Rampant (Colonial) Power, Undertheorised(Native) Resistance: Foucault, Bhabha, Said

This essay argues that in comparison with colonial power and discourse, anti-colonial resistance has largely been inadequately theorised. This inadequate theoretical engagement with resistance to colonialism is one of the consequences of the current, especially poststructuralist, conception of colonial power and discourse in postcolonial theory. Since Edward Said and Homi Bhabha’s theorisation of colonial power and resistance draws on Michel Foucault’s paradigms of power and resistance, this essay begins by tracing the problems of theorisng resistance to Foucault’s poststructuralism. The essay concludes that Foucault’s paradigms of power attenuate his resistance claims by defining resistance as a function of power. Similarly Bhabha’s resistance claims are undermined by his dispensing with native, anti-colonial, political intentionality and consciousness. In contrast, Said offers a more nuanced account of the colonial experience, rejects a totalised conception of colonial power, and retrieves a space for anti-colonial subjectivity and agency.