Public debates and academic conferences on decolonization are growing in both number and appeal. They seem to acknowledge that Eurowestern societies are diverse and closely interrelated with non-Western countries. Nevertheless, these discussions rarely inquire further than superficial issues; they continually fail to recognize the ongoing economic, political, and epistemic (neocolonial) subordination of the global South to Western neoliberalism, beliefs, and ideas (e.g., of reason, progress). Dealing with Europe’s colonial past requires calling arrogant and ignorant Western thinking into question.

The international online conference, “A Call for the Desuperiorization of Philosophy and the Foundation of Superaltern Studies”, took on this task. It was organized by Björn Freter (Knoxville) and Aribiah Attoe (Johannesburg).

In an insightful essay, Freter1 claims that the West had and has “a permanent tacit assumption of superiority of almost metaphysical proportions”.2 Through the “ontological-normative dialectic of superiority and inferiority”3, the Western thinking of difference(s) establishes hierarchical binaries, e. g., between reason and nature. Freter, consequently, demands implementing the philosophical practice of desuperiorization of the West, that accompanies the non-Western “adseredition”4 in a twofold process of decolonization. As the underlying concept of the conference, desuperiorization demonstrates important (self-)critical potential.

In the following, I highlight and summarize key talks and arguments of the conference.

Colonial Framework: Reason, Progress, and Nature
NATSU TAYLOR SAITO’s (Atlanta) fascinating lecture showed that the persistent assumptions and beliefs stemming from the Western superiority have roots in European colonialism and the supporting discourses; roots that currently maintain many systems of neoliberalism worldwide. Colonizers asserted and institutionalized a racial and gender-based hierarchy that, I am inclined to mention, has been immanent to a hegemonic concept of Western rationality, which enlightenment philosophy established and universalized. As a result, a critical analysis of, for example, Immanuel Kant’s remarks on race requires continual effort (see below).

Saito’s critique highlighted the colonial link between reason and the again universalized idea of human progress. In this way, she reminded the audience of a basic colonial narrative: civilization develops only through consistent conquest and the exploitation of nature. Decolonial thinkers like Aníbal Quijano have marked the continuity between this understanding of progress and Cartesian mind-body dualism5, both of which helped divide the colonial world into the (“modern”) European nations and the supposedly underdeveloped (“primitive”) periphery. Colonizers further secured the cultural inferiorization of indigenous peoples through a biological construction of the concept of race, and, in so doing, legitimized forceful racial capitalism6 and labor.

Achieving Cognitive Justice through an Ecology of Knowledges
An unshakeable faith in Western superiority has left the world in crisis. Climatic warming and even aspects of the COVID-19 pandemic and its proliferation7 resulted from ruthless natural exploitation, required for industrial and economic growth. BOAVENTURA DE SOUSA SANTOS (Coimbra, Wisconsin-Madison) reiterated these facts in the opening remarks of his talk. In line with Saito’s thoughts, he asserted the existence of an “abyssal line” between North and South vis-à-vis epistemic injustice.8 Since the beginning of the colonial era the West has stigmatized, suppressed, and erased indigenous forms of knowledge, while having the arrogance (and ignorance) to believe in the universal and exclusive superiority of Western concepts of reason, science, and the nature of epistemic knowledge. Following this “abyssal thinking”, Santos describes five Western “monocultures”.9 He argues instead for an “ecology of knowledges” (with unrecognized, non-scientific, pluralistic epistemologies) – in the sense of a post-abyssal conception of knowledge – since “new” perspectives and currently ignored wisdom could help face the mentioned crises. Without cognitive (epistemic) justice, according to Santos, global social justice is impossible, which was one of the basic and shared beliefs throughout the conference.

The herein described efforts of Saito and Santos to analyze and deconstruct Eurocentrism set the general framework of the conference. Decolonization – a task of critical philosophy – leads to the desuperiorization of the global North and its (epistemic, economic, and political) hegemony as well as the deinferiorization of the global South. Inevitably, we – as critical thinkers – must charge ourselves with the task of decolonization (desuperiorization) of Western philosophy itself (the discriminating structures; the Eurocentric canon, thinking, and teaching).

Deconstructive Awareness
The conference fulfilled these two demands. Speakers from South Africa, Germany, and the U.S. questioned the Western claim of superiority and, at the same time, enriched philosophy with different and new critical perspectives. To this end, I would highlight the talks of ABRAHAM TOBI (Johannesburg) and DIMPHO TAKANE MAPONYA (Johannesburg).

In a fascinating conversation with Sarah Harasy, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak has warned us not to produce new exclusions by categorizing and defining groups homogeneously.10 Tobi displayed a corresponding “deconstructive awareness”11 in the presentation of his “cautionary argument”. He argues that the ongoing project of epistemic decolonization must not exclude the perspectives of subgroups (e.g., womxn, LGBTIQ+ people) within the marginalized communities.

In this respect, Maponya’s talk criticized the marginalization of African womxn’s perspectives within male-centered African philosophy. With reference to Patricia Hill Collins12, she recognized a Black womxn’s silence out of “race loyalty.” This, of course, reminds of Kimberlé Crenshaw’s essay entitled “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color”.13 “Within communities of color,” as Crenshaw wrote, “efforts to stem the politicization of domestic violence [against women of color, C. N.] are often grounded in attempts to maintain the integrity of the community”14. Crenshaw thusly declared “strategic silences of antiracism”15. Because of the importance of intertwining decolonial with intersectional feminist work, I have emphasized, in this report, the deconstruction (desuperiorization) of a gender-based patriarchal hegemony. But I would desire a more elaborate (transcultural) dialogue between African Philosophy and Black (postcolonial, antiracist) thinkers that have already dealt with these challenging questions in the West (e.g., Kobena Mercer, Stuart Hall, bell hooks).

(Re-)Thinking Personhood with Kant and Ubuntu
As already mentioned, the self-critical decolonial work within Western philosophy is paramount and should be widely prioritized. However, there is an ongoing academic controversy concerning Kant’s philosophy of enlightenment, that, e.g., Nikita Dhawan has discussed at length.16 In 2020, UK protesters toppled the statue of Edward Colston during the global BLM protests. How should we deal with the racism and misogyny in Kant’s work if we aim to decolonize the philosophical canon? Should we remove Kant from the syllabus?

At the same time, I believe that these academic discussions are going in circles. Therefore, I must positively highlight the talks of ROBERTO BERNASCONI (Pennsylvania), WOLBERT C. G. SMIDT (Mekelle, Jena), and MPHO TSHIVHASE (Pretoria); the three scholars stimulated fruitful discussions on Kant’s racial philosophy and theory in different ways and provided a productive critique of the structural institutionalization of an exclusive (racist, white) Western philosophy within Western and, as ELVIS IMAFIDON (London) could add, African universities. Imafidon introduced the concept of “differential politics” to show how difference is categorized, institutionalized, and instrumentalized, how yet again African philosophy and ethnophilosophy have been relegated to the discourse’s margins.

Referring to Emmanuel Chukwudi Eze17 and Munyaradzi Felix Murove18, Tshivhase’s talk encouraged a plot changing approach19: desuperiorizing personhood vis-à-vis Ubuntu ethics. Initially, she re-evaluates Kant’s understanding of personhood, which, according to Tshivhase, is based on a discriminatory concept of Western rationality and a biased (racist) perspective toward non-white human beings. Kant, following Charles W. Mills, accordingly, subordinates Black people and Native Americans to the status of sub-persons20, between that of white men21 and animals. Tshivhase, afterwards, confronted this inherent “racialization of [a] foundational concept of liberalism”22 with the non-Western ethic of Ubuntu. Its understanding of personhood encapsulates behavioral principles (virtues) – e.g., kindness, compassion, respect, and care – which aim to secure the welfare of others. Human beings are and demonstrate themselves to be persons (umuntu, munhu) in relation to – i.e., in responsible relationships with – others by recognizing the humanness in them. As Tshivhase brings up, Colonialism is the complete antithesis of Ubuntu, questioning then vice versa the personhood of the white colonizers. “[T]he original understanding of a human being as relational being,” I quote Murove here, “does challenge the contemporary individualistic and self-interested understanding of human being.”23 Furthermore, I believe a complementary reading with Édouard Glissant’s “Poetics of Relation” to be insightful.24

Finally, Tshivhase’s confrontation between Kant and Ubuntu exemplified a canon challenged, exhibiting the subversive potential of what Santo refers to as the ecology of knowledges (mentioned above). With Imafidon, we therefore need – questioning the denial, non-recognition, prejudices of the West – a radical openness regarding philosophical thought and its diverse manifestations.

Conclusion
The online conference enabled an international audience to engage in a most insightful and productive dialogue between Africa, Europe, and the U.S. The COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed digital transformation worldwide. Hopefully, this will lead to a more equitable and accessible collaboration between the global North and South when tackling the quintessential project of decolonization. During this dialogue, we should, at the very least, question the self-centered, philosophical, academic (“decolonial”) practice and its egregious lack of diversity in German philosophy.

The conference’s central concept of desuperiorization, that of course needs further edification, seems so far most useful in deconstructing the epistemic hegemony not just plaguing but further constitutive of the West.

“Are we still talking?”, asked JANINE JONES (Greensboro). She presented a thought-provoking picture of a young Andrew Johnson to the audience, whose dreadlocks were forcibly cut – as ordered by a white referee – before a wrestling match of his.25 It re-presents the daily violence, to which Black and non-white bodies have been forced to submit for ages. With this image in mind, the exceptional conference showed that the global North must eventually establish truly decolonial practices if – in the face of a “world on the edge” – it honestly endeavors to establish social (peaceful) justice across the globe.26

Conference Overview:

Abraham Tobi (Johannesburg, South Africa): How not to Decolonize: A Cautionary Argument

Natsu Taylor Saito (Atlanta, USA): The Colonial Foundations of Western Conceptions of Superiority

Janine Jones (Greensboro, USA): I’m sorry. I Thought We Were Just Talking About It

Siseko Kumalo (Pretoria, South Africa): Outlining a Decolonial Methodology using the Black Archive

Benda Hofmeyr (Pretoria, South Africa): Whence the European Superiority Complex? Revisiting “the Other Question”

Veli Mitova (Johannesburg, South Africa): Desuperiorizing Epistemic Justice in the Service of Knowledge-Decolonisation

Mpho Tshivhase (Pretoria, South Africa): Desuperiorizing Personhood through Ubuntu?

Elvis Imafidon (London, UK): Differentia-Politics in the Formation of Academic Philosophy

Dimpho Takane Maponya (Johannesburg, South Africa): Gender, Sexuality, and the Acculturation of African Philosophy

Boaventura de Sousa Santos (Coimbra, Portugal; Madison, USA): The Epistemologies of the South and the Quest for Global Cognitive Justice

Robert Bernasconi (Pennsylvania, USA): Is Academic Philosophy in the West Institutionally Racist?

Wolbert C. G. Smidt (Mekelle, Ethiopia; Jena, Germany): Africa in the Shadow of the Enlightenment – Immanuel Kant and the Hierarchy of Races

Notes:
1 See Björn Freter, Decolonization of the West, Desuperiorization of Thought, and Elative Ethics, in: Elvis Imafidon (ed.), Handbook of African Philosophy of Difference, Heidelberg 2020, pp. 105–127.
2 Ibid., p. 119.
3 Ibid., p. 120.
4 According to a yet unpublished essay, the term “abseredition” refers to the Latin expression, reditio ad se, to come back to oneself (see Björn Freter, Decolonial Philosophical Praxis Exemplified Through Superiorist and Adseredative Understandings of Development, in: Jonathan Okeke Chimakonam et al. (eds.), Essays on Contemporary Issues in African Philosophy, Cham, to be published in 2022).
5 See Aníbal Quijano, Coloniality of Power, Eurocentrism, and Latin America, in: Nepantla: Views from South 1.3 (2000), pp. 533–580.
6 See Gargi Bhattacharyya, Rethinking Racial Capitalism: Questions of Reproduction and Survival, London; New York 2018.
7 See Jeffrey A. McNeely, Nature and COVID-19: The pandemic, the environment, and the way ahead, in: Ambio 50 (2021), p. 767–781 (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13280-020-01447-0, 20.09.2021).
8 See Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Epistemologies of the South: Justice against Epistemicide, London 2015.
9 These are the monocultures of (1) knowledge, (2) (linear) time, (3) naturalization of differences, (4) the logic of dominant scale, and (5) the criteria of capitalist productivity and efficiency.
10 See Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak / Sarah Harasym, Practial Politics of the Open End, in: Sarah Harasym (ed.), The Post-Colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies, Dialogues, New York; London 1990, S. 95–113.
11 Ibid., p. 104.
12 See Patricia Hill Collins, Gender, Black Feminism, and Black Political Economy, in: The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (AAPSS) 568 (2000), pp. 41–53.
13 See Kimberlé Crenshaw, Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color, in: Stanford Law Review 6.43 (1991), pp. 1241–1299.
14 Ibid, p. 1253.
15 Ibid.
16 Nikita Dhawan, Affirmative Sabotage of the Master’s Tools: The Paradox of Postcolonial Enlightenment, in: Nikita Dhawan (ed.), Decolonizing Enlightenment: Transnational Justice, Human Rights and Democracy in a Postcolonial World, Opladen; Berlin; Toronto 2014, pp. 19–78.
17 See Emmanuel Chukwudi Eze, The Color of Racism: The Idea of ‚Race’ in Kant’s Anthropology, in: Emmauel Chukwudi Eze (ed.), Postcolonial African Philosophy: A Critical Reader, Oxford 1997, pp. 103–140.
18 Munyaradzi Felix Murove, Ubuntu, in: Diogenes 59,3-4 (2012), pp. 36–47.
19 Bernasconi argued that we should rewrite, e. g., the history of political philosophy disclosing its justification of slavery. In doing so, we defunction the epistemic and political intentions of the hegemonic canon by changing the plot.
20 See Charles W. Mills, Black Rights/White Wrongs: The Critique of Racial Liberalism, New York 2017, pp. 91–112.
21 It is important to note that Kant’s “abyssal” thinking also established a misogynistic framework in the global North, where men are associated with reason (the sublime) and women with sensuality (the beautiful).
22 Mills, Black Rights/White Wrongs, p. 91.
23 Murove, Ubuntu, p. 37.
24 See Edouard Glissant, Poetics of Relation, Ann Arbor 1997.
25 See Jesse Washington, The Untold Story of Wrestler Andrew Johnson’s Dreadlocks: How the High School Athlete Endured his Infamous Haircut, 2019, https://theundefeated.com/features/the-untold-story-of-wrestler-andrew-johnsons-dreadlocks/ (20.09.2021).
26 The superhuman studies conference series will continue in 2022 with a symposium on speciesism and subsequently sexism.