CFP Dossier || The times of popular peace: de(s)colonial pluralities against neoliberal hegemony


Call for Papers • Volume 7 •  Issue 32 • June 2022

Dossier The times of popular peace: de(s)colonial pluralities against neoliberal hegemony

Guest Editors: 

Dr.(c). Gonzalo Esteban Calderón Mendoza (Universidad Pablo de Olavide-España)

Dr. Julio Lisandro Cañón Voirin (Universidade de Santiago de Compostela-España)

Submission deadline: March 30, 2022

Editorial guidelines: instructions and templates 

Submission method: Consult the checklist

APC: Consult policies and waivers

Accepted languages: Spanish, English, or Portuguese

With the end of the Cold War, the international policies determined by the imperialist powers for the construction of peace were aimed at encouraging so-called "post-conflict" contexts. A horizon that was imposed, fundamentally, in the latitudes that the central capitalist countries considered representative of the so-called third world (sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America). Such a "constructive" initiative has been strongly imbued by a conceptualization of peace characterized as neoliberal. This formulation has been so labeled because of its basis in the dominant Western ideas of representative democracy, the market economy, and conflict resolution marked by formality, statehood, and hegemonic stability.

In contemporary times, the neoliberal conception of peace has gained a terminological, pragmatic, and epistemological monopoly on the visualization of possible "ways out" of what is perceived, imposingly, as the most pressing socio-political situation. This neoliberal understanding of peace, though often overlooked, has a neocolonial component that supports the enterprise of keeping the interests of the Western imperialist states and the corporations they support and represent at the top.

Peace studies have habitually ignored the profound contradictions implied by a neoliberal vision: the sacrifice of human rights on the altar of democracy; the pretended impartiality, homogeneity, objectivity, and neutrality of the technique and practice of peace that, innocently or not, is assumed to be safe from political-economic, racial and gender discrimination; the representations of peripheral and marginalized countries as scenarios lacking local agencies that are "clamoring" for the salvation of the world powers.

It is no longer appropriate to ignore the fact that this predominant discourse on peace is the result of a modern/colonial system whose obligatory nature was established as a Western universal. It became normative in post-colonial states where the reproduction of the values of the coloniality of power, knowledge, and being was unquestionable. This system of modern/colonial domination maintained and carried out the bases of the systemic ideology of classification and discrimination throughout the world.

For all of the above, it becomes peremptory colonial perspectives that contribute to the understanding of the ways in which the alterities and other nesses underlying the oscillating logic between war and peace, are subjected to hierarchical structures of the ethnic-racial order to manage their populations. Neoliberal peace is a narrative that not only fails to overcome colonial differentiation, but also sustains exclusion through the co-optation of human existences in favor of the legitimacy and centrality of the figure of the nation-state.

It is necessary to question the semantics and the living semiotics of the concept, its deep limitations. But it is also necessary to question the theoretical, practical, and pedagogical support of neoliberal peace and its daily consequences. Criticism must be launched against neoliberalism itself because of the wounds, separations, and incongruities arising from its primary goals of consolidating post-conflict environments through the strengthening of neocolonial projects for the construction and maintenance of States.

Certain de(s)colonial views allow us to place the accent on resistances situated from the margins and subalternities of institutions and governmental armatures. The construction of popular, collective, emancipatory, and root paces also depends on a deconstruction, on a significant transformation of the academy so that it may finally act as a dynamic link between local histories, societies, and politics.

Special topics of interest

- Historical-political identification of the processes of construction and consolidation of the neoliberal imaginary on peace in the territories that have been and are colonized.

- Socio-historical characterization of the central elements of the marginalization and peripheralization of the south through colonialist war dynamics.

- Development of theoretical and epistemological positions critical of the hegemonic, westernist, and pro-state parameters of war and peace studies.

- Valorization of situated, popular and subaltern experiences and resistances in the face of the neoliberal and colonial configuration of conflict and post-conflict contexts in the glocal peripheries.



Anctil Avoine, P., & Paredes Saavedra, N. J. (julio-diciembre de 2018). Pensar la construcción de paces en Colombia: la (ir)relevancia teórico-práctica de la decolonialidad. (317-335, Ed.) Análisis, 50(93).

Castro-Herrera, F. S. (2020). Ficciones coloniales de la paz. En Centro de Investigación y Educación Popular / Programa por la Paz, Estudios críticos de paz: perspectivas decoloniales (págs. 29-32). Bogotá: CINEP / PPP.

Centro de Investigación y Educación Popular / Programa por la Paz. (2020). Estudios críticos de paz: perspectivas decoloniales. Bogotá: CINEP/PPP.

Cruz, J. D. (2020). Estudios críticos de paz y conflictos: una perspectiva decolonial. En Centro de Investigación y Educación Popular / Programa por la Paz Popular, Estudios cíticos de paz: perspectivas decoloniales (págs. 21-28). Bogotá: CINEP / PPP.

Fontan, V. (2012). Descolonizando la Paz. Cali: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana.

Fontan, V. (enero-junio de 2012). Replanteando la epistemología de la Paz: el caso de la descolonización de paz. Perspectivas Internacionales, 8(1), 41-71.

Fontan, V., & Cruz, J. D. (2014). Una mirada subalterna y desde abajo de la cultura de la paz. Ra Ximhai, 10(2), 135-152.

Kabunda, M. (2006). Relaciones Internacionales africanas y relaciones interafricanas en la era de la globalización. En E. Echart Muñoz, & S. A. (Edits.), África en el horizonte. Introducción a la realidad socioeconómica del África Subsahariana (págs. 75-109). Madrid: Catarata.

López Arias, L. (junio de 2018). Repensando Palestina. Una crítica a la paz liberal de Oslo desde un marco analítico del colonialismo. Revista de Estudios Internacionales Mediterráneos(24), 151-172.

Martínez Guzmán, V. (2009). Filosofía para hacer las paces. Barcelona: Icaria.

Richmond, O. (2011). Resistencia y paz postliberal. Revista de Relaciones Internacionales, 16, 13-45.

Rivera Cusicanqui, S. (2010). Ch'ixinakax utxiwa. Una reflexión sobre prácticas y discursos descolonizadores. Buenos Aires: Tinta Limón.

Rodríguez Iglesias, A. I. (2019). A decolonial critique of the liberal peace: Insights from peace practices of ethnic people in Colombia. Revista de Paz y Conflictos, 12(2), 199-223.

Sandoval, E. (2012). Estudios para la paz, la interculturalidad y la democracia. Ra Ximhai, 8(2), 1-37.

Sandoval, E. (2013). Etnografía para la paz, la interculturalidad y los conflictos. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 8(14), 11-24.

Sandoval, E. (2016). Educación para la paz integral, memoria, interculturalidad y decolonialidad. Bogotá: ARFO.

Torres-Amaya, D. (2020). Otras paces posibles. Apuesta para el buen vivir. En Centro de Investigación y Educación Popular / Programa por la Paz, Estudios críticos de paz: perspectivas decoloniales (págs. 73-80). Bogotá: CINEP / PPP.

Zirion-Landaluze, I. (2017). Críticas al modelo de construcción de «paz liberal» en contextos posconflicto en el África Subsahariana. Iberoamerican Journal of Development Studies, 6(2), 28-47.