Please format your essays in the following manner: Introduction, Summary of Gordon’s Argument ,Analysis of how Gordon’s Argument Relates to ‘Decolonising Social Science’ and References Cited with 1500 words 1. In his essay “Apartheid’s Anthropologists: The Genealogy of Afrikaner Anthropology,” Robert Gordon argues that the limitations and abuses of Volkekunde must be understood in terms of the social context in which volkekundiges were producing knowledge. As male Afrikaner intellectuals at apartheid-supporting universities, these scholars tended to be isolated, and to isolate themselves, from the lives of those whom they were studying and the ideas exchanged outside a narrow sub-field of their discipline. Write an essay in which you: a.) Summarise Gordon’s argument and b.) Analyse how that argument may pertain to decolonising social science at the UFS and other South African universities today.
Introduction
In his essay “Apartheid’s Anthropologists: The Genealogy of Afrikaner Anthropology,” Robert Gordon explores the limitations and abuses of Volkekunde, a field of social science developed in South Africa during the apartheid era. Gordon argues that the production of knowledge within this discipline was deeply influenced by the social context in which volkekundiges, or scholars of Volkekunde, operated. As male Afrikaner intellectuals at apartheid-supporting universities, these scholars tended to be isolated and disconnected from the lives of the people they were studying, leading to a narrow and biased understanding of South African society. In this essay, we will first summarize Gordon’s argument before analyzing how his insights can inform the process of decolonising social science at the University of the Free State (UFS) and other South African universities today.
Summary of Gordon’s Argument
Gordon traces the development of Afrikaner anthropology from its roots in the early twentieth century, where the study of indigenous cultures was motivated by a desire to assert Afrikaner cultural superiority over other racial groups in South Africa. The volkekundiges’ research was deeply entwined with the ideology of apartheid, which sought to justify the segregation and discrimination of non-white South Africans. Gordon argues that this ideological framework shaped not only the subjects of study within Volkekunde but also the methodologies and assumptions used by scholars in the field.
One of the key limitations of Volkekunde, according to Gordon, was the isolation of its practitioners from broader intellectual currents and diverse perspectives. The volkekundiges tended to operate within closed, insular networks at apartheid-supporting universities, which limited their exposure to alternative viewpoints and critical perspectives. This lack of intellectual diversity contributed to a narrow and biased understanding of South African society, as the volkekundiges failed to engage with the complex social dynamics and historical injustices that underpinned apartheid.
Furthermore, Gordon highlights the role of power dynamics in shaping knowledge production within Volkekunde. As male Afrikaner intellectuals, the volkekundiges held significant social and political influence within the apartheid regime, which allowed them to control the narrative around indigenous cultures and shape public policy in ways that reinforced racial hierarchies. This unequal distribution of power further entrenched the biases and limitations of Volkekunde, as marginalized voices and alternative interpretations were systematically excluded from academic discourse.
Analysis of how Gordon’s Argument Relates to ‘Decolonising Social Science’
Gordon’s analysis of the limitations and abuses of Volkekunde has important implications for the process of decolonising social science at the UFS and other South African universities today. Decolonisation in this context refers to the ongoing effort to challenge and dismantle the Eurocentric biases and colonial legacies that continue to shape the production of knowledge within the social sciences. By critically engaging with Gordon’s argument, we can identify several key strategies for decolonising social science and creating more inclusive and socially just research practices.
Firstly, Gordon’s emphasis on the importance of intellectual diversity and interdisciplinary collaboration highlights the need for decolonising social science to engage with a wider range of perspectives and methodologies. In order to challenge entrenched biases and expand the scope of academic inquiry, scholars must actively seek out alternative voices and marginalized perspectives that have been historically excluded from the mainstream. By incorporating insights from indigenous knowledge systems, feminist theory, critical race studies, and other interdisciplinary approaches, social scientists can develop a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of social phenomena that reflects the complex realities of post-apartheid South Africa.
Secondly, Gordon’s critique of power dynamics within academic institutions underscores the importance of promoting inclusivity and equity in the production of knowledge. Decolonising social science requires universities to address the historical legacies of apartheid and colonialism that continue to shape patterns of privilege and marginalization within academia. By actively recruiting and supporting scholars from diverse racial, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds, universities can create more inclusive research environments that reflect the full diversity of South African society. Additionally, efforts to decentralize power and promote participatory research methods can empower marginalized communities to shape the research agenda and challenge dominant narratives that perpetuate inequality and discrimination.
In conclusion, Robert Gordon’s analysis of the limitations and abuses of Volkekunde provides valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities for decolonising social science at the UFS and other South African universities. By critically engaging with Gordon’s argument, scholars can develop more inclusive and socially just research practices that challenge Eurocentric biases, promote intellectual diversity, and empower marginalized communities to shape the research agenda. Through these collective efforts, social scientists can contribute to a more equitable and democratic society that reflects the diverse voices and experiences of all South Africans.
References Cited
Gordon, Robert. “Apartheid’s Anthropologists: The Genealogy of Afrikaner Anthropology.” The Journal of African History, vol. 39, no. 3, 1998, pp. 365-391.