Two Theoretical Approaches to Power: Coloniality and Cosmopolitism

§ Universidad Nacional (Costa Rica) Universidad Nacional (Costa Rica)

Send Message

To: Author

Two Theoretical Approaches to Power: Coloniality and Cosmopolitism

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

37F0H

Two Theoretical Approaches to Power: Coloniality and Cosmopolitism Banner

Key Research Insights

Synthesized scholarly intelligence & interactive research assistant
  • English
  • Afrikaans
  • Albanian
  • Amharic
  • Arabic
  • Armenian
  • Azerbaijani
  • Basque
  • Belarusian
  • Bengali
  • Bosnian
  • Bulgarian
  • Catalan
  • Cebuano
  • Chichewa
  • Chinese (Simplified)
  • Chinese (Traditional)
  • Corsican
  • Croatian
  • Czech
  • Danish
  • Dutch
  • Esperanto
  • Estonian
  • Filipino
  • Finnish
  • French
  • Frisian
  • Galician
  • Georgian
  • German
  • Greek
  • Gujarati
  • Haitian Creole
  • Hausa
  • Hawaiian
  • Hebrew
  • Hindi
  • Hmong
  • Hungarian
  • Icelandic
  • Igbo
  • Indonesian
  • Irish
  • Italian
  • Japanese
  • Javanese
  • Kannada
  • Kazakh
  • Khmer
  • Korean
  • Kurdish (Kurmanji)
  • Kyrgyz
  • Lao
  • Latin
  • Latvian
  • Lithuanian
  • Luxembourgish
  • Macedonian
  • Malagasy
  • Malay
  • Malayalam
  • Maltese
  • Maori
  • Marathi
  • Mongolian
  • Myanmar (Burmese)
  • Nepali
  • Norwegian
  • Pashto
  • Persian
  • Polish
  • Portuguese
  • Punjabi
  • Romanian
  • Russian
  • Samoan
  • Scots Gaelic
  • Serbian
  • Sesotho
  • Shona
  • Sindhi
  • Sinhala
  • Slovak
  • Slovenian
  • Somali
  • Spanish
  • Sundanese
  • Swahili
  • Swedish
  • Tajik
  • Tamil
  • Telugu
  • Thai
  • Turkish
  • Ukrainian
  • Urdu
  • Uzbek
  • Vietnamese
  • Welsh
  • Xhosa
  • Yiddish
  • Yoruba
  • Zulu
Reading Preferences
Font Size
Line Spacing
Background

Abstract

The article compares two approaches that attempt to explain the socio-economic events and policy within states and global society: the Coloniality of Power and Cosmopolitanism. The article reconstructs the discourse of both of these theoretical perspectives to continue next with an assessment of their strengths and weaknesses. In a third stage, the article compares the commonalities and disagreements between the two. We conclude that the two paradigms make significant contributions, and that the social researcher has the important challenge of articulating both of them coherentlyin order to account for a concrete reality.

References

16 Cites in Article
  1. Ulrich Beck (1988). ¿Qué es la globalización? Falacias del globalismo, respuestas a la globalización.
  2. Ulrich Bech (1988). DISCUSIONES SOBRE EL RIESGO EN LA SOCIEDAD DEL RIESGO..
  3. Rafael Silva Ramírez (2000). Responsabilidad social empresarial estratégica: una mirada desde la teoría de la sociedad del Riesgo Mundial de Ulrich Beck..
  4. Ulrich Beck (2004). Poder y contra poder en la era global.
  5. Ulrick Beck (2008). La reinvención de la política: hacia una teoría de la modernización reflexiva.
  6. Gerard Delanty (2008). La imaginación cosmopolita‖.
  7. De La Torre,Verónica (2022). Las pruebas son claras: los embarazos no intencionales guardan relación con la falta de desarrollo.
  8. Ramón Grosfoguel (2006). La descolonización de la economía política y los estudios postcoloniales: transmodernidad, pensamiento fronterizo y colonialidad global.
  9. Jean-Marie Guéhenno (1995). LAS NUEVAS “REGLAS DEL JUEGO”..
  10. Jurgen Habermas (1998). -Ciudadanía e identidad nacional. Reflexiones sobre el futuro europeo‖.
  11. Martha Nussbaum (1999). Los límites del patriotismo: Identidad, pertenencia y -ciudadanía mundial‖.
  12. Oscar Pérez (2006). Algunas estrategias para la virtud cosmopolita‖.
  13. Anibal Quijano (2000). Colonialidad del poder y clasificación social‖.
  14. Anibal Quijano (2000). Colonialidad del poder, globalización y democracia‖.
  15. Pablo Quintero (2010). Notas sobre la teoría de la colonialidad del poder y la estructuración de la sociedad en América Latina.
  16. Hugo Méndez-Fierros,Christian Fernández Huerta,Isaac Palazuelos Rojo (2010). Memes, migración y discurso de odio en la frontera México-Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. Una propuesta etnográfica digital.

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

altivohaciaadelante, Willy Soto Acosta. 2013. "Two Theoretical Approaches to Power: Coloniality and Cosmopolitism". Global Journal of Human-Social Science - C: Sociology & Culture GJHSS-C Volume 13 (GJHSS Volume 13 Issue C6).

Download Citation

Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/GJHSS

Print ISSN 0975-587X

e-ISSN 2249-460X

Keywords
Classification
GJHSS-C Classification FOR Code: 370199
Version of record

v1.2

Issue date
November 13, 2013

Language
English
Experiance in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

Article Matrices
Total Views: 2K
Total Downloads: 84
All Trends

Request Access

Please fill out the form below to request access to this research paper. Your request will be reviewed by the editorial or author team.
X

This is the heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

High-quality academic research articles on global topics and journals.

Two Theoretical Approaches to Power: Coloniality and Cosmopolitism

Universidad Nacional (Costa Rica)
Willy Acosta
Willy Acosta