsound and wholly unrealistic, conflating modernity with coloniality, and groundlessly advocating an open-ended undoing of global society’s foundations. Worst of all, today’s movement attacks its own ‘decolonisers’ themselves are disregarding, infantilising and imposing values on contemporary African thinkers.
This powerful, much-needed intervention questions whether today’s ‘decolonisation’ truly serves African empowerment. Táíwò’s is a bold challenge to respect African intellectuals as innovative adaptors, appropriators and synthesisers of ideas they have always seen as universally relevant.
Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò fiercely rejects the indiscriminate application of ‘decolonisation’ to everything from literature, language and philosophy to sociology, psychology and medicine. He argues that the decolonisation industry, obsessed with cataloguing wrongs, is seriously harming scholarship on and in Africa. He finds ‘decolonisation’ of culture intellectually unsound and wholly unrealistic, conflating modernity with coloniality, and groundlessly advocating an open-ended undoing of global society’s foundations. Worst of all, today’s movement attacks its own ‘decolonisers’ themselves are disregarding, infantilising and imposing values on contemporary African thinkers.
This powerful, much-needed intervention questions whether today’s ‘decolonisation’ truly serves African empowerment. Táíwò’s is a bold challenge to respect African intellectuals as innovative adaptors, appropriators and synthesisers of ideas they have always seen as universally relevant.
Audio CD
Published June 13, 2023
59 people are currently reading
916 people want to read
About the author
Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò
14 books45 followersOlúfẹ́mi Táíwò (b. 1956) is a philosopher and professor at Cornell University.
See also: Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò, philosopher at Georgetown University.
See also: Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò, philosopher at Georgetown University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
February 11, 2023
Ugh... I've just written this review then accidentally closed goodreads and lost the whole lot. Disheartening. Now, do I have the energy to write it all again or am I just going to write "I liked it"?
OK, so Olúfemi Táíwò is a Nigerian writer. Its important to remember this, firstly because there is an American writer of the same name who is first in any Google search you might do for this name, and secondly because if a book with this name was written by a British guy called Nigel it would probably be a very different kind of book...
His argument is that Decolonisation has ceased to be a process of ridding colonised countries (in Africa and elsewhere) of their oppressors (mainly European). Instead it has become a trope that is used for more obscurantist purposes, trying to rid all aspects of culture - from music to philosophy, from literature to politics - of any faint trace of European influence. The argument is wider than Africa, and he mentions Asian countries, former Japanese colonies, among others, but his primary focus is his own continent.
To illustrate how futile and unhelpful it is to continue using the Decolonisation trope above all else, he talks about the music of King Sunny Ade who has repurposed European instruments and musical forms to make something distinctively African. What would it look like if it were decolonised?
Widening the focus, he suggests that for all ideas, one has to ask, is this a pure product of colonialism as opposed to simply a product of a European culture?how was it used in the past and is it beneficial? For example, Liberal democracy is a product of Europe but it isn't a product of colonialism. Colonialism, in fact, was a betrayal of enlightenment values like liberalism, and colonised peoples were not fully able to get the full benefit of them. So it would make sense to modernise Africa using these things consciously and owning them. That isn't neo-colonialism, it's a path to progress. But, he argues, while the whole of Africa is crying out for better political and economic institutions, there are African intellectuals who don't want to dirty their hands by engaging with the philosophy that built those things.
What they are doing, he argues, is retaining the "Manichean split" between coloniser and colonised which is colonialism's most fundamental legacy. In other words, by defining their identity in reaction to the past they entrench the harms of the past and foreclose on the benefits of modernity. Worse still, there are populist leaders like Modi in India, who, despite inheriting a country that had retained a lot of the best aspects of Liberal thought, use Decolonisation as a slogan to energise support for some pretty nasty shit (those are my words, not Taiwo's). What's even weirder is that there are some extremists in American academia who argue that colonialism is "an enlightenment project" and that the only way to expiate white guilt is for the whole history of western thought to be thrown out even in the country that is arguably still the most free, most equal multiracial society in the world (less so today than a few years ago, perhaps, but still doing a lot better than its critics give it credit for).
What's needed is some perspective and a cool head. I've seen the same kinds of arguments from Kishore Mahbubani, who focuses more in Asia, but Mahbubani is weirdly a fan of state censorship. Well, OK, at least the principle is the same: take the agency of the people seriously and be pragmatic about building a better future avoiding the twin traps of either staying in thrall to a colonial past or defining yourself wholly in reaction to it.
There. I made it to the end. Well done, me.
OK, so Olúfemi Táíwò is a Nigerian writer. Its important to remember this, firstly because there is an American writer of the same name who is first in any Google search you might do for this name, and secondly because if a book with this name was written by a British guy called Nigel it would probably be a very different kind of book...
His argument is that Decolonisation has ceased to be a process of ridding colonised countries (in Africa and elsewhere) of their oppressors (mainly European). Instead it has become a trope that is used for more obscurantist purposes, trying to rid all aspects of culture - from music to philosophy, from literature to politics - of any faint trace of European influence. The argument is wider than Africa, and he mentions Asian countries, former Japanese colonies, among others, but his primary focus is his own continent.
To illustrate how futile and unhelpful it is to continue using the Decolonisation trope above all else, he talks about the music of King Sunny Ade who has repurposed European instruments and musical forms to make something distinctively African. What would it look like if it were decolonised?
Widening the focus, he suggests that for all ideas, one has to ask, is this a pure product of colonialism as opposed to simply a product of a European culture?how was it used in the past and is it beneficial? For example, Liberal democracy is a product of Europe but it isn't a product of colonialism. Colonialism, in fact, was a betrayal of enlightenment values like liberalism, and colonised peoples were not fully able to get the full benefit of them. So it would make sense to modernise Africa using these things consciously and owning them. That isn't neo-colonialism, it's a path to progress. But, he argues, while the whole of Africa is crying out for better political and economic institutions, there are African intellectuals who don't want to dirty their hands by engaging with the philosophy that built those things.
What they are doing, he argues, is retaining the "Manichean split" between coloniser and colonised which is colonialism's most fundamental legacy. In other words, by defining their identity in reaction to the past they entrench the harms of the past and foreclose on the benefits of modernity. Worse still, there are populist leaders like Modi in India, who, despite inheriting a country that had retained a lot of the best aspects of Liberal thought, use Decolonisation as a slogan to energise support for some pretty nasty shit (those are my words, not Taiwo's). What's even weirder is that there are some extremists in American academia who argue that colonialism is "an enlightenment project" and that the only way to expiate white guilt is for the whole history of western thought to be thrown out even in the country that is arguably still the most free, most equal multiracial society in the world (less so today than a few years ago, perhaps, but still doing a lot better than its critics give it credit for).
What's needed is some perspective and a cool head. I've seen the same kinds of arguments from Kishore Mahbubani, who focuses more in Asia, but Mahbubani is weirdly a fan of state censorship. Well, OK, at least the principle is the same: take the agency of the people seriously and be pragmatic about building a better future avoiding the twin traps of either staying in thrall to a colonial past or defining yourself wholly in reaction to it.
There. I made it to the end. Well done, me.
June 1, 2024
'I do not make the case for engaging with the political and philosophical discourse of modernity on the grounds of personal preference or that it furnishes the best of which humanity is capable. No, I am arguing that other countries that have chosen to be modern in our time have exited the ‘misery corner’ of the globe that they used to share with us. Now, they have become givers of alms to Africa. And Africans are happy to stretch out our arms to them while fulminating against the same principles whose adoption enabled them to overtake us.'
July 11, 2024
Taiwo argues decolonization theory (i) obscures the role of Africans in history, and (ii) hinders their adopting modern liberal practices. Persuasive, declamatory, repetitive.
September 22, 2024
The book contains some interesting theories and ideas but Taiwo's ideas about what decolonialism is and what decolonial thinking entails and where he thus bases his entire arguing on, are not what I consider to be the dominant views on these matters. Therefore, it often left me irritated by the assumptions the author makes about decolonial thinking without any evidence. His whole theory about decolonisation is based on Wideru and Ngugi Wa Thiong'o's theories, with whom he clearly doesn't align. This book is not against decolonisation, it's against Wideru and Ngugi Wa Thiong'o's theories, which is fine, but don't claim these theories to be the backbones of decolonial thinking, they are not.
November 17, 2023
Excellent read. This book makes a very compelling case for a more nuanced view on the history and development of the continent of Africa. Would highly recommend to anyone interested on the continent
April 20, 2025
I agree with roughly 80 per cent of Táíwò’s arguments and theories, especially his contention that modernity is not synonymous with colonialism. Colonialism—or, in this context, “the West”—is not the sole progenitor of modernity in the Enlightenment sense. Modernity was not entirely constructed by Western thought in Europe; rather, it emerged from exchanges, encounters, fusions and collisions of ideas that were by no means all forged in Europe as the capital of colonialism. Long before Europe’s colonial ventures, the Silk Road had already brought together diverse perspectives that fostered modernities in different localities. By “modernity” here, I mean a rational mode of thought that privileges empirical experience and maintains an orientation towards progress. All three of these elements were practised—independent of, and prior to, any contact between the West and the non‑West—through maritime networks across many non‑Western regions; witness, for example, the Pacific, or the encounters between Makassan sailors and Aboriginal peoples in northern Australia.
Thus, when Táíwò forcefully—and, indeed, angrily—declares his refusal to treat “decolonisation‑2” theories seriously because they explicitly conflate modernity with colonialism, I agree one thousand per cent. Eurocentric modernity certainly travelled through colonial channels, yet equating modernity with colonialism is an oversimplification. Unfortunately, the remaining 20 per cent of my disagreement with Táíwò also stems from oversimplification. Much is reduced to broad strokes, especially when he turns to the question of universalism. Táíwò overlooks the fact that universalism carries a potent hegemonic risk, one that simultaneously delegitimises world‑views rooted in specific life‑worlds. Here I am not speaking solely about Africa.
One further point: Táíwò seems to miss that the “decolonisation‑2” theories he critiques are themselves products of Western liberalism, which fails to confront structural or class problems within real‑political-charge decolonisation (what he terms “decolonisation‑1”). Consequently, these decolonisation‑2 theories often resonate with leaders in so‑called Global South countries who appropriate protectionist, atavistic or nativist narratives—and stridently anti‑Western rhetoric imbued with ethnocentrism—to perpetuate repression of their own people. Indonesia is a case in point.
Thus, when Táíwò forcefully—and, indeed, angrily—declares his refusal to treat “decolonisation‑2” theories seriously because they explicitly conflate modernity with colonialism, I agree one thousand per cent. Eurocentric modernity certainly travelled through colonial channels, yet equating modernity with colonialism is an oversimplification. Unfortunately, the remaining 20 per cent of my disagreement with Táíwò also stems from oversimplification. Much is reduced to broad strokes, especially when he turns to the question of universalism. Táíwò overlooks the fact that universalism carries a potent hegemonic risk, one that simultaneously delegitimises world‑views rooted in specific life‑worlds. Here I am not speaking solely about Africa.
One further point: Táíwò seems to miss that the “decolonisation‑2” theories he critiques are themselves products of Western liberalism, which fails to confront structural or class problems within real‑political-charge decolonisation (what he terms “decolonisation‑1”). Consequently, these decolonisation‑2 theories often resonate with leaders in so‑called Global South countries who appropriate protectionist, atavistic or nativist narratives—and stridently anti‑Western rhetoric imbued with ethnocentrism—to perpetuate repression of their own people. Indonesia is a case in point.
Read
May 23, 2024It's really hard for me to evaluate this book because I think I lack some background/I am not the target audience.
Otherwise I think the author made some interesting points in the question of how/what to decolonise and the tension between the meaning of decolonisation and modernity for African countries. I didn't expect this book to be quite so philosophical/academic but I think this is my mistake in having expectations in the first place. It was an informative read and backed up by a lot of sources which I appreciated.
Otherwise I think the author made some interesting points in the question of how/what to decolonise and the tension between the meaning of decolonisation and modernity for African countries. I didn't expect this book to be quite so philosophical/academic but I think this is my mistake in having expectations in the first place. It was an informative read and backed up by a lot of sources which I appreciated.
Read
September 19, 2025Very good and persuasive book - longer review to follow.
April 4, 2024
The premise is great and some of the finer points in chapters 2/3 were actually super well argued but large/grand claims were asserted as true or uncontested prima facie which was just strange and made it hard to agree with the author at points. The section on language was beautifully done. Overall interesting book that challenged decolonization theory on a more material level which is admittedly where that field often bottoms out, something that is becoming more and more relevant in emerging discourse.
November 25, 2024
argument was well though through but i'm not sold
November 28, 2025
Hallelujah!! I have finally finished this book. This was a longgg read but nonetheless a wonderful book that I sincerely enjoyed reading. Taiwo's argument allows students to really critically think about decolonization and African agency, and for that I am grateful. Until next review!!
January 5, 2023
Whether you find "decolonisation" compelling or whether you have doubts, if you are genuinely interested in progressive developments of the Global South, read this book.
Táíwò rigorously defends formal political independence ("Decolonisation 1"), but uses the very same principles to show us the dangers of obscurantism, essentialism, and reaction lurking in "Decolonisation 2", the increasingly popular project aimed at uprooting all political and cultural vestiges of colonialism.
By introducing you to a range of debates between African thinkers - each as equally African and anti-imperialist as each other - Táíwò denies you the luxury of typecasting any given political or cultural expression as either "African/decolonial" or "European/colonial". He instead forces you to think for yourself and to consider their arguments, based on what your strategy and vision for progress looks like.
In doing so, Táíwò compellingly shows us that colonialism, far from being an Enlightenment project, greatly disfigured and betrayed universalist principles. He thus reclaims the universalism and modernism (as embraced by the original anti-colonial movements), demonstrates the dangers in rejecting those concepts, and shows us why they are more relevant than ever in struggles for progress and dignity all across the world.
Note however, as Táíwò makes clear in the introduction, that the book focuses mostly on Africa, and largely avoids delving into any specific modern-day controversies or case studies. What remains, however, is a pungent, readable, and pithy review of arguments and thought patterns that replicate themselves in today's decolonisation discourse.
Táíwò rigorously defends formal political independence ("Decolonisation 1"), but uses the very same principles to show us the dangers of obscurantism, essentialism, and reaction lurking in "Decolonisation 2", the increasingly popular project aimed at uprooting all political and cultural vestiges of colonialism.
By introducing you to a range of debates between African thinkers - each as equally African and anti-imperialist as each other - Táíwò denies you the luxury of typecasting any given political or cultural expression as either "African/decolonial" or "European/colonial". He instead forces you to think for yourself and to consider their arguments, based on what your strategy and vision for progress looks like.
In doing so, Táíwò compellingly shows us that colonialism, far from being an Enlightenment project, greatly disfigured and betrayed universalist principles. He thus reclaims the universalism and modernism (as embraced by the original anti-colonial movements), demonstrates the dangers in rejecting those concepts, and shows us why they are more relevant than ever in struggles for progress and dignity all across the world.
Note however, as Táíwò makes clear in the introduction, that the book focuses mostly on Africa, and largely avoids delving into any specific modern-day controversies or case studies. What remains, however, is a pungent, readable, and pithy review of arguments and thought patterns that replicate themselves in today's decolonisation discourse.
October 20, 2023
//3.5 stars//
This book was a bit too long, but the concept at its heart is fascinating, confronting and persuasive. Taiwo posits that decolonisation is about agency and power and choice of an individual African national and applies to politics and the economy. Calls to decolonise language, literature and art can be helpful, but it is a far overused trophe that belittles African agency in choosing to keep elements brought over in colonial times, if they are owned by Africans.
“'Decolonisation' today, how-ever, has come to mean something entirely different: forcing an ex-colony to forswear, on pain of being forever under the yoke of colonisation, any and every cultural, political, intellectual, social and linguistic artefact, idea, process, institution and practice that retains even the slightest whiff of the colonial past. I call this decolonisation2.
Decolonisation2 presents itself in a number of ways. Any aspect of an ex-colony that mirrors what was there during the colonial period is treated as evidence of continuing colonisation.
Any institution that can be traced to colonial times must be shunned once colonisation has supposedly ended.”
“I would like to see the trope abandoned in most areas, especially when it comes to making sense of phenomena in contemporary Africa. This is not because colonialism plays no role in explaining events, but because we must take care to specify in each case exactly how colonialism features in the expla-nation, and why a colonialism-driven explanation is better than the alternatives.”
“Throughout the book, I point to ways in which the ex-colonised, at least in some parts of Africa, have domesticated (and not merely by mimicry) many ideas, processes, institutions and practices that are routinely attributed to colonialism, but are in fact traceable to modernity and other causes. And even if some of those phenomena were rooted in colonialism, that by itself is not enough to condemn them as evidence of the persistence of colonial forms of rule in the post-independence period.”
“Decolonising scholars cannot escape a Manichaean division in which, (just as during colonial times), the colonised and the colonisers must occupy entirely distinct spaces”
“First, is X created, caused, deter-mined, conditioned or influenced by colonialism? We can see from my example of music that the relationship between X and colonialism is rarely straightforward or clear-cut. Whether X is ‘African music', 'African philosophy, 'African literature or something else, the place of colonialism in its genealogy must be considered and demonstrated to show why it is a candidate for decolonising. I believe that if this were done, much of the decol-onisation discourse would evaporate.”
“Second, Once we've established Xs credentials for decotonising, we must identify what sort of colonialism we're seeking to rid it of. Colonialism in Africa was anything but a monolith: settler colonialism predominated in southern, eastern and northern Africa, while exploitation-colonialism was imposed across the rest of the continent.”
“Third, when X is present in a former colony post-indepen-dence, before we rush to decolonise it as a colonial hangover or product, we must consider and, if appropriate, rule out, any alternative explanations. Such explanations might include inertia or a choice by the peoples or intellectuals of this ex-colony to domesticate X in their new situation.”
“Fourth, given that a positive aim of decolonising is to restore something to X that was taken away from it by its colonial origins, once we've established that there is a causal connection between X and colonialism, we might discover that in the case of an entire discipline, for example, colonial genealogy by itself means very little.”
This book was a bit too long, but the concept at its heart is fascinating, confronting and persuasive. Taiwo posits that decolonisation is about agency and power and choice of an individual African national and applies to politics and the economy. Calls to decolonise language, literature and art can be helpful, but it is a far overused trophe that belittles African agency in choosing to keep elements brought over in colonial times, if they are owned by Africans.
“'Decolonisation' today, how-ever, has come to mean something entirely different: forcing an ex-colony to forswear, on pain of being forever under the yoke of colonisation, any and every cultural, political, intellectual, social and linguistic artefact, idea, process, institution and practice that retains even the slightest whiff of the colonial past. I call this decolonisation2.
Decolonisation2 presents itself in a number of ways. Any aspect of an ex-colony that mirrors what was there during the colonial period is treated as evidence of continuing colonisation.
Any institution that can be traced to colonial times must be shunned once colonisation has supposedly ended.”
“I would like to see the trope abandoned in most areas, especially when it comes to making sense of phenomena in contemporary Africa. This is not because colonialism plays no role in explaining events, but because we must take care to specify in each case exactly how colonialism features in the expla-nation, and why a colonialism-driven explanation is better than the alternatives.”
“Throughout the book, I point to ways in which the ex-colonised, at least in some parts of Africa, have domesticated (and not merely by mimicry) many ideas, processes, institutions and practices that are routinely attributed to colonialism, but are in fact traceable to modernity and other causes. And even if some of those phenomena were rooted in colonialism, that by itself is not enough to condemn them as evidence of the persistence of colonial forms of rule in the post-independence period.”
“Decolonising scholars cannot escape a Manichaean division in which, (just as during colonial times), the colonised and the colonisers must occupy entirely distinct spaces”
“First, is X created, caused, deter-mined, conditioned or influenced by colonialism? We can see from my example of music that the relationship between X and colonialism is rarely straightforward or clear-cut. Whether X is ‘African music', 'African philosophy, 'African literature or something else, the place of colonialism in its genealogy must be considered and demonstrated to show why it is a candidate for decolonising. I believe that if this were done, much of the decol-onisation discourse would evaporate.”
“Second, Once we've established Xs credentials for decotonising, we must identify what sort of colonialism we're seeking to rid it of. Colonialism in Africa was anything but a monolith: settler colonialism predominated in southern, eastern and northern Africa, while exploitation-colonialism was imposed across the rest of the continent.”
“Third, when X is present in a former colony post-indepen-dence, before we rush to decolonise it as a colonial hangover or product, we must consider and, if appropriate, rule out, any alternative explanations. Such explanations might include inertia or a choice by the peoples or intellectuals of this ex-colony to domesticate X in their new situation.”
“Fourth, given that a positive aim of decolonising is to restore something to X that was taken away from it by its colonial origins, once we've established that there is a causal connection between X and colonialism, we might discover that in the case of an entire discipline, for example, colonial genealogy by itself means very little.”
May 12, 2025
Against decolonisation? Aren’t we supposed to be pro-decolonisation??
This book humbled me. It made me realize that, though I’ve read books *about* African scholarship, I am seriously ignorant when it comes to African scholarship itself.
Táíwò’s book was against ‘decolonisation philosophy’ and ‘decolonisation literature’—which seek to cleanse African scholarship of its colonial influences. But decolonisation philosophy also targets people I (naïvely?) considered decolonial thinkers—like Aimé Césaire, Walter Rodney, Frantz Fanon 😮 Because they’re rooted in European philosophy and they write in colonial languages.
The main focus of Táíwò’s critique was Ghanaian philosopher Kwasi Wiredu and Kenyan author Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o—
[pause: the fact that I didn’t know who Wiredu was and yet he’s considered the greatest 20th century African philosopher]
And Táíwò’s critique was basically that decolonisation philosophy—rather than deconstructing the colonizer / colonized dichotomy to liberate African scholarship—reinforces and fixes the dichotomy; permanently oppresses; and denies the ownership claim Africans have on ‘Western philosophy,’ modernity, and truth.
I’m so new to this debate. But Táíwò compared his arguments to the relationship between feminism and philosophy—and THAT I’m very familiar with. On a personal note: my academic focus is female-centred classical philosophy and I get two kinds of responses: a) “you can’t do truly radical feminism within classical philosophy,” (from my feminist readers—analogous, for Táíwò, to decolonisation philosophers)** or b) “you can’t do good classical philosophy with all this woman stuff” (from my [male] philosophy readers—analogous to philosophers who completely ignore African scholarship).
A very eye-opening philosophy book for me, overall.
** you haven’t lived until someone’s said your mind was “colonized by the phallus.”
This book humbled me. It made me realize that, though I’ve read books *about* African scholarship, I am seriously ignorant when it comes to African scholarship itself.
Táíwò’s book was against ‘decolonisation philosophy’ and ‘decolonisation literature’—which seek to cleanse African scholarship of its colonial influences. But decolonisation philosophy also targets people I (naïvely?) considered decolonial thinkers—like Aimé Césaire, Walter Rodney, Frantz Fanon 😮 Because they’re rooted in European philosophy and they write in colonial languages.
The main focus of Táíwò’s critique was Ghanaian philosopher Kwasi Wiredu and Kenyan author Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o—
[pause: the fact that I didn’t know who Wiredu was and yet he’s considered the greatest 20th century African philosopher]
And Táíwò’s critique was basically that decolonisation philosophy—rather than deconstructing the colonizer / colonized dichotomy to liberate African scholarship—reinforces and fixes the dichotomy; permanently oppresses; and denies the ownership claim Africans have on ‘Western philosophy,’ modernity, and truth.
I’m so new to this debate. But Táíwò compared his arguments to the relationship between feminism and philosophy—and THAT I’m very familiar with. On a personal note: my academic focus is female-centred classical philosophy and I get two kinds of responses: a) “you can’t do truly radical feminism within classical philosophy,” (from my feminist readers—analogous, for Táíwò, to decolonisation philosophers)** or b) “you can’t do good classical philosophy with all this woman stuff” (from my [male] philosophy readers—analogous to philosophers who completely ignore African scholarship).
A very eye-opening philosophy book for me, overall.
** you haven’t lived until someone’s said your mind was “colonized by the phallus.”
August 27, 2023
Very much enjoyed this, and also agree with the main thesis that decolonisation has become a buzzword with very unclear meaning that ends up disempowering thinkers from former colonies, and sneaks in Eurocentrism through the back door. But to be quite honest I don't really know enough about the African philosophy he engages with, so I can't really assess the arguments as much as I would like to
One part of his analysis I kind of disagree with is his argument around linguistic decolonisation, where he argues that philosophising in native languages for its own sake is a pointless excercise because 1) many concepts that have been developed in English German or French have not been developed in native languages 2) translating philosophical concepts 1:1 into native languages without corresponding philosophical praxis in respective countries isolates the researchers doing so, ending up with a weird private language excercise. I agree that African philosophers writing in colonial languages shouldnt be discounted as not being "real African thinkers", I do want to see a point in trying to introduce and develop philosophy in native languages
Oh, and he is slightly too liberal for my taste
One part of his analysis I kind of disagree with is his argument around linguistic decolonisation, where he argues that philosophising in native languages for its own sake is a pointless excercise because 1) many concepts that have been developed in English German or French have not been developed in native languages 2) translating philosophical concepts 1:1 into native languages without corresponding philosophical praxis in respective countries isolates the researchers doing so, ending up with a weird private language excercise. I agree that African philosophers writing in colonial languages shouldnt be discounted as not being "real African thinkers", I do want to see a point in trying to introduce and develop philosophy in native languages
Oh, and he is slightly too liberal for my taste
September 29, 2023
Engaging and thought provoking call to discard "decolonialisation" in discussions on African philosophy, historiography, political science based on taking care to specify in each case how colonialism features in the explanation, and why a colonialism-driven explanation is better than the alternatives
Defining decolonialisation(1) as making a colony into a self-governing entity with its political and economic fortunes under its own direction (though not necessarily control)
Whereas decolonialisation(2) is defined as removing any and every cultural, political, intellectual, social and liguistic artefact, idea, process, institution and practice that retains "even the slightest whiff of the colonial past"
The author takes aim at the conflation of human emancipation with decolonialisation, as overextending decolonialisation beyond its accurate application of a struggle for independence and its outcome, results in incorrectly identifying causality via confusion and distortion
Good discussion of the philosophy, history, historiography, political theory and comparative analysis of colonialism and its aftermath in Africa and the Caribbean, in arguing that decolonialisation has become an unnecessary buzzword in many circles, in which it has become used to perform contemporary "morality" or "authenticity"
As well as in the domain of linguistics, especially constrasting Ngūgī and Cabral's views on English as the postcolonial lingua franca and agreeing with the latter
Defining decolonialisation(1) as making a colony into a self-governing entity with its political and economic fortunes under its own direction (though not necessarily control)
Whereas decolonialisation(2) is defined as removing any and every cultural, political, intellectual, social and liguistic artefact, idea, process, institution and practice that retains "even the slightest whiff of the colonial past"
The author takes aim at the conflation of human emancipation with decolonialisation, as overextending decolonialisation beyond its accurate application of a struggle for independence and its outcome, results in incorrectly identifying causality via confusion and distortion
Good discussion of the philosophy, history, historiography, political theory and comparative analysis of colonialism and its aftermath in Africa and the Caribbean, in arguing that decolonialisation has become an unnecessary buzzword in many circles, in which it has become used to perform contemporary "morality" or "authenticity"
As well as in the domain of linguistics, especially constrasting Ngūgī and Cabral's views on English as the postcolonial lingua franca and agreeing with the latter
February 20, 2025
Táíwò’s book offers a sharp critique of the overuse of "decolonisation," urging a focus on Africa’s specific historical and contemporary realities. His distinction between Decolonisation¹ and decolonisation² deepens the discourse, and his emphasis on African intellectual traditions, culture, and language is a valuable contribution. He rightly challenges simplistic calls to reject all Western ideas, recognizing the complexity of decolonising science and language.
However, his uncritical endorsement of modernity and democracy as liberatory is troubling. These systems, rooted in colonial histories, were tools of control rather than genuine freedom. The past 16 months in Gaza reveal their complicity in ongoing violence, exposing the hollowness of their promises. Would Táíwò still uphold them today? Rather than solutions, they are part of the problem.
Despite this, the book is a must-read. It is well-researched, thought-provoking, and essential for understanding the evolving discourse on decolonisation.
However, his uncritical endorsement of modernity and democracy as liberatory is troubling. These systems, rooted in colonial histories, were tools of control rather than genuine freedom. The past 16 months in Gaza reveal their complicity in ongoing violence, exposing the hollowness of their promises. Would Táíwò still uphold them today? Rather than solutions, they are part of the problem.
Despite this, the book is a must-read. It is well-researched, thought-provoking, and essential for understanding the evolving discourse on decolonisation.
July 18, 2023
Een pleidooi tegen de reactionaire reflex die blijkbaar bij nogal wat filosofen en anderen in ex-koloniën leeft. Mensen die er blijkbaar voor pleiten terug te keren naar een wereld zoals ze voor de kolonisatie bestond… weg met alles wat besmet is door de kolonisatie, weg met de ‘moderniteit’. We wisten niet dat dat leefde in sommige landen, blijkbaar wel.
Een pleidooi ook voor diezelfde landen om uit de slachtofferrol te treden en hun eigen verantwoordelijkheid op te nemen. De weg naar de democratie is lang.
De schrijver houdt een stevig pleidooi waarin het er soms nogal persoonlijk aan toe gaat en dat, wat ons betreft, ook in de helft van het aantal pagina’s had kunnen gepleit worden. Los daarvan, een erg belangrijk boek dat toch vooral door burgers en politici uit de ex-koloniën zou moeten gelezen worden al kunnen we niet inschatten in hoeverre men er daar voor openstaat
Een pleidooi ook voor diezelfde landen om uit de slachtofferrol te treden en hun eigen verantwoordelijkheid op te nemen. De weg naar de democratie is lang.
De schrijver houdt een stevig pleidooi waarin het er soms nogal persoonlijk aan toe gaat en dat, wat ons betreft, ook in de helft van het aantal pagina’s had kunnen gepleit worden. Los daarvan, een erg belangrijk boek dat toch vooral door burgers en politici uit de ex-koloniën zou moeten gelezen worden al kunnen we niet inschatten in hoeverre men er daar voor openstaat
July 2, 2024
Dit boek is geen pleidooi te stoppen met de dekolonisatie in de westerse wereld maar richt zich helemaal op de dekolonisatie in Afrikaanse landen zelf. Ook is het geen pleidooi om de afhankelijkheid van Afrikaanse landen op allerlei gebied goed te praten. Het gaat Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò om het gebruik van dekolonisatie als argument in discussies over wat nog wel en wat niet meer als samenleving te omarmen. Hij pleit ervoor ideeën op hun waarde te beoordelen en niet op hun herkomst omdat het laatste geen enkel Afrikaans land goed zou doen.
Dit pleidooi geeft een fascinerend inkijkje in de discussies die op het Afrikaanse continent gevoerd worden.
Dit pleidooi geeft een fascinerend inkijkje in de discussies die op het Afrikaanse continent gevoerd worden.
October 4, 2022
A helpful argument for a more nuanced view of African social and political development
Taiwo urges his fellow academics and countrymen to drop their fascination with decolonialism and argues that this simplistic framework gets in the way of absorbing and adapting principles of universal human rights and liberal governance to Africa. It’s refreshing to read someone who is unafraid to stand up to an academic mob.
Taiwo urges his fellow academics and countrymen to drop their fascination with decolonialism and argues that this simplistic framework gets in the way of absorbing and adapting principles of universal human rights and liberal governance to Africa. It’s refreshing to read someone who is unafraid to stand up to an academic mob.
April 16, 2025
This book presents a compelling argument that contributes to a paradigm shift within academia, where decolonisation has become an increasingly prominent theme. By highlighting Africa’s own historical depth and intellectual contributions, it reframes the concept of modernity as a more inclusive one—no longer confined to Western societies alone.
Must read for anyone interested in Africa, (de)colonisation or academic debates on modernity and decolonisation!
Must read for anyone interested in Africa, (de)colonisation or academic debates on modernity and decolonisation!
December 21, 2023
A very dense but valuable read forcing us to reckon with what decolonizing is and isn’t, how it does and doesn’t tie to concepts of independence, freedom, and power and how it can, if we’re not careful, be used as a way that robs Africans (and others) of agency in their own lives.
December 12, 2024
The argument of the book is very thought-provoking, and the author examines is at length with, giving lots of contextual, historical examples... maybe even too many? It felt like the writing could be condensed to make it flow better.
November 5, 2025
This was my first foray into Olúfẹ́mi Táíwò's work. In this book, Táíwò makes cohesive arguments against the popular perspectives underlying decolonisation today. In my view, this book is seminal in understanding the stasis in African political science.
December 27, 2025
A humanist critique of the practical impact of the "decolonization discourse" on the African continent. Similar to many other critiques of the modern "woke" left, Táíwò's critique is that there is a subtle regressivism embedded within progressive intentions.
August 12, 2023
Zeer onduidelijke vertaling van een anders interessant boek.
May 31, 2025
3.5 stars
January 17, 2024
3,5e ster.
April 17, 2024
A must read for anyone who has encountered contemporary decolonial literature.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews