Send message to Author

Paper long abstract:

Khorasanian thinkers believed that, the discovery of their origins and the "Other", is not a single whole act, but rather a procedural, almost stage-by-stage like capacity to understand the world. Evidence suggests that in order to survive (or just grow), one must move from their initial sphere of life/science to the next. Such mobility was influenced heavily by the tradition of constant crossing of boundaries and countries, formalizing commercial/scientific flexibility of the entire culture of the region. However, this potential remains untapped in the construction of the new history of nations. Therefore it is fair to ask: what is the reason for the lack of dialogue on decolonization of, both within the region (between researchers of different republics), between the Russian and Central Asian researchers, as well as between other regions, .ie South-to-South (the Middle East, Latin America, China etc.). Without doubt, every one of us has worthy of alibi. But it is important to understand that today's distancing from the topic in Central Asia; is not an ideological camouflage ala Soviet-style, but rather a preservation of the myth of Westphalia on the priority of national sovereignty. Finding one's way out of this maze created by the rhetoric of the nations and the logic of coloniality is a very real issue. The first step may be to recognize that our very own knowledge base is colonial. Accordingly, the process must begin with ridding ourselves from this state, starting the process of de-coloniality. To initiate such an understanding, the author proposes to use - dahlez (concept of AL Gazali), philosophical concept, put forward with a view to the perception of many values of plural-cycle culture of the region, as well as the values of the outside.

Key words: Central Asia, authority, colonialism, coloniality, Eurasia, Russia, Europe, subaltern.