General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/about/ebr-terms Abstract: Lusofonia or lusophony is often defined as an identity shared by people in areas that were once colonised by Portugal, which in Africa include Angola, Cabo Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique and São Tomé and Príncipe. Lusofonia assumes that in these places people share something -a language, certainly, but also a history and culture rooted in the Iberian Peninsula. In some ways, it is a re-articulation of Gilberto Freyre's lusotropicalismo, the idea that Portuguese were more adaptable than other Europeans to tropical climates and cultures and created more multicultural colonial communities. Those who espouse lusofonia often have a political agenda -the strengthening of the Community of Portuguese Speaking Countries (CPLP). In this article, we argue that like lusotropicalismo, lusofonia is a dream; it is not rooted in a historical reality. It is luso-centric in that it ignores the power and persistence of local cultures and gives undo weight to Portuguese influence. With regard to Africa, lusofonia's agenda is elite driven and assumes the inevitability of modernity and globalisation. And we demonstrate that it was through Upper Guinean institutions and * Corresponding author. Email: walterh@msu.edu; jose.lingnanafafe@bristol.ac.uk 2 languages, and not colonial ones, that community and fellowship were most commonly fostered in the past, as they are fostered today. Those seeking the roots of lusofonia cannot, then, look to this period of Portuguese-African engagement in Upper Guinea. There Portuguese embraced "black ways." They operated in a peculiar multicultural space in which people possessed fluid and flexible identities. Portugal did not create that space. Lusofonia has not been the foundation for cultural unity. Rather, unity has been found in localised institutions and in Crioulo. In Guinea-Bissau, lusofonia is not an indigenous movement. If it is anything, it is the stuff of elites and foreigners and is not rooted in any historical reality.

No abstract

European encounters fostered in the early modern period with West Africa have provided us with interesting frameworks from which to engage in the construction of difference, race within Western European space and with terms for rethinking European identity that transcend the cosmopolitan and colonial pretensions. Drawing on early historical records, especically the Portuguese experience in West Africa, this article seeks to contest standard historical sociological tropes of European identity. First, creolization and hybridity are to challenge the essentialism which has been deployed by Hegel to defend colonial interests. Second, it engages with the critiques levelled at Hegel's eurocentrism, universalism and teleology. Particular use is made of Susan Buck-Morss's work on Hegel, Sybelle Fischer's critique of Buck-Morss' work. Third, it interrogates the principle of the dialectic with Hegel's Europe engagement with its Others; using Levinas' work as a critique of Hegel's dialectic, which represents alternative, that is less violent and non-dominant.

No abstract

Bacurau (BACURAU, 2019) de Kleber Mendonça Filho e Juliano Dornelles foi o filme brasileiro mais polêmico de 2019. Estreou no Festival de Cannes 2019 onde obteve o Prêmio especial do Júri e depois ganhou mais distinções nacionais e internacionais. Foi elogiado e criticado como filme de resistência contra o atual governo de Bolsonaro, seu discurso sexista, racista e homofóbico. Este artigo procura analisar três aspetos centrais do filme: 1) a maneira como se dá essa resistência contra os invasores norte-americanos que utilizam o povoado de Bacurau para um videogame real, valendo-se de sua população como alvos vivos; 2) o emprego da necropolítica, que possui historicamente uma dimensão mais violenta no Brasil devido ao trafico de escravizados e à escravidão, e que está atrás da venda da vila pelo prefeito Tony Júnior; e 3), a fantasia de vingança relativamente à essa opressão e à qual o filme dá expressão por meio de um banho de sangue violento quando o povoado se defende contra os invasores. O maior objetivo deste artigo e da analise desses aspetos consiste em compreender se o filme contribui para o debate sobre racismo no Brasil, no sentido de promover a discussão acerca da necessária decolonização das mentes para enfrentar o fundamental problema da desigualdade nacional e de seu ainda vigente poder colonial, ou se é apenas uma válvula de escape para as frustrações políticas, oferecendo um momento catártico muito pontual aos espectadores.