Читать книгу Decolonization(s) and Education - Daniel Maul - Страница 10
ОглавлениеMarcelo Caruso
Abstract The chapter analyses the discourse on ‘colonial education’ in nineteenth-century Latin America. It shows the legitimizing role of the question of educational heritance in the decades after independence from Spanish colonial rule. In this earliest process of de-colonization, ‘colonial education’ became a common thread in public discourse in which at least two types of arguments were advanced. First, colonial education was added to the long list of colonial grievances that, in the view of the Latin Americans, made independence necessary and legitimate. Second, colonial education became a consistent argument when discussing why the new independent polities found such serious difficulties in consolidating a new political order. The chapter concludes that this referencing to the educational past became a feature of scholarly and political discourses.
Keywords: Latin America, legitimacy, historiography, colonial schools
In 1918, in the city of Córdoba (Argentina), a broad student movement ignited against the inherited forms of governance and scholarship at Argentinean universities. This “university reform movement”, in addition to having a major impact on educational and political circles in Latin America in the following decades, succeeded in imposing new forms of institutional governance and academic freedom.1 With all the enthusiasm of a revolt, the young students published a manifesto addressed to all Latin Americans, which would turn into one of the best-known texts in the region during the twentieth century. Their passionate celebration of university reform began with a suggestive reference to Argentinean independence one century before: “Men of a free Republic, we have just finished breaking the last chain that, even in the twentieth century, tied us ←21 | 22→down to the old order of monarchic and monastic domination.”2 The students in Córdoba saw themselves as part of a broader liberating movement, the great movement for political independence that had begun a hundred years earlier to break the “first” chain of “monarchic and monastic domination”.
It may be somewhat unexpected that revolting students after more than one hundred years of political independence still insisted in evoking colonial times for naming all things past, backward, or simply illegitimate. After all, Argentinians had governed the country since 1816 and they did it from the very beginning by favoring a break with colonial policies by founding republican institutions, through free commerce and a relatively ample, albeit only formal, enfranchisement of the male adult population. The meanings these students actualized in their manifest were both old and still effective: references to colonial times, including colonial education, persisted through the nineteenth century and became a political and scholarly pattern of argumentation with varied shapes and functions. The fascinating history of Latin American independence reverberated in these statements and expressed present hopes and past frustrations.
Initiated in 1808, Latin American independencies3 led, in the long run, to the formation of 19 different polities out of four big colonial units called viceroyalties. Although shortly after independence preferences for a post-colonial political regime oscillated between monarchy and republic, all of these new polities eventually became republican regimes. Similarly, a strong tendency for leaving behind all traces of the old political regime prevailed on various societal levels from 1820 onwards. This process also entailed a good deal of utopian energy. The irruption of political modernity in the region reached a level and influence4 that even progressive-minded European contemporaries considered too radical in many respects.5 Aligning with a quite global ←22 | 23→pattern,6 hopes and utopian ideas had given way to a more moderate and disillusioned approach by the middle of the century. The consolidation of the Latin American republics, mostly after 1850, became a rather patchy modern project, quite principled in its declarations but with increasingly conservative features.
In the following, I will explore the discourse on ‘colonial education’ in post-colonial times as a recurring motif in the construction of post-colonial legitimacy. The afterlife of ‘colonial education’ in post-colonial writings certainly played a role here, and came close to being a ghost haunting the new republics. I will treat the discourse surrounding colonial education as an ambiguous way of decolonializing educational practices and institutions. I do so by analyzing different works of Latin American intellectuals in the nineteenth century as the main leads into the discourse on colonial education in that time, using “discourse” in a loose Foucauldian way. Central elements of colonial education, the spread of universities, the lack of consistent elementary education and the dominance of the Jesuits until their expulsion from all Spanish American colonies in 1767, were amply referred to after independence as keys to understanding the ailments of the new republics.
I want to show that references to colonial education became an intellectual and political operation, in which statements were created for certain purposes and in specific situations through concrete actors (or groups of actors). The idea that the recurrent references to education in colonial times showed a supra-individual consistency and variation over a long time is part of my assumptions as well. Yet exploring colonial education as a discourse while constructing legitimacy in post-colonial times cannot include all types of discursive practices. Intellectual works – including early Latin American historiography – are therefore in focus. This implies that the impact this discourse had vis-à-vis wider audiences has to be treated separately. On the whole, this piece tells a story about the particular role of constructions of the past as one preferred source while constructing legitimacy in the post-colonial setting in Latin America.
Degraded, negative, purposeful: ‘Colonial Education’ in the early republican discussion
Critique against colonial education had already begun in the late colonial period as an element of wider criticism by supporters of the Spanish version of the ←23 | 24→Enlightenment against inherited educational structures. Education in the Jesuit colleges in particular was the subject of severe criticism.7 Yet a more specific discourse on colonial education only ignited when the young republics, many of them still fighting against Spanish and loyalist troops, discussed their options for the future.
One major actor shaping this discourse was Simon Bolívar (1783–1830) himself, the military leader and politician from the Caracas upper class that would be decisive in the fight against the Spaniards in the Northern part of South America. Contrary to the rather simplistic image of the radical liberator that current political movements such as the Venezuelan Chavismo try to consolidate, Bolívar was – generally speaking – by no means a radical liberal. He was, for instance, more than a little cautious about the quick extension of political rights to the whole adult male population. Bolívar repeatedly evoked ancient republican orders and did not hide a racial bias against colored populations.8 Yet, contrary to later racist discourses stressing differences between groups, Bolívar saw the main obstacle to the consolidation of the emerging republican order in the cultural environment. He strongly advocated for education according to the new principles of government. In the famous speech he rendered to the constitutional assembly of Gran Colombia at La Angostura in 1819, he described colonial rule as a combination of different “yokes”: “The People of America, bound with the triple yoke of ignorance, tyranny, and vice, could not acquire either knowledge, power, or virtue.”9 Education, certainly, should become a key for the acceptance and stabilization of the new republican order. Yet education as he understood it was not only about learning new rules and principles. For Bolívar, to fight against “this abject state of depression” entailed a wider purpose: “Pupils of such ←24 | 25→pernicious Masters – the lessons we received, and the examples we followed – were the most destructive. We were governed more by deceit and treachery than by force, and were degraded more by vice than by superstition. Slavery is the daughter of darkness, and an ignorant person is generally the blind instrument of his own ruin […].”10 In sum, colonial education was responsible for having formed “the habit of submission”, as Bolívar called it.11 And the task of the new republican education was first and foremost to erase this habit. Yet the second aspect of the new republican education was to inculcate the new political institutions vis-à-vis the new generations;12 forgetting and restarting however was in the first decades after independence a leitmotiv in the cultural politics of the elites.
The second most important military leader during the independence wars, José de San Martín (1778–1850), was equally clear about the necessity of an extended and new education in order to consolidate the new order. He saw the legacy of the “fatal colonial education” in Peru as the main obstacle for a “moderate exercise ←25 | 26→of the rights” achieved through independence and republican government.13 His explicit support for new pedagogies like the Lancasterian model of schooling showed the association of political with pedagogical ruptures.14 Bolívar’s and San Martín’s positions widely circulated in different South American countries – the speech at La Angostura for instance was published in the weekly press and in different pamphlets. The established argument of colonial education as a hindrance to sound republican development spread quickly. Echoes of this theme mushroomed among political elites. Manuel José Restrepo, who was in charge of the inner affairs of the Republic of Gran Colombia under the liberal-radical president Francisco de Paula Santander, voiced his conviction in his address to the Colombian congress in 1826 that colleges and universities had to undergo a deep transformation “like the one our political institutions have already suffered”. To deliberately forget about the past was again at the center of the program: “it is certainly painful to have to forget most of the things that we have learnt under the Spaniard colonial education and to study again; but it is necessary in order to put ourselves on the path of the progress of our century and to obtain the place we aspire among the truly civilized nations.”15
What kind of education was this colonial education and why did post-colonial elites take issue with it? First, colonial education was not simply “Spanish education”, but rather a second hand, degraded form it. In an overview of the state of education during colonial times published in London in 1826, this degraded form of education was a main point: “It was not sufficient to deprive the Americans of the liberty of action, they were deprived of liberty of thinking as well.”16 Public establishments of education in the colonial time were “a monument of imbecility” full of bad books “full of errors and deceit; in all of them they presented ←26 | 27→words as knowledge and false doctrines as dogmas”.17 Degradation came from poor content that the new republics had to overcome: “An impenetrable veil hid from us the foreign languages, chemistry, natural history and the history of civil associations; a dark shadow separated us from the acquaintance of our own country, our planet and the general mechanics of the universe; we did not have the faintest idea about the relations that tie the Man to society and among societies.”18 This assessment from an exiled liberal leader did not stand alone. On the other side of the aisle, conservative authors equally condemned this education. In an early Resúmen de la Historia de Venezuela from 1841 the state of education in colonial times was presented as having been “in the most lamentable situation, being the education of the people completely useless and that of the higher classes incomplete in many respects.”19 Ecclesiastical centers of learning had emerged relatively late in Venezuela – contrary to the early establishment of universities in many colonial cities like Lima, Mexico, and Santo Domingo – and a printing press, subject to many regulations, opened only in the first years of the nineteenth century. In the view of early republicans, cultural achievements of that time were possible in spite of the restrictive colonial policies. The conservative author of this introduction into Venezuelan history regretted that the American colonies were cut off from all other scientific progress in fields like zoology, botany, chemistry, and physics as well as from the discussion of economic and political theories.20 Adding insult to injury, the problem was not only the restricted range of knowledge circulating in the colonies, but also the way of its transmission: “To say the truth, colleges were only monastic enclosures where a lot of time got lost in religious practices […]. A severe regime or, better to say, harsh and tyrannical, early made the youth familiar with humiliating habits such as hypocrisy and lie; flogging punishments robbed them even of the idea of shame […]”21 In sum, a wide consensus against this second-hand education united Hispanic Americans after independence.
Second, this consensus also included the effects of colonial education as having been invariably negative considering the task of building up new republics. ←27 | 28→Firstly, people outside of colonial schools were part of the overall gloomy picture. As the radical Central American philosopher, politician, and journalist José Cecilio del Valle (1780–1834) put it when he listed some “colonial crimes”: “The condemnation of the natives to the most stupid ignorance, perpetuating their tutelage in consideration of the ignorance in which they were kept.”22 Secondly, even persons educated during the old colonial order were not suited to the new state of society: “Their instruction suffered from one thousand defects due to the systems of teaching; the small number of sciences cultivated at the University or the lack of books, the adherence to old methods, to formulations and so many other defects of colonial education […].”23 The consequences were obvious. An anonymous contemporary author that discussed “provincialism” as an urgent problem of his time in the context of Mexican politics, confirmed the negative image of the inherited educational practices and institutions. His adamant condemnation of the overly dominant religious element, the generally poor state in which schools found themselves in and the harming strategies of the Spanish colonists culminated in a characterization of the aims of colonial education as “getting accustomed to suffering, indolence, the almost sacred respect to the established authorities, ignorance, superstition, humiliation, obedience and distinction of classes”. Moreover, “their habits [those of the Mexicans, MC] became fixed and have been passed over from generation to generation until the very present.”24 This was certainly not the only statement about “inexperience and colonial education” as the main causes of the “disgraces” affecting the new republics.25 And this effect was deemed to run throughout as a structural one: in intellectual circles writers of different provenience lamented the long-term effects of colonial education as being felt “since centuries”.26
Thirdly, this degraded and negative education was, as most writers agreed, not the work of a blind and simple stupidity; on the contrary it was seen as a ←28 | 29→purposeful effect of colonial rule: “All the efforts from Spain were directed towards brutalizing us. Spain put all kind of obstacles to our population, our education, our agriculture, our industry because they feared our progress and only desired our degradation.”27 Many decades later the feeling still prevailed that this education was a work of “high refinement in its malice”.28 Largely ignoring similar restrictive developments of education in Spain, critics of colonial rule saw in colonial education an intentional means of maintaining colonial hegemony: “It was convenient to them [the Spaniards, MC] to maintain the colonies in a state of ignorance and with the vices that loosen the Man from its native place, extinguish patriotic love, unnerve the spirits and debase persons.”29 Independence fighters constantly invoked episodes, in which colonial rule explicitly hindered educational progress. They listed numerous fruitless petitions from Buenos Aires, Yucatan, Guatemala and Quito asking for permission to establish new schools: “Thirty years ago, in the last century, cacique Juan Cirilo Castilla, wanted permission to establish a college for natives in his homeland Puebla de los Angeles. He died in Madrid without success.”30 Others continued to collect such grievances, such as the Venezuelan general José Antonio Páez (1790–1873), who had been a leader in the struggle for independence of his country from Gran Colombia in 1830. Decisions by the Spanish crown discouraging the establishment of schools for natives from 1785, the negative answer to the project of the city council of Buenos Aires for establishing a new School of nautical drawing (a project that the crown purportedly characterized as “presumptuous”) and scattered evidence of Catholic officials defining the Christian doctrine as everything that the creole population of the Americas needed for her education were all constantly cited and kept inflaming the spirits.31 Still, in the late nineteenth century authors described how some representatives of the colonial government had admitted with “insolent frankness”, that it was the purpose of educational ←29 | 30→politics to maintain the inferior status of the Hispanic Americans.32 The case was clear: colonial rule implied a purposeful plan of keeping the Americans in a state of ignorance.
‘Colonial Education’ and the troubles of the new polities
One of the few virtues of colonial education in a retrospective view was its full compatibility with despotic rule. Particularly against the background of political instability after independence, this feature of colonial education became evident. In the words of the Argentinean writer and historian Andrés Lamas (1817–1891): “The elements of colonial life were connected – education and popular habits were in direct and immediate relationship to colonial policies.”33 This judgement echoed an older discourse coined by Montesquieu holding that education and political system had to be congruent. Others like the Mexican Simón Tadeo Ortiz de Ayala (1788–1833), advocated “a rational system of instruction (…) in harmony with the political regime adopted by the nation; without its development and operation, liberal institutions, in constant struggle against decadent habits, would only be beautiful theories […]”.34 He echoed a position already formulated in a project for elementary education addressed to the chambers of congress in Mexico in 1826: “A polity in which instruction is not in perfect harmony with the laws is untenable.”35 Now, under new republican circumstances, the probably unique positive effect of colonial education had lost its efficacy.
This retrospective view was quite understandable in view of the troublesome times the new republics had to face. Civil unrest, civil wars and confusion about the territorial distribution of some provinces overshadowed early hopes and favored a grim outlook on the future. ‘Colonial education’ continued to serve as a plausible explanation. For instance, the official gazette in Bolivia admitted ←30 | 31→in 1829 that the negative opinion of some Europeans about the new polities in South America was grounded in troubling facts and in an exaltation of ideas “[…] we could never have acquired if we haven’t had colonial education […]”.36 Still in the Bolivian parliamentary assembly from 1846 the “defects of colonial education” helped to explain “the demoralization caused in the people through the untamed passions of the civil war”.37 From Costa Rica – “Liberty without reason” was the result of the “people that have no idea of true liberty because of colonial education […]”38 – to Mexico where colonial education equaled the “seeds of civil discord”39 – this leitmotiv circulated. Progressive forces used this attribution of responsibility in the second half of the nineteenth century in order to discuss the further development of the young republics towards democracy. In the view of an early Chilean historian, “the prejudices of colonial education” promoted opposition to the “development of democratic ideas”.40
Whereas the argument of colonial education affecting post-colonial political culture became a persistent pattern of discourse throughout the whole nineteenth century, a new kind of problem related to the question of economic progress and, particularly, free trade, came to be attributed to the effects of “colonial education” in the middle of the century: The Argentinean Juan Bautista Alberdi (1810–1884), a staunch liberal advocating free market policies, had no doubts that the gap between generous constitutional rights and the poor record of the new republics in matters of economic freedom was a “dangerous inconsequence” for the further development of the young republics. Following Rousseau’s idea of “education through things” and not only through formal instruction, a notion Alberdi extended to all political and cultural conditions, he clearly blamed “colonial education” for being the main counterforce against economic progress.41 The strong link between colonial rule and controlled and taxed commerce had educational effects that the modern republics now had to face. In a parliamentarian debate about the abolition of all customs in 1828, the project ←31 | 32→had not only commercial purposes, but educational ones. It was an element of a wider policy of “encouraging and revitalizing” the population “taking them out from the nullity of commercial ideas in which they were immersed as a result of colonial education”.42 Interestingly enough, colonial education was even an argument for those few intellectuals advocating protectionist trade policies. One Chilean author characterized the old monopolistic trade system of the Spaniards as failing to elevate work to a social beneficial force: “they merely made a means of colonial education out of it”.43
At least, three main economic aspects were linked to colonial education. First: “The bad colonial education has […] deep roots”, still causing a rejection of work and crafts among “decent people”, who clearly prefer to be lawyers or medical doctors.44 The argument was about the disdain for manual work and productive occupations in crafts and nascent industries, a pattern of meaning that continued well into the twentieth century.45 Second, colonial education, as Alberdi had formulated, was a major obstacle for free trade. Next to factors like “passports, inner customs, the levy, sequestrations, kidnappers, police mistrust, local hatred”, colonial education nourished “disastrous prejudices against change, among them against foreign trade” that stood in the way of the free flow of goods and capital.46 Third, and as a consequence, re-education was needed in the view of these intellectuals of economic development. The sluggish pace of the progress of formal instruction demanded, in the view of some, a more resolute course of action. This was the case with the Mexican politician and writer José María Lafragua (1813–1875) when he addressed the constitutional assembly of 1846 in Mexico City in his capacity as minister of interior and foreign policies. He lamented that immigration, or “colonization”, as many authors termed it at the time, had not been regulated in Mexico although liberal elites strongly supported it. Lafragua admitted that the causes of this failure were multiple. Yet “in my view, the most effective and powerful obstacle opposed to colonization has been the general upsetting reactions to the principle [of colonization, MC] and, then, in some regions, to the presence of foreigners; this is a precise effect ←32 | 33→of the prejudices coming from colonial education”.47 Again, during the polemic unleashed by the parliamentary treatment of the project of encouraging immigration into Mexico in the 1870s, a strong discussion about colonial inheritance ignited that explicitly included educational themes in the usual condemnatory formulations.48 I will not elaborate on the ambivalent meanings that the notion of “colonization” for immigration may have actualized. Yet, one aspect is of utmost significance here, i.e. that the project of massive immigration was clearly seen as a large program for re-education of the population through a new “education through things” and costumes, those brought by purportedly industrious European immigrants.
Dissenting voices certainly existed, yet for a long time they were somewhat marginal. In one of the earliest research works on the field of history of education at the end of the nineteenth century, the discomfort of the author with the subject ‘colonial education’ was evident. “In our present view, the colonial period is a synonym of backwardness, obscurantism, barbarism, ignorance.” The author, the historian José Manuel Frontaura Arana (1864–1904) lamented this situation and positioned his work vis-à-vis “the strong prejudice against everything that implied enlightenment and culture in Chile before independence.” Among these prejudices, he quoted that general opinion sustained that during colonial times no elementary public-school system existed, which he strongly denied.49 Yet this kind of consideration in a more ‘Hispanistic’ vein did not enter into the main corpus of scholarship, particularly in early historiography.
←33 | 34→
Historiography as a bridge for new generations
Whereas “colonial education” played a role in diagnosing disappointing developments in politics and economy, it also became a recurrent theme of early Latin American historiography. These works guaranteed that colonial education as an argument survived those who had experienced it. Resolutely negative descriptions of colonial education filled the pages of early liberal works of regional and national historiography, describing a rigid, restrictive and out-dated educational reality in colonial times as the quintessence of the hardships and injustices that the colonial regime had inflicted upon the Hispanic Americans. In addition, as already mentioned, the consistence of habits and education in this description was certainly both strong and condemnable.50 Even when liberal elites were apparently more satisfied with the course of things, like in the case of Argentina in the second half of the nineteenth century, an attentive scrutiny of colonial education was still required. Although Argentinean authors saw their country complacently as being populated by very “generous, educated and intelligent” people “always more liberal and more progressive than their governments”, they cautioned that the study of resistance to changes, a feature of colonial education, had to be consistently carried out.51 Yet conservative historiography had developed a differentiated argument as well. Like in the voluminous Historia eclesiástica y civil de Nueva Granada (published 1869), conservatives clearly condemned both colonial education and the liberal attempts to overcome it. The ambitious educational plans followed by liberals and reformers, the argument went, were simply unrealistic and the “acclimatization among the people of Colombia to those doctrines advanced by Rousseau, Voltaire, Destutt de Tracy, Constant, Say, Bentham, Fritot…” was clearly doomed to fail.52
Clearly, the leitmotiv of colonial education persisted through different historiographical waves. A case in point is the characterization of José Gaspar Rodríguez de Francia (1766–1840), probably the impersonation of autocratic rule in post-colonial Latin America, who governed Paraguay with increasingly absolute powers between 1816 and 1840. The Chilean historian Manuel Bilbao ←34 | 35→(1827–1895), who wrote extensively about Francia and the Argentinean dictator Juan Manuel de Rosas, really focused on colonial education as a major factor in the making of these autocracies. With regard to Francia’s dictatorship, causation was unambiguous: “Paraguay […] was organized under the power of Dr. Francia, who, taking advantage of the colonial education, isolated himself from the revolution and from the contact with the world […]”.53 The Argentinean psychiatrist and historian, José María Ramos Mejía (1849–1914), a staunch positivist who was about to become one of the major figures in Argentinean educational bureaucracy, later delivered a more detailed work of historical imagination on Francia. Fully imbued with positivistic views of history and reclaiming a truly scientific approach in his ‘The neurosis of famous men in Argentine history’ (1878), he linked Francia’s colonial education with his posterior autocracy in pathological terms. Ramos Mejía claimed that Francia’s pathological character had had deep roots in his complexion and early education, but the education he had received at the University of Cordoba in today’s Argentina definitely reinforced his pathological tendencies. For Ramos Mejía, a “defective intellectual education” was an influence in producing “his extraordinary anomalies”. For instance, he compared the experience of being exposed to four years of theological studies to that of a tumor spreading in a healthy body.54 Lastly, the very content of that scholastic education was like “falling into troubled waters where the old Aristotelian ideas that circulated were confounded by the barbaric comments of the Arabs”.55 “This life of eternal intellectual masturbation had to be therefore necessarily harmful, that constant roaming of his mind oppressed by the shackles that tied him to the vague system of the Peripatetic school or to the old, moth-eaten parchment venerated during the excessive ecstasies in which those colonial scholars failed.”56 Even if historiographical preferences changed from classic liberal to more positivistic and scientific views, colonial education proved a very productive theme for grappling with uncomfortable post-colonial realities.
Liberal historical accounts of colonial culture and education consistently devalued the main traits of colonial education.57 Only very seldom were ←35 | 36→references to “colonial education” not outright negative, for instance its characterization as “fraternal” in a History of Uruguay.58 It was probably also the work of historians, now as authors of textbooks for schools, that propagated the popularity of colonial education as leitmotiv for explaining post-colonial developments and brought this argument to the revolting students quoted at the beginning of this text. With the expansion of primary and secondary education at the end of the nineteenth century some textbooks repeating the pattern of meaning conveyed the message to larger groups of the population. Introducing a textbook for primary and secondary schools in Guatemala, one anonymous author declared plainly: “I believe that the evils that affect Hispanic-American societies are the result of the poor colonial education whose atavism is still a heavy burden for us. To point out the defects of that education, to instill the youth with the conscious of them in the classrooms, to show them that intellectual laziness is overwhelming us and that the lack of ideals condemns us to be a people without energies is to advance the work of diffusion aimed at a better destiny.”59
On the whole, “colonial education” became a quite effective means of legitimating one’s position in the political arena in the post-colonial setting, and even was invoked to justify plans for “colonization” of the land in the work of some advocates of free market and “re-education” through transformation of the population by immigration. Lastly, it also acted as a historiographical recurrent motive in the major task of attaching meanings to the past, colonial and post-colonial.
Outlook: ‘Colonial Education’ and the construction of legitimacy in decolonization settings
A preliminary assessment of the discourse about ‘colonial education’ should take into account the widespread presence of this motive in political, scholarly and – probably – educational settings. There is no doubt that this reference suited the ideological needs of the elites of the fragile polities of early post-independence Latin America very well. They looked back to the colonial past and considered that the central problems of their polities were the outcome of deep, historical causation. They partly indulged in their political judgements by considering ←36 | 37→the heavy inheritance of the habits produced by colonial education. Realities in Latin America, even in the early twentieth century, may not have been rosy and hopeful. The legitimacy of independence, republicanism and democracy was by no means affected by these disappointments. In this sense, colonial education as a discourse of seemingly consistent contours and functions, embraced equally by liberals, conservatives and later socialists, constituted a convenient resource for facing difficult realities.
In this sense, Latin American decolonization inaugurated a pattern of argument, in which the legitimacy of new political orders was strongly construed on the basis of historical insights. In cases, in which legitimacy is contested or fragile, actors may look for an ‘outside’ from which they borrow arguments that lend them additional meanings for constructing legitimacy. This operation, called externalization in the sociology of knowledge,60 may refer to many sources. Actors may hint to experiences in other, more ‘advanced’ countries; they may refer to science or moral principles as well; or they may refer to history. Interestingly enough, decolonization processes favored a pattern of externalization in which references to the past, or to history gained a very significant place. Whether this constant referencing to the colonial past is a gain or a trap has worried several authors and intellectuals since independence. Yet the particular setting of decolonizing political and educational regimes in Latin America seems to have favored a strong historicizing gaze that eventually reached schools and became one of the elements in Latin American common sense discourses that definitely surfaced during the commemoration of the 500 years of the ‘discovery’ of the continent in 1992.
Literature
Aguirre Cinta, Rafael. Lecciones de Historia General de Guatemala. Guatemala: Impreto en la tipografía nacional, 1899.
Alberdi, Juan Bautista. Elementos del derecho publico provincial, para la Republica Arjentina. Valparaiso: Imprenta del Mercurio, 1853.
Ancona, Eligio. Historia de Yucatán desde la época más remota hasta nuestros días. Vol. II, Mérida: Imprenta de M. Heredia Argüelles, 1878.
←37 | 38→
Baeza Ruz, Andrés. “Enlightenment, Education, and the Republican Project: Chile’s Instituto Nacional (1810–1830).” Paedagogica Historica 46, no. 4 (2010): 479–493.
Baralt, Rafael María. Resúmen de la historia de Venezuela. Paris: Imprenta de H. Fournier y Comp., 1841.
Barreda Laos, Felipe. Vida intelectual de la colonia (educación, filosofía y ciencias). Ensayo histórico crítico. Lima: Impr. “La industria”, 1909.
Barros Grez, Daniel. Pipiolos i Pelucones. Tradiciones de ahora cuarenta años. Santiago: Imprenta Franklin, 1876.
Bayly, Christopher Alan. The Birth of the Modern World, 1780–1914. Malden/Mass.: Blackwell, 2004.
Baz, Gustavo, and Eduardo L. Gallo. Historia del ferrocarril mexicano. Mexico: Gallo y Compañía, 1874.
Bilbao, Manuel. Historia de Rosas. Vol. I, Buenos Aires: Imprenta ‘Buenos Aires’, 1868.
Bolívar, Simón. Speech of his Excellency General Bolivar at the Installation of the Congress of Venezuela in Angostura, on the 15th day of February 1819. Angostura: Printed by Andrew Roderick, 1819.
Bushnell, David. Simón Bolívar. Hombre de Caracas, proyecto de América. Una biografía. Historias americanas, edited by Carlos Mayo. Buenos Aires: Biblos, 2002.
Caruso, Marcelo. “New Schooling and the Invention of a Political Culture: Community, Rituals and Meritocracy in Colombian Monitorial Schools, 1821–1842.” In Imported Modernity in Post-Colonial State Formation, edited by Marcelo Caruso and Eugenia Roldán Vera. 277–306. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2007.
Caruso, Marcelo. “Independencias latinoamericanas y escuelas mutuas: Un análisis desde la perspectiva de la historia global (ca. 1815–1850).” In História e Historiografia da Educação Ibero-Americana. Projetos, Sujeitos e Práticas, edited by Claudia Alves and Ana Chrystina Mignot. 19–42. Rio de Janeiro: Quartet, 2010.
Caruso, Marcelo. “Emotional Regimes and School Policy in Colombia, 1800–1835.” In Childhood, Youth and Emotions in Modern History, edited by Stephanie Olsen. 73–94. New York: Palgrave, 2015.
Caruso, Marcelo, and Eugenia Roldán Vera. “El impacto de las nuevas sociabilidaes: Sociedad civil, recursividad comunicativa y cambio educativo en la Hispanoamérica postcolonial.” Revista Brasileira de história da educação 11, no. 2 (2011): 15–52.
←38 | 39→
de Pascual, Antonio Isidoro. Apuntes para la historia de la República Oriental del Uruguay desde el año 1810 hasta el de 1859. Vol. II, Paris: T. Ducessois, 1864.
del Valle, José Cecilio. Obra escogida. Caracas: Biblioteca Ayacucho, 1982.
Esposicion que el Secretario de Estado del Depacho de Interior de la República de Colombia hace al congreso de 1826 sobre los negocios de su departamento. Bogotá: Imp. de Manuel M. Viller-Calderon, 1826.
Estrada, José Manuel. Lecciones sobre la historia de la República Argentina dadas públicamente en 1868. Buenos Aires: Librería del Colegio, 1898.
Fonseca, Juan. “ ‘Sin educación no hay sociedad’: las escuelas lancasterianas y la educación primaria en los inicios de la república (1822–1826).” In La Independencia en el Perú. De los Borbones a Bolívar, edited by Scarlett O’Phelan Godoy. 265–288. Lima: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2001.
Frontaura Arana, José Manuel. Noticias históricas sobre las escuelas públicas de Chile á fines de la era colonial. Santiago de Chile: Imprenta Nacional, 1892.
García del Río, Juan. “Revista del estado anterior y actual de la instruccion publica en la America antes española.” El repertorio americano I (1826): 231–253.
Gartz, Jochen. Liberale Illusionen. Unabhängigkeit und republikanischer Staatsbildungsprozeß im nördlichen Südamerika unter Simón Bolívar im Spiegel der deutschen Publizistik des Vormärz. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1998.
Gorriti, Juan Ignacio. Reflecciones sobre las causas morales de las convulsiones interiores en los nuevos estados americanos y examen de los medios eficaces para reprimirlas. Valparaíso: Imprenta del Mercurio, 1836.
Groot, José Manuel. Historia eclesiástica y civil de Nueva Granada. Vol. V, Bogotá: Casa Editorial de M. Rivas, 1893.
Guenot, Estevan. Plan de educacion elemental y de varios establecimientos de utilidad y de beneficencia. Mexico: Imprenta del ciudadano Alejandro Valdés, 1826.
Guerra, François-Xavier. Modernidad e independencias. Ensayos sobre las revoluciones hispánicas. 3 ed. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2000.
Helg, Aline. Liberty & Equality in Caribbean Colombia, 1770–1835. Chapel Hill, London: The University of North Carolina Press, 2004.
Herrera, Inacio. “Contestacion de la Camara de Representantes” In Gaceta estraordinaria de Colombia, April 27, 1824.
Koinzer, Thomas. “ ‘Lehrfahrten für die Gesamtschule’. Educational Borrowing, Transfer und Externalisierung auf die amerikanische Comprehensive School.” Bildung und Erziehung 62, no. 1 (2008): 11–29.
←39 | 40→
Lafragua, José María. “Discurso pronunciado por el Sr. Lic. Don José María Lafragua en contra de la Tolerancia de cultos, en la sesion celebrada en el Palacio Legislativo, el 1° de Agoto de 1856.” In Galería de oradores de México en el siglo XIX, edited by Emilio del Castillo Negrete. 224–239. Mexico: Tipografía de R. I. González e Hijos, 1878.
Lafragua, José María. Memorandum de los negocios pendientes entre México y España. Poissy: Tipografía de Arbieu, 1857.
Lafragua, José María. Memoria de la Primera Secretaría de Estado y del Despacho de Relaciones Interiores y Exteriores de los Estados-Unidos Mexicanos. Mexico: Imprenta de Vicente García Torres, 1847.
Lamas, Andrés. Apuntes históricos sobre las agresiones del dictador argentino D. Juan Manuel Rosas contra la independencia de la República Oriental del Uruguay. Montevideo: Imprenta Hispano-Americana, 1849.
Latelier, Valentín. Sesiones de los cuerpos lejislativos de la República de Chile, 1811 a 1845. Santiago: Imprenta Cervantes, 1893.
López, José Francisco. Estudio político de la República Argentina y un cuadro histórico del govierno municipal en los pueblos romanos y germánicos. Buenos Aires: Imprenta, litografía y fundición de tipos de la Sociedad Anónima, 1875.
Manifiesto Liminar de la Reforma Universitaria de 1918. Buenos Aires: Ministerio de Educación de la Nación, 1985.
Michelena y Rojas, Francisco. Exploracion oficial por la primera vez desde el norte de la América del Sur. Brussels: Lacroix, Verboeckhoven y Cia., 1867.
Milanesio, Natalia. “Gender and Generation: The University Reform Movement in Argentina, 1918.” Journal of Social History 39, no. 2 (2005): 505–529.
Oelsner, Veronica. ‘Produzenten statt Parasiten’: Entwürfe und Wirklichkeiten beruflicher Ausbildung im modernen Argentinien. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2012.
Ortiz, Tadeo. México considerado como nación independiente y libre, ó sean algunas indicaciones sobre los deberes mas esenciales de los mexicanos. Burdeos: Imprenta de Carlos Lawalle Sobrino, 1832.
Páez, José Antonio. Autobiografia. Vol. II, New York: Imprenta de Hallet y Breen, 1869.
Palti, Elías. El tiempo de la política. El siglo XIX reconsiderado. Buenos Aires: Siglo XXI, 2007.
Perez Gallardo, Basilio. “La instruccion publica durante la dominacion española en México.” In Polémica entre el Diario Oficial y la Colonia Española sobre la administración virreynal en Nueva-España y la colonización en México. 178–196. Mexico: Imprenta Políglota, 1875.
←40 | 41→
Prieto, Guillermo. Lecciones elementales de economía política. Mexico: Imprenta del Gobierno, 1871.
Ramos Mejía, José María. Las neurosis de los hombres célebres en la Historia Argentina. Buenos Aires: Martin Biedma, editor, 1878.
Redactores de los Congresos Constitucionales de 1846 y Extraordinarios de 1847 y 1848. La Paz: Litografías e Imprentas Unidas, 1924.
Rivera, Agustín. Pensamientos filosóficos sobre la educación de la mujer en México. Mazatlan: Typ. y Casa Editorial de Valadés y Cia., 1908.
Rodríguez O., Jaime E. La independencia de la América española. Mexico: El Colegio de Mexico/FCE, 2005.
Roldán Vera, Eugenia. “Order in the Classrom: The Spanish American Appropriation of the Monitorial System of Education.” Paedagogica Historica 41, no. 6 (2005): 655–675.
Roldán Vera, Eugenia. “Reading in Questions and Answers. The Catechism as an Educational Genre in Early Independent Spanish America.” Book History 4 (2001): 17–48.
Roldán Vera, Eugenia. “Towards a Logic of Citizenship. Public Examinatios in Elementary Schools in Mexico, 1788–1848: State and Education before and after Independence.” Paedagogica Historica 46, no. 4 (2010): 511–524.
Schriewer, Jürgen. “Vergleich als Methode und Externalisierung auf Welt: Vom Umgang mit Alterität in Reflexionsdisziplinen.” In Theorie als Passion, edited by Dirk Baecker, Jürgen Markowitz, Rudolf Stichweh, Hartmann Tyrell and Helmut Willke. 629–668. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1987.
Spiewak, Martin. Das ferne Echo der Vernunft: das höhere Bildungswesen in Hispanoamerika im Zeitalter der Aufklärung. Münster: Lit, 1993.
Tocornal, Manuel. Memoria sobre el primer gobierno nacional. Santiago: Imprenta del Progreso, 1848.
Tünnermann Bernheim, Carlos. Noventa años de la Reforma Universitaria de Córdoba (1918–2008). Buenos Aires: CLACSO, 2008.
V. C. Lijera reseña de los partidos, facciones y otros males que agobian a la República Mexicana, y particularmente al Distrito Federal. Mexico: Imprenta de M. F. Redondas, 1851.
Valdez, Crisóval. “Estudios Histórico-Económicos.” Revista de Santiago 3, no. 21 (1849): 22–36.
Villalba Pérez, Enrique. Consecuencias educativas de la expulsión de los jesuitas en América. Madrid: Dykinson, 2003.
Weinberg, Gregorio. “The Enlightenment and Some Aspects of Culture and Higher Education in Spanish America.” In Facets of Education in the Eighteenth Century, edited by James A. Leith. 491–522. Oxford: The Voltaire Foundation, 1977.
←41 | 42→←42 | 43→
1 Natalia Milanesio, “Gender and Generation: The University Reform Movement in Argentina,” 1918, Journal of Social History 39, no. 2 (2005); Carlos Tünnermann Bernheim, Noventa años de la Reforma Universitaria de Córdoba (1918–2008) (Buenos Aires: CLACSO, 2008).
2 Manifiesto Liminar de la Reforma Universitaria de 1918 (Buenos Aires: Ministerio de Educación de la Nación, 1985), 5.
3 I will focus on the former Spanish colonies, that is, I will set apart the particular process of independence in Brazil.
4 François-Xavier Guerra, Modernidad e independencias. Ensayos sobre las revoluciones hispánicas, 3 ed. (Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2000); Jaime E. Rodríguez O., La independencia de la América española (Mexico: El Colegio de Mexico/FCE, 2005); Elías Palti, El tiempo de la política. El siglo XIX reconsiderado (Buenos Aires: Siglo XXI, 2007).
5 Jochen Gartz, Liberale Illusionen. Unabhängigkeit und republikanischer Staatsbildungsprozeß im nördlichen Südamerika unter Simón Bolívar im Spiegel der deutschen Publizistik des Vormärz (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1998).
6 Christopher Alan Bayly, The Birth of the Modern World, 1780–1914 (Massachusetts et al.: Blackwell, 2004).
7 Enrique Villalba Pérez, Consecuencias educativas de la expulsión de los jesuitas en América (Getafe (Madrid): Dykinson, 2003); Martin Spiewak, Das ferne Echo der Vernunft: das höhere Bildungswesen in Hispanoamerika im Zeitalter der Aufklärung (Münster: Lit, 1993); Gregorio Weinberg, “The Enlightenment and some aspects of culture and higher education in Spanish America,” in Facets of Education in the Eighteenth Century, ed. James A. Leith (Oxford: The Voltaire Foundation, 1977).
8 Aline Helg, Liberty & Equality in Caribbean Colombia, 1770–1835 (Chapel Hill, London: The University of North Carolina Press, 2004); David Bushnell, Simón Bolívar. Hombre de Caracas, proyecto de América. Una biografía, Historias americanas (Buenos Aires: Biblos, 2002).
9 Simón Bolívar, Speech of His Excellency General Bolivar at the Installation of the Congress of Venezuela in Angostura, on the 15th day of February 1819 (Angostura: Printed by Andrew Roderick, 1819), 4.
10 Ibid.
11 Ibid., 6.
12 Marcelo Caruso, “New Schooling and the Invention of a Political Culture: Community, Rituals and Meritocracy in Colombian Monitorial Schools, 1821–1842,” in Imported Modernity in Post-Colonial State Formation, ed. Marcelo Caruso and Eugenia Roldán Vera (Frankfurt: Peter lang, 2007); Andrés Baeza Ruz, “Enlightenment, education, and the republican project: Chile’s Instituto Nacional (1810–1830),” Paedagogica Historica 46, no. 4 (2010); Marcelo Caruso, “Independencias latinoamericanas y escuelas mutuas: Un análisis desde la perspectiva de la historia global (ca. 1815–1850),” in História e Historiografia da Educação Ibero-Americana. Projetos, Sujeitos e Práticas, ed. Claudia Alves and Ana Chrystina Mignot (Rio de Janeiro: Quartet, 2010); Marcelo Caruso, “Emotional Regimes and School Policy in Colombia, 1800–1835,” in Childhood, Youth and Emotions in Modern History, ed. Stephanie Olsen (New York: Palgrave, 2015); Eugenia Roldán Vera, “Reading in Questions and Answers. The Catechism as an Educational Genre in Early Independent Spanish America,” Book History 4 (2001); Eugenia Roldán Vera, “Order in the Classrom: The Spanish American Appropriation of the Monitorial System of Education,” Paedagogica Historica 41, no. 6 (2005); Eugenia Roldán Vera, “Towards a logic of citizenship. Public examinatios in elementary schools in Mexico, 1788–1848: stateand education before and after independence,” Paedagogica Historica 46, no. 4 (2010); Marcelo Caruso and Eugenia Roldán Vera, “El impacto de las nuevas sociabilidaes: Sociedad civil, recursividad comunicativa y cambio educativo en la Hispanoamérica postcolonial,” Revista Brasileira de história da educação 11, no.2 (2011).
13 Decree from August 6, 1821. Printed in Gazeta Ministerial Extraordinaria de Chile, N°48 (August 29, 1821), 300–302, here 301.
14 Juan Fonseca, “ ‘Sin educación no hay sociedad’: las escuelas lancasterianas y la educación primaria en los inicios de la república (1822–1826),” in La Independencia en el Perú. De los Borbones a Bolívar, ed. Scarlett O’Phelan Godoy (Lima: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2001). The association between Lancasterian schooling and overcoming colonial education was strong: See: Inacio Herrera, “Contestacion de la Camara de Representantes,” in Gaceta estraordinaria de Colombia, April 27, 1824, 5.
15 Esposicion que el Secretario de Estado del Depacho de Interior de la República de Colombia hace al congreso de 1826 sobre los negocios de su departamento (Bogotá: Imp. de Manuel M. Viller-Calderon, 1826), 26.
16 Juan García del Río, “Revista del estado anterior y actual de la instruccion publica en la America antes española,” El Repertorio Americano I(1826): 231.
17 Ibid., 232.
18 Ibid., 235.
19 Rafael María Baralt, Resúmen de la historia de Venezuela (Paris: IMprenta de H. Fournier y Comp., 1841), 384.
20 Ibid., 388–91. Similar complaints in: Juan García del Río, “Revista del estado anterior y actual de la instruccion publica en la America antes española,” El repertorio americano I(1826): 390–391.
21 Baralt, “Historia de Venezuela,” 392–393.
22 Exposition from 1829. Reproduced in: José Cecilio del Valle, Obra escogida (Caracas: Biblioteca Ayacucho, 1982), 103–104.
23 Manuel Tocornal, Memoria sobre el primer gobierno nacional (Santiago: Imprenta del Progreso, 1848), 17.
24 V. C., Lijera reseña de los partidos, facciones y otros males que agobian a la República Mexicana, y particularmente al Distrito Federal (Mexico: Imprenta de M. F. Redondas, 1851), 49.
25 José María Lafragua, Memorandum de los negocios pendientes entre México y España (Poissy: Tipografía de Arbieu, 1857), 54.
26 Agustín Rivera, Pensamientos filosóficos sobre la educación de la mujer en México (Mazatlan: Typ. y Casa Editorial de Valadés y Cia., 1908), 44.
27 “Ensayo histórico y politico sobre las Provincias del Rio de la Plata, desde el 25 de Mayo de 1810” El Conciliador, N°1, May 1827, 2.
28 “La felonía,” La América Ilustrada (New York), II, N°25 (January 10, 1873), 10.
29 Juan Ignacio Gorriti, Reflecciones sobre las causas morales de las convulsiones interiores en los nuevos estados americanos y examen de los medios eficaces para reprimirlas (Valparaíso: Imprenta del Mercurio, 1836), 68.
30 García del Río, “Revista del estado anterior,” 243.
31 José Antonio Páez, Autobiografia, vol. II (New York: Imprenta de Hallet y Breen, 1869), 184–85. Further cases of restrictive attitudes towards expanding education in the colonies in: García del Río, “Revista del estado anterior,” 398–399.
32 José Manuel Estrada, Lecciones sobre la historia de la República Argentina dadas públicamente en 1868 (Buenos Aires: Librería del Colegio, 1898), 287.
33 Andrés Lamas, Apuntes históricos sobre las agresiones del dictador argentino D. Juan Manuel Rosas contra la independencia de la República Oriental del Uruguay (Montevideo: Imprenta Hispano-Americana, 1849), 18.
34 Tadeo Ortiz, México considerado como nación independiente y libre, ó sean algunas indicaciones sobre los deberes mas esenciales de los mexicanos (Burdeos: Imprenta de Carlos Lawalle Sobrino, 1832), 112.
35 Estevan Guenot, Plan de educacion elemental y de varios establecimientos de utilidad y de beneficencia (Mexico: Imprenta del ciudadano Alejandro Valdés, 1826), 5.
36 “Esterior,” El Iris de La Paz, N°6 (August 15, 1829): 2.
37 Redactores de los Congresos Constitucionales de 1846 y Extraordinarios de 1847 y 1848 (La Paz: Litografías e Imprentas Unidas, 1924), 26.
38 “Pensamientos sueltos,” Mentor Costarricense N°12 (March 25, 1843): 42.
39 Gustavo Baz and Eduardo L. Gallo, Historia del ferrocarril mexicano (Mexico: Gallo y Compañía, 1874), 157.
40 Daniel Barros Grez, Pipiolos i Pelucones. Tradiciones de ahora cuarenta años (Santiago: Imprenta Franklin, 1876), 262.
41 Juan Bautista Alberdi, Elementos del derecho publico provincial, para la Republica Arjentina (Valparaiso: Imprenta del Mercurio, 1853), 43–44.
42 Valentín Latelier, Sesiones de los cuerpos lejislativos de la República de Chile, 1811 a 1845 (Santiago: Imprenta Cervantes, 1893), 60.
43 Crisóval Valdez, “Estudios Histórico-Económicos,” Revista de Santiago 3, no. 21(1849): 24.
44 Guillermo Prieto, Lecciones elementales de economía política (Mexico: Imprenta del Gobierno, 1871), 184.
45 Veronica Oelsner, ‘Produzenten statt Parasiten’: Entwürfe und Wirklichkeiten beruflicher Ausbildung im modernen Argentinien (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2012).
46 Prieto, Economía política, 278.
47 José María Lafragua, Memoria de la Primera Secretaría de Estado y del Despacho de Relaciones Interiores y Exteriores de los Estados-Unidos Mexicanos (Mexico: Imprenta de Vicente García Torres, 1847), 79–80. He clearly softened his stance a few years later, when he discussed the issue of religious tolerance in 1856. See José María Lafragua, “Discurso pronunciado por el Sr. Lic. Don José María Lafragua en contra de la Tolerancia de cultos, en la sesion celebrada en el Palacio Legislativo, el 1° de Agoto de 1856,” in Galería de oradores de México en el siglo XIX, ed. Emilio del Castillo Negrete (Mexico: Tipografía de R. I. González e Hijos, 1878), 226.
48 Basilio Perez Gallardo, “La instruccion publica durante la dominacion española en México,” in: Polémica entre el Diario Oficial y la Colonia Española sobre la administración virreynal en Nueva-España y la colonización en México, ed. Manuel López (Mexico: Imprenta Políglota, 1875).
49 José Manuel Frontaura Arana, Noticias históricas sobre las escuelas públicas de Chile á fines de la era colonial (Santiago de Chile: Imprenta Nacional, 1892), 5.
50 Eligio Ancona, Historia de Yucatán desde la época más remota hasta nuestros días, vol. II (Mérida: Imprenta de M. Heredia Argüelles, 1878), 531.
51 José Francisco López, Estudio político de la República Argentina y un cuadro histórico del govierno municipal en los pueblos romanos y germánicos (Buenos Aires: Imprenta, litografía y fundición de tipos de la Sociedad Anónima, 1875), 88.
52 José Manuel Groot, Historia eclesiástica y civil de Nueva Granada, vol. V (Bogotá: Casa Editorial de M. Rivas, 1893), 122.
53 Manuel Bilbao, Historia de Rosas, vol. I (Buenos Aires: Imprenta ‘Buenos Aires’, 1868), 69.
54 José María Ramos Mejía, Las neurosis de los hombres célebres en la Historia Argentina (Buenos Aires: Martin Biedma, editor, 1878), 14.
55 Ibid., 15.
56 Ibid., 17.
57 Felipe Barreda Laos, Vida intelectual de la colonia (educación, filosofía y ciencias). Ensayo histórico crítico (Lima: Impr. “La industria”, 1909), 145.
58 Antonio Isidoro de Pascual, Apuntes para la historia de la República Oriental ddel Uruguay desde el año 1810 hasta el de 1859, vol. II (Paris: n.d., 1864), 474.
59 Prologue in: Rafael Aguirre Cinta, Lecciones de Historia General de Guatemala (Guatemala: Impreto en la tipografía nacional, 1899), XII.
60 Thomas Koinzer, “ ‘Lehrfahrten für die Gesamtschule’. Educational Borrowing, Transfer und Externalisierung auf die amerikanische Comprehensive School,” Bildung und Erziehung 62, no. 1 (2008); Jürgen Schriewer, “Vergleich als Methode und Externalisierung auf Welt: Vom Umgang mit Alterität in Reflexionsdisziplinen,” in Theorie als Passion, ed. Dirk Baecker et al. (Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp, 1987).
