1932

Abstract

To present the world anthropologies project (WA), this article explores the existence of three kinds of anthropological cosmopolitanisms and cosmopolitics: imperial, liberal, and radical. Imperial cosmopolitics reproduces the hegemony of the Anglo-American core in the world system of anthropological production. Liberal cosmopolitics is a step ahead but naturalizes the West's prominent place in the global production of knowledge. Radical cosmopolitics is currently epitomized by the WA. It problematizes Anglo-American centrality and criticizes Eurocentrism. The WA is a hybrid of diverse theoretical and political debates. It has important singularities: It is not located in the discipline's center, and it is a political critique of and action against the existing global anthropological hierarchy. Critical transnationalism and cosmopolitanism are sources of inspiration for the WA. The WA believes that anthropologists can take advantage of globalization's heterodox opportunities to go beyond metropolitan provincialism, to improve the conditions of conversability, and to benefit from the diversity of anthropologies and from the resulting heteroglossic cross-fertilizations.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102313-030139
2014-10-21
2024-03-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/anthro/43/1/annurev-anthro-102313-030139.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102313-030139&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Acciaioli G. 2011. From world anthropology to world anthropologies: continuities in the project of decolonizing and internationalizing anthropology. See Ribeiro 2011 20–44
  2. Albert B. 1995. O Ouro Canibal e a Queda Do Céu: Uma Crítica Xamânica da Economia Política da Natureza Sér. Antropol. 174 Brasilia: Univ. Bras.
  3. Am. Anthropol. Assoc., Comm. on World Anthropol 2014. Objectives Adopted Aug. 10, 2010. Am Anthropol. Assoc., Arlington, Va. http://www.aaanet.org/cmtes/cwa/index.cfm
  4. Asad T. 1973. Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter New York: Humanities
  5. Bartolomé MA. 2006. Procesos Interculturales. Antropología Política del Pluralismo Cultural en América Latina. México: Siglo XXI Ed.
  6. Bhabha HK. 1994. Of mimicry and man: the ambivalence of colonial discourse. The Location of Culture85–92 London/New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  7. Boskovic A. 2008. Other People's Anthropologies: Ethnographic Practice on the Margins New York/Oxford: Berghahn
  8. Buchowski M. 2012. Intricate relations between Western anthropologists and Eastern ethnologists. Focaal – J. Glob. Hist. Anthropol. 63:20–38 [Google Scholar]
  9. Buchowski M. 2014. The story of WCAA Presented at Jt. Meet. Int. Union Anthropol. and Ethnol. Sci. and the Jpn. Assoc. Cult. Anthropol., Chiba, Jpn.
  10. Bueno C. 2007. Hegemonía o alternancia: trayectorias glocales de la antropología. Desacatos 25:238–42 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cardoso de Oliveira LR. 2008. Dialogical and power differences in world anthropologies. Vibrant 5:2268–76 [Google Scholar]
  12. Cardoso de Oliveira R. 1988. O que é isso que chamamos de antropologia brasileira. Sobre o Pensamento Antropológico109–28 Rio de Janeiro: Tempo Brasileiro [Google Scholar]
  13. Cardoso de Oliveira R. 1999/2000. Peripheral anthropologies “versus” central anthropologies. J. Lat. Am. Anthropol. 4:2 5:110–30 [Google Scholar]
  14. Castro-Gómez S, Grosfoguel R. 2007. El Giro Decolonial. Reflexiones para una Diversidad Epistémica más Allá del Capitalismo Global. Bogotá: Siglo Hombre Ed./Univ. Cent./Pontifícia Univ. Javeriana
  15. Chaabani H. 2012. Insights on the history of anthropology: its emergence in the wider Middle East before it existed as a discipline. Int. J. Mod. Anthropol. 5:80–87 [Google Scholar]
  16. Chakrabarty D. 2000. Provincializing Europe. Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton, NJ/Oxford, UK: Princeton Univ. Press
  17. Cheah P, Robbins B. 1998. Cosmopolitics: Thinking and Feeling Beyond the Nation Minneapolis: Univ. Minn. Press
  18. Chun A. 2008. The postcolonial alien in us all: identity in the global division of intellectual labor. Positions 16:3689–710 [Google Scholar]
  19. Comaroff J, Comaroff JL. 2012. Theory from the South: Or, How Euro-America Is Evolving Toward Africa Boulder, CO: Paradigm
  20. Connel RW. 2007. Southern Theory: Social Science and the Global Dynamics of Knowledge Cambridge, UK: Polity
  21. Copans J. 1975. Anthropologie et Impérialisme Paris: François Maspero
  22. Danda AK. 1995. Foundations of Anthropology: India New Delhi: Inter-India
  23. Das V. 2003. The Oxford Indian Companion to Sociology and Social Anthropology Delhi: Oxford Univ. Press
  24. Das V, Randeria S. 2014. Democratic strivings, social sciences, and public debates: the case of India. Am. Anthropol. 116:160–65 [Google Scholar]
  25. Daveluy M, Dorais LJ. 2009. À la Péripherie du Centre. Les Limites de l'Hégémonie en Anthropologie. Montreal, Can: Éd. Liber
  26. De L'Estoile B. 2008. Hegemonic gravity and pluralistic utopia: a comparative approach to internationalization in Anthropology. J. World Anthropol. Netw. 3:111–29 [Google Scholar]
  27. De L'Estoile B, Neiburg F, Sigaud L. 2002. Antropologia, Impérios e Estados Nacionais Rio de Janeiro: Relume Dumará/Faperj
  28. Díaz Crovetto G. 2008. Antropologías mundiales en cuestión: diálogos y debates. J. World Anthropol. Netw. 3:131–55 [Google Scholar]
  29. Dodds JW. 1963. Eulogy for Paul Fejos (1897–1963). Curr. Anthropol. 4:4405–7 [Google Scholar]
  30. Dodds JW. 1973. The Several Lives of Paul Fejos: a Hungarian American Odyssey New York: Wenner-Gren Found. Anthropol. Res.
  31. Dominguez VR. 2012. Mutuality, responsibility, and reciprocity in situations of marked inequality: dilemmas of, and concerning, US anthropology in the world. Focaal – J. Glob. Hist. Anthropol. 63:51–61 [Google Scholar]
  32. Elster J. 2010. One social science or many?. See UNESCO/ISSC 2010 199–202
  33. Escobar A. 1994. Welcome to Cyberia: notes on the anthropology of cyberculture. Curr. Anthropol. 35:211–31 [Google Scholar]
  34. Fabian J. 2012. Comments on “Changing global flows in anthropological knowledge.”. Focaal – J. Glob. Hist. Anthropol. 63:62–65 [Google Scholar]
  35. Fahim H. 1982a. Communication among anthropologists across non-Western Countries. See Fahim 1982b 138–51
  36. Fahim H. 1982b. Indigenous Anthropology in Non-Western Countries Durham, NC: Carolina Acad.
  37. Gerholm T, Hannerz U. 1982. Introduction: the shaping of national anthropologies. Ethnos 47:15–35 [Google Scholar]
  38. González RJ. 2009. American Counterinsurgency: Human Science and the Human Terrain Chicago: Prickly Paradigm
  39. Gough K. 1968. Anthropology and imperialism. Monthly Rev. 19:1112–27 [Google Scholar]
  40. Grimson A, Ribeiro GL, Semán P. 2004. La Antropología Brasileña Contemporánea: Contribuciones para un Diálogo Latinoamericano Buenos Aires: Prometeo
  41. Guarné B. 2012. The world is a room: beyond centers and peripheries in the global production of anthropological knowledge. Focaal – J. Glob. Hist. Anthropol. 63:8–19 [Google Scholar]
  42. Hanks M. 2012. Introduction: the politics and ethics of collaboration among world anthropologies. Focaal – J. Glob. Hist. Anthropol. 63:3–7 [Google Scholar]
  43. Hannerz U. 1996. Cosmopolitans and locals in world culture. Transnational Connections: Culture, People, Places102–11 London: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  44. Harrison FV. 1991. Decolonizing Anthropology: Moving Further toward an Anthropology for Liberation Washington, DC: Assoc. Black Anthropol., Am. Anthropol. Assoc.
  45. Harrison F. 2012. Dismantling anthropology's domestic and international peripheries. J. World Anthropol. Netw. 6:87–110 [Google Scholar]
  46. Hymes DH. 1974. Reinventing Anthropology New York: Vintage Books
  47. Jorgensen JG, Wolf ER. 1970. A special supplement: Anthropology on the warpath in Thailand. New York Rev. Books Nov. 19 26–35
  48. Keck ME, Sikkink K. 1998. Activists Beyond Borders Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
  49. Keesing FM. 1960. The international organization of anthropology. Am. Anthropol. 62:191–201 [Google Scholar]
  50. Kingsolver A. 2007. World anthropologies: disciplinary transformations within systems of power. Review article. Am. Anthropol. 109:3580–81 [Google Scholar]
  51. Kroeber AL. 1953. Anthropology Today: An Encyclopedic Inventory Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  52. Krotz E. 1997. Anthropologies of the South: their rise, their silencing, their characteristics. Crit. Anthropol. 17:3237–51 [Google Scholar]
  53. Krotz E. 2002. La Otredad Cultural entre Utopía y Ciencia. Un Estúdio sobre el Origen, el Desarrollo y la Reorientación de la Antropología. México: Univ. Autón. Metrop., Unidad Iztapalapa/Fondo Cult. Econ.
  54. Kuwayama T. 2004. Native Anthropology Melbourne: Trans Pac. Press
  55. Low S, Merry S. 2011. Engaged anthropology in the United States and its relevance for world anthropologies. See Ribeiro 2011 93–110
  56. Mathews G. 2008. Why Japanese anthropology is ignored beyond Japan. Jpn. Rev. Cult. Anthropol. 9:53–69 [Google Scholar]
  57. Mathews G. 2011. On the referee system as a barrier to global anthropology. See Ribeiro 2011 45–57
  58. Mato D. 2002. Estudios y otras prácticas intelectuales latinoamericanas en cultura y poder. Estudios y Otras Prácticas Intelectuales Latinoamericanas en Cultura y Poder D Mato 21–46 Caracas: Cons. Latinoamericano Cienc. Soc. (CLACSO)/CEAP, FACES, Univ. Cent. Venez [Google Scholar]
  59. Miceli S. 1999. O Que Ler na Ciência Social Brasileira (1970–1995) São Paulo: Ed. Sumaré/Anpocs [Google Scholar]
  60. Mignolo W. 2001. Capitalismo y Geopolítica del Conocimiento: El Eurocentrismo y la Filosofia de la Liberación en el Debate Intelectual Contemporáneo Buenos Aires: Ed. Signo
  61. Narotzky S. 2006. The production of knowledge and the production of hegemony: anthropological theory and political struggles in Spain. See Ribeiro & Escobar 2006b 133–56
  62. Nava Morales E. 2013. Totopo no Ar: Rádio e Comunalidad em Oaxaca, México PhD Thesis, Univ. Bras., Brasilia, DF
  63. Neilson B. 1999. Review article: on the new cosmopolitanism. Communal/Plural. J. Transnatl. Cross-Cult. Stud. 7:1111–24 [Google Scholar]
  64. Ntarangwi M, Mills D, Babiker M. 2006. African Anthropologies: History, Critique and Practice London/New York: Zed Books
  65. Patel S. 2010. The ISA Handbook of Diverse Sociological Traditions London: Sage
  66. Pratt ML. 1992. Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation New York: Routledge
  67. Price DH. 2011. Weaponizing Anthropology: Social Science in Service of the Militarized State Oakland, CA: AK/CounterPunch Books
  68. Quijano A. 1993. Colonialidad del poder, eurocentrismo y América Latina. La Colonialidad del Saber: Eurocentrismo y Ciencias Sociales. Perspectivas Latinoamericanas E. Lander 201–46 Buenos Aires: CLACSO [Google Scholar]
  69. Rappaport J. 2005. Intercultural utopias Durham, NC/London: Duke Univ. Press
  70. Restrepo E, Escobar A. 2005. Other anthropologies and anthropology otherwise: steps to a world anthropologies framework. Crit. Anthropol. 25:299–129 [Google Scholar]
  71. Reuters T. 2011. Defining the practical tasks of a global anthropology and the role of democracy in their accomplishment. See Ribeiro 2011 58–63
  72. Ribeiro GL. 1998. Cybercultural politics. Political activism at a distance in a transnational world. Cultures of Politics/Politics of Cultures: Revisioning Latin American Social Movements SE Alvarez, E Dagnino, A Escobar 325–52 Boulder, CO: Westview [Google Scholar]
  73. Ribeiro GL. 2001. Cosmopolitanism. International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences 4 NJ Smelser, PB Baltes 2842–45 Elsevier London: [Google Scholar]
  74. Ribeiro GL. 2003. Postimperialismo. Cultura y Política en el Mundo Contemporáneo. Barcelona: Gedisa
  75. Ribeiro GL. 2006. World anthropologies. Cosmopolitics for a new global scenario in anthropology. Crit. Anthropol. 26:4363–86 [Google Scholar]
  76. Ribeiro GL. 2008. Post-imperialism. A Latin American cosmopolitics. Brazil and the Americas. Convergences and Perspectives P Birle, S Costa, H Nitschack 31–50 Madrid/Frankfurt: Iberoamericana/Vervuert [Google Scholar]
  77. Ribeiro GL. 2011. Global Anthropologies Beijing: Intellect. Prop.
  78. Ribeiro GL, Escobar A. 2006a. World anthropologies: disciplinary transformations within systems of power. See Ribeiro & Escobar 2006b 1–25
  79. Ribeiro GL, Escobar A. 2006b. World Anthropologies. Disciplinary Transformations in Systems of Power. Oxford, UK: Berg
  80. Ribeiro GL, Trajano Filho W. 2004. O Campo da Antropologia no Brasil Rio de Janeiro: Contraponto
  81. Said EW. 1994. Culture and Imperialism New York: Knopf
  82. Saillant F, Kilani M, Bideau FG. 2011. The Lausanne Manifesto. For a Non-Hegemonic Anthropology. Montreal: Éd. Liber
  83. Silverman S. 2009. The first 50 years. A social experiment. Sol Tax, Paul Fejos, and the origins of Current Anthropology. Curr. Anthropol. 50:6949–54 [Google Scholar]
  84. Skalník P. 2002. The Struggles for Sociocultural Anthropology in Central and Eastern Europe Prague: Set Out
  85. Skalník P. 2005. Anthropology of Europe. Teaching and Research. Prague: Set Out
  86. Smith LT. 1999. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples London/New York/Dunedin: Zed Books/Univ. Otago Press
  87. Spiegel M. 2014. WCAA and IUAES: institutions for strengthening anthropology in a globalized world Presented at Jt. Meet. Int. Union Anthropol. and Ethnol. Sci. and the Jpn. Assoc. Cult. Anthropol., Chiba, Jpn.
  88. Stocking GW Jr. 2000. “Do good, young man”: Sol Tax and the world mission of liberal democratic anthropology. Excluded Ancestors: Inventible Traditions: Essays Toward a More Inclusive History of Anthropology R Handler 171–264 Madison: Univ. Wis. Press [Google Scholar]
  89. Souza Santos B, Meneses MP. 2009. Epistemologias do Sul Coimbra: Almedina
  90. Sztompka P. 2010. One sociology or many?. See Patel 2010 21–28
  91. Tax S, Eiseley LC, Rouse I, Voegelin CF. 1953. An Appraisal of Anthropology Today Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  92. Uberoi P, Deshpande S, Sundar N. 2008a. Introduction: The professionalization of Indian anthropology and sociology. People, places, and institutions. See Uberoi et al. 2008b 1–63
  93. Uberoi P, Sundar N, Deshpande S. 2008b. Anthropology in the East: Founders of Indian Sociology and Anthropology Calcutta/London/New York: Seagull Books
  94. UNESCO/ISSC (Int. Soc. Sci. Counc.) 2010. World Social Science Report, 2010: Knowledge Divides Paris: UNESCO
  95. Vermeulen HF, Rodán AA. 1995. Fieldwork and Footnotes. Studies in the History of European Anthropology London: Routledge
  96. Vidyarthi LP. 1974. The emerging American model in anthropology. Trends in World Anthropology11–21 New Delhi: Concept [Google Scholar]
  97. Visacovsky S, Guber R. 2003. Historia y Estilos de Trabajo de Campo en Argentina Buenos Aires: Ed. Antropofagia
  98. Wake CS. 1894. Memoirs of the International Congress of Anthropology Chicago: Schulte
  99. Weil J. 2014. World anthropology. First articles in the new section. Am. Anthropol. 116:1160 [Google Scholar]
  100. World Anthropol. Collect 2003. A conversation about a World Anthropologies Network. Soc. Anthropol. 11:2265–69 [Google Scholar]
  101. Yamashita S. 2006. Reshaping anthropology: a view from Japan. See Ribeiro & Escobar 2006b 29–48
  102. Yamashita S, Bosco J, Eades JS. 2004. The Making of Anthropology in East and Southeast Asia New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102313-030139
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error