Robert Warrior- Native American Scholarship and the Transnational Turn

Transnationalism is a term that has permeated many fields of study.  Native American scholars, however, have traditionally not joined the transnational discourse. Robert Warrior’s article, Native American Scholarship and the Transnational Turn, examines why most Native scholars have not adopted a position in relation to transnationalism.  Warrior argues that a resistance against transnationality can be intellectually defensible and can also provide theoretical insights. (122)

 

-“Postcolonial Precursors”

Warrior starts by pointing out that one explanation for the lack of engagement in relation to transnationality is that many Native American scholars reject postcolonial studies.  Although many once-colonized groups of people are living in a post-independent era, Native Americans remain colonized.  “Thus the post in postcolonialism creates a stumbling block to engagement.” (122) Native critics do not engage in the transnationality discourse that is characteristic within postcolonial studies since its proponents are more interested in issues beyond national borders and tend to not focus on the transnationalism that colonialism produces within borders.  The aftermath of the 1998 American Studies Association meeting further embraced transnationalism within American Studies, however, Warrior along with other Native scholars were not eager to adopt the broader project being proposed at the ASA meeting.  Subsequently, “Native American studies remains marginalized within American Studies.”(124)

 

-“Sorting Out an Indigenous Position”

In the aftermath of the ASA meeting, Warrior became wary of the inclusive agenda of American studies and postcolonial studies since they do not truly consider the real current needs of Native communities. Native scholars did not contribute to the increasingly normative adoption of transnationalism, rather “Indigenous scholars have contributed to discussions of transnationality specifically by refusing to get with the program . . . In effect our nationalism is born out of  native transnationalism, the flow and exchange of ideas and politics across our respective nations’ borders.”(125)  In short, the tradition of wariness, refusal, and ultimately resistance within Indigenous studies can benefit Indigenous studies, while not directly benefiting other fields of study like American studies.

 

-“Outlasting Colonialism”

For American and postcolonial studies, transnationalism has been the alternative to the highly criticized concept of Nationalism.  Warrior argues that Nationalism is an essential element of Native American studies “because it remains the domestic and international language in which Native struggle is waged and remains a primary vehicle for fueling Indigenous imaginations.”(125)  Nevertheless, Warrior believes that Native scholars should broaden the field to include the “Indigenous world” and that the critiques of nationalism are worth considering.  There are Native scholars who have incorporated forms of transnational analysis in their work, even if the language of transnationality is not specifically mentioned.  This is just another example of the ungovernable aspect of Native writing and Indigenous studies.  “Irrespective of whether or not more of us adopt the language of transnationality our most successful work will always be reaching similarly toward ungovernability.”(127)

 

I appreciated Warrior’s article because it shines light on the intrinsic nature of the ungovernability within Indigenous studies and Native writing in relation to widely adopted academic discourses.  Last week in class we briefly talked about the relationship between theory and the people we theorize about.  I think that this link between theory and ‘the people’ is largely ignored within western hierarchies of knowledge.  This article demonstrated for me how “universally accepted” concepts or theories can transcend the very people who fall under their umbrellas.  For instance, post-colonial theory is a highly problematic concept when applied to Indigenous peoples who still have not experienced the ‘post’ of colonialism.  Even on a global scale, isn’t the seemingly “postcolonial era” a problematic concept since large groups of people still experience colonialism?