“Rethinking Decolonization” By A. G. Hopkins: Summary and Critique

Introduction: “Rethinking Decolonization” By A. G. Hopkins

“Rethinking Decolonization” by A. G. Hopkins first appeared in 2008 in the journal Past and Present, published by Oxford University Press. This seminal work reevaluates the processes of decolonization, emphasizing that it should not only be seen as the formal independence of colonies but also as a global, multifaceted transformation involving settler dominions like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa. Hopkins challenges the traditional focus on Africa and Asia, arguing that the old dominions’ gradual detachment from Britain, symbolized through changes in flags, anthems, and governance, signifies a broader and more profound reshaping of imperial connections. He underscores that this transition disrupted the core concept of “Britishness” and fostered distinct national identities, highlighting that “the adoption of new anthems and flags, far from being mere window dressing, represented a fundamental and remarkably neglected transformation of the whole of the empire-Commonwealth.” The article holds significance in literature and literary theory for its global and interconnected view of historical narratives, urging scholars to reconsider decolonization as a response to post-war globalization and ideological shifts. Hopkins’ work contributes a critical lens to the study of postcolonialism by bridging the gap between formal independence and cultural decolonization.

Summary of “Rethinking Decolonization” By A. G. Hopkins

• Decolonization as a Symbolic and Cultural Shift
  • National symbols such as flags and anthems marked the shift from colonial rule to independence in former colonies and dominions. For example, new flags and anthems in Malaya (1957), Nigeria (1960), and Jamaica (1962) signified the emergence of national identities (Hopkins, 2008, p. 210).
• Inclusion of Dominions in the Decolonization Narrative
  • The “old dominions” (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa) are often excluded from traditional decolonization studies despite undergoing parallel processes of severing ties with Britain. These dominions developed new national identities and ceremonial independence after World War II (Hopkins, 2008, p. 213).
• Dominion Status and Ambiguous Independence
  • The dominions’ pre-World War II “independence” was ambiguous, with the Statute of Westminster (1931) granting autonomy but not fully breaking British control. Formal independence came only decades later, following significant cultural, political, and economic transformations (Hopkins, 2008, pp. 214-216).
• Cultural Decolonization as a Break from Britishness
  • Decolonization of the dominions involved the erosion of “Britishness” as the central identity. This transformation was symbolized by the adoption of new national flags, anthems, and the replacement of British imperial honors with localized traditions (Hopkins, 2008, p. 215).
• Globalization as a Force for Decolonization
  • Post-World War II globalization accelerated decolonization by promoting new economic alignments, challenging racial hierarchies, and introducing civic concepts of nationality. This global shift reshaped both formal colonies and dominions into independent nation-states (Hopkins, 2008, pp. 229-231).
• Dominions’ Post-War Economic and Political Reorientation
  • The economic and political ties binding the dominions to Britain weakened as they integrated into regional trade systems, such as Australia’s and New Zealand’s trade with Japan and Southeast Asia (Hopkins, 2008, p. 237). Britain’s application to join the European Economic Community in 1961 further spurred this shift (Hopkins, 2008, p. 239).
• Multiculturalism and Civic Nationalism
  • Multiculturalism replaced ethnically British identities in the dominions. Australia abolished its “White Australia” policy (1973), while Canada and New Zealand also embraced civic nationalism as diverse populations became integral to their societies (Hopkins, 2008, pp. 234-236).
• Racial Justice and First Nations’ Emancipation
  • The decolonization of the dominions paralleled internal decolonization efforts by indigenous peoples. Movements in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand challenged assimilationist policies and asserted land and cultural rights, redefining national identities (Hopkins, 2008, pp. 234-235).
• Broader Implications for Decolonization Studies
  • Hopkins argues for expanding the study of decolonization beyond the traditional focus on Asia and Africa to include settler dominions. He highlights the global scope of decolonization, linking it to broader processes of globalization, human rights movements, and racial justice (Hopkins, 2008, pp. 243-245).

Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Rethinking Decolonization” By A. G. Hopkins

Theoretical Term/Concept	Definition/Explanation	Relevance in the Article
Decolonization	The process through which colonies gain independence, involving political, economic, and cultural detachment from imperial powers.	The article redefines decolonization to include the transformation of dominions and challenges the exclusion of dominions from traditional studies.
Old Dominions	Self-governing settler colonies (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa) with ambiguous independence under British rule before full sovereignty.	Highlights how dominions experienced delayed and gradual decolonization, distinct from former colonies in Asia and Africa.
Britishness	A shared identity based on cultural, racial, and political loyalty to Britain, rooted in imperial unity.	The erosion of Britishness was central to dominions’ cultural decolonization, paving the way for new national identities.
Dominion Status	A political status granting self-governance within the British Empire while maintaining constitutional ties to Britain.	Dominion status blurred the boundaries between independence and subordination, delaying formal decolonization.
Globalization	The process of increasing global interconnectedness in trade, culture, and politics, reshaping post-war economic and social systems.	Post-war globalization undermined imperial hierarchies, promoted economic integration, and contributed to the decolonization of dominions and colonies.
Civic Nationalism	A form of national identity based on shared civic values and inclusivity rather than ethnicity or race.	Dominion nations transitioned from ethnically defined Britishness to civic nationalism to reflect diverse and multicultural societies.
Informal Empire	Continued dominance through economic, cultural, or political influence without direct control or formal colonization.	Explores how Britain retained influence over dominions through economic and defense policies after formal decolonization.
Second Colonial Occupation	Post-World War II imperial reinvigoration focusing on economic exploitation and geopolitical strategy in colonies.	Britain’s renewed focus on the empire in the 1940s-50s is juxtaposed with the dominions’ gradual separation from the imperial system.
Post-Colonial Globalization	A new global order emerging after the decline of imperialism, characterized by regional economic integration and the erosion of traditional imperial hierarchies.	Describes the economic and cultural shifts that accompanied decolonization and reoriented former dominions’ and colonies’ international roles.
Cultural Cringe	A term describing self-doubt or inferiority among colonized or dominion populations regarding their own culture compared to the imperial power.	Used to explain dominions’ cultural dependence on Britain and the gradual assertion of independent cultural identities.
Internal Decolonization	The process by which indigenous peoples within dominions and settler societies gain recognition, rights, and cultural independence from colonial institutions.	Highlights the parallel struggles of indigenous peoples in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand alongside the dominions’ decolonization.
Greater Britain	The idea of a unified British world, linking Britain with its settler colonies through cultural, economic, and political ties.	The decline of this concept represents the dissolution of imperial identity and the emergence of independent national identities in dominions.
Neo-Colonialism	Continued economic and political dominance over formally independent countries by former imperial powers.	Mentioned to contrast dominions’ post-colonial independence with continued dependency in some ex-colonies.
Assimilationist Policies	Government policies aimed at absorbing indigenous peoples into dominant settler culture, often through cultural erasure.	Seen as a colonial legacy that dominions dismantled during their process of internal decolonization.
Human Rights and Equality	Universal principles advocating for the end of racial, social, and economic discrimination.	Central to dismantling imperial ideologies and racial hierarchies in dominions and colonies post-World War II.
Multiculturalism	The coexistence of diverse cultural groups within a single national identity.	Replaced British-centered cultural identities in dominions as they transitioned to inclusive civic nationalism.
Regionalism	Economic and political integration within geographically proximate areas, replacing imperial economic structures.	Dominions like Canada, Australia, and New Zealand shifted towards regional trade agreements and alliances after Britain’s pivot to Europe.

Contribution of “Rethinking Decolonization” By A. G. Hopkins to Literary Theory/Theories

• Broadening the Scope of Decolonization Studies
  • Challenges the traditional geographic and conceptual boundaries of decolonization studies, expanding it to include dominions like Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.
  • Proposes that decolonization is not limited to formal political independence but involves cultural, social, and economic detachment from imperial influence (Hopkins, p. 213).
• Critique of Postcolonialism
  • Suggests that postcolonial theory has focused excessively on Asia and Africa while neglecting the cultural and ideological decolonization of dominions (Hopkins, p. 214).
  • Advocates for including the dominions within postcolonial frameworks to address the delayed and gradual dissolution of imperial ties (Hopkins, p. 229).
• Intersection with Globalization Theory
  • Connects the decline of imperial systems to the rise of postcolonial globalization, highlighting how global economic and cultural shifts undermined traditional hierarchies (Hopkins, p. 241).
  • Postulates that globalization has eroded imperial structures, transforming hierarchical empires into horizontal, interconnected global systems (Hopkins, p. 242).
• Reframing Britishness and Identity Theories
  • Explores the dissolution of Britishness as a shared identity in dominions, proposing that its decline was central to the development of new, pluralistic national identities (Hopkins, p. 221).
  • Contributes to theories of cultural identity by showing how civic nationalism replaced ethnocentric and imperial identities (Hopkins, p. 236).
• Coloniality and Internal Decolonization
  • Draws attention to the “internal decolonization” of indigenous peoples within settler societies, linking it to broader postcolonial struggles (Hopkins, p. 233).
  • Aligns with decolonial theory’s emphasis on dismantling colonial hierarchies within formerly colonized spaces (Hopkins, p. 245).
• Multiculturalism and Nation-Building
  • Offers a theoretical framework for understanding the transition of dominions to multicultural societies, where national identities became inclusive and civic-based (Hopkins, p. 236).
  • Contributes to theories of nation-building by illustrating how dominions evolved from racially exclusive societies to multicultural polities (Hopkins, p. 237).
• Cultural Studies and the “Cultural Cringe”
  • Engages with cultural studies by examining dominions’ “cultural cringe” and their journey toward cultural independence and authenticity (Hopkins, p. 235).
  • Provides insights into the psychological effects of imperialism on cultural production and consumption in former dominions.
• Informal Empire and Neo-Colonialism
  • Challenges neo-colonialism theories by arguing that dominions experienced cultural and economic independence alongside political autonomy (Hopkins, p. 243).
  • Suggests that neo-colonial frameworks need to account for regional variations in post-imperial transitions.
• Decolonization as a Global Process
  • Frames decolonization as part of a global transformation rather than a localized political process, integrating it with theories of interconnected global history (Hopkins, p. 243).
  • Highlights the interplay of universal principles, such as human rights, with localized struggles for independence (Hopkins, p. 244).

Examples of Critiques Through “Rethinking Decolonization” By A. G. Hopkins

Literary Work	Critique Through “Rethinking Decolonization”	Key Reference from Hopkins’ Article
Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart	Explores the cultural impact of British colonialism in Africa but could benefit from including a comparative analysis of dominions’ decolonization.	Hopkins highlights the need to expand the scope of decolonization studies to include dominions and settler colonies (p. 213).
J.M. Coetzee’s Disgrace	Focuses on the post-apartheid societal shifts but could integrate global decolonization dynamics to deepen the context of South Africa’s transformation.	Hopkins connects South Africa’s internal struggles with global decolonization and human rights movements (p. 233).
E.M. Forster’s A Passage to India	Critiques British rule in India, but it could deepen its impact by connecting India’s independence to the broader global shifts in settler dominions and globalization.	Hopkins underscores the need to understand decolonization as a global, interconnected phenomenon (p. 241).
Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale	The dystopian portrayal of cultural and societal control could be enriched by connecting Canada’s historical ties to British imperialism and its gradual cultural independence.	Hopkins discusses Canada’s delayed cultural and constitutional independence from Britain (p. 214).

Criticism Against “Rethinking Decolonization” By A. G. Hopkins

• Neglect of Postcolonial Literature: While Hopkins emphasizes the global and interconnected nature of decolonization, the article does not engage sufficiently with postcolonial literary voices or the rich body of literature that critiques imperial legacies.
• Overemphasis on Dominion Nations: Critics may argue that the focus on settler dominions like Canada, Australia, and New Zealand risks sidelining the experiences of colonized nations in Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean, which faced more severe forms of exploitation and oppression.
• Limited Consideration of Cultural Decolonization: Hopkins primarily addresses constitutional, economic, and political decolonization but gives less attention to cultural and psychological aspects, which are central to understanding postcolonial identity formation.
• Underexploration of Indigenous Perspectives: While Hopkins acknowledges the role of indigenous peoples in the decolonization of dominions, the treatment of their struggles for sovereignty and rights remains underdeveloped compared to broader geopolitical narratives.
• Simplified Dichotomy of Formal and Informal Empire: The discussion on formal independence versus ongoing informal ties (economic and cultural) could have been nuanced further, especially in the context of neo-colonial dynamics in former colonies.
• Inconsistent Chronology of Decolonization: Some scholars argue that Hopkins’ attempt to align the timelines of dominion and colony decolonization is forced, as the contexts and processes in settler colonies were fundamentally different.
• Limited Engagement with Intersectional Factors: The article does not delve deeply into how gender, class, and race intersected with decolonization processes, particularly in the dominions and postcolonial nations.
• Missed Opportunities for Comparative Analysis: Critics point out the absence of detailed comparative analysis between the settler dominions’ trajectories and those of other regions, such as Latin America or Southeast Asia, which experienced different patterns of colonial disengagement.
• Insufficient Attention to Neo-Colonialism: Although Hopkins references globalization, the analysis could have further developed the concept of neo-colonialism and how it impacts former colonies and dominions today.

Representative Quotations from “Rethinking Decolonization” By A. G. Hopkins with Explanation

Quotation	Explanation
“The moment of decolonization is recorded by dates and signalled by ceremony… flags are redesigned.”	Highlights the symbolic acts of decolonization (e.g., new anthems and flags), reflecting shifts in national identity. Often dismissed as trivial, Hopkins argues they hold deeper significance.
“Acquiring the ceremonial emblems of independence may have been merely a delayed tidying-up operation.”	Suggests that for dominions like Canada and Australia, gaining independence through symbolic changes was more about completing a process already underway.
“The old dominions themselves might be an integral part of the process of decolonization.”	Challenges traditional historiography by integrating dominions (e.g., Canada, Australia) into broader narratives of decolonization typically reserved for Africa and Asia.
“Formal self-government did not confer full independence on the old settler colonies.”	Argues that formal autonomy for dominions did not equate to genuine independence due to ongoing cultural, economic, and political ties with Britain.
“The destruction of the core concept of Britishness… and the creation of new national identities.”	Points to the profound cultural transformation in the dominions as they moved away from the idea of being extensions of Britain.
“Decolonization was a response to changes in the process of globalization after the Second World War.”	Frames decolonization as part of a larger global shift, linking imperial decline to postwar globalization and economic restructuring.
“The ideology of empire had begun to disintegrate under the pressure of new principles of equality.”	Explores the ideological collapse of empire, influenced by universal human rights and anti-colonial movements in the mid-20th century.
“The British world, which had been rejuvenated after the Second World War, was losing its vitality.”	Suggests the decline of the “British world” was accelerated by global political and economic transformations in the postwar era.
“Small events can signify large developments… changes to flags and anthems were matters of deep significance.”	Reaffirms the importance of symbolic acts in understanding the broader process of decolonization, especially in settler dominions.
“The dominions failed to reproduce Britain’s class-based, hierarchical model of social order.”	Highlights the divergence between Britain and the dominions, where new cultural and social values emerged, emphasizing egalitarianism over rigid class structures.

Suggested Readings: “Rethinking Decolonization” By A. G. Hopkins

1. Hopkins, A. G. “Rethinking Decolonization.” Past & Present, no. 200, 2008, pp. 211–47. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25096724. Accessed 25 Jan. 2025.
2.  Ward, Stuart. “THE EUROPEAN PROVENANCE OF DECOLONIZATION.” Past & Present, no. 230, 2016, pp. 227–60. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/44014553. Accessed 27 Jan. 2025.
3. Chapman, Alister. “The International Context of Secularization in England: The End of Empire, Immigration, and the Decline of Christian National Identity, 1945–1970.” Journal of British Studies, vol. 54, no. 1, 2015, pp. 163–89. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24701729. Accessed 27 Jan. 2025.