Paper short abstract:

Through a keyword-analysis of the concept of 'retribalization', this paper sheds light on socio-political foundations of knowledge production. By highlighting how one concept can be imbued with many meanings, ways to overcome epistemic hierarchies in social sciences can be explored.

Paper long abstract:

In the 1960's, Western scholars concerned with Africa faced a conundrum. Why was it that, against expectations, local social identities in newly established African nation states remained relevant, rather than being replaced with more 'modern' or 'western' identities such as worker, urbanite, or citizen?

Social scientists coined the term 'retribalization' to explain the phenomenon. A term steeped in problematic assumptions, intricately linked to the broader epistemic project of maintaining western supremacy, and often used to explain African inability to modernize.

Later, the term was appropriated by African scholars and political leaders, framing retribalization not as a consequence of 'African' being, but as a deliberate strategy by western minority elites to prevent local populations from participating, and shaping, modernization efforts.

Later again, the term would become detached from Africa, finding its way into family psychology literature and media studies in the late 1970's.

This paper is an effort to highlight the multiplicity of meanings behind a single concept. Through a keyword-analysis, I hope to show how (social) context can shape concepts. In doing so, I expect to come to a more nuanced conclusion than the outright rejection of all knowledge gathered under problematic circumstances. Rather, our job as contemporary researchers is to salvage what is worth keeping, while being diligent in our deconstruction of knowledge as always produced within a specific political project.