1 | P a g e Investigating (Possible) Tensions and Possibilities of Decolonising History Curriculum as a Locus to Foster Inclusive Education in South African Schools Bongani Shabangu 1265258 Supervisor: Louis Botha A dissertation Submitted to the Wits School of Education University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa In fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Education by Research. June 2021 2 | P a g e Table of Contents ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................. 5 KEYWORDS: ............................................................................................................................................... 6 DECLARATIONS .......................................................................................................................................... 7 DECLARATIONS .......................................................................................................................................... 8 DEDICATIONS .......................................................................................................................................... 10 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................ 11 LIST OF ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................. 12 DEFINING CONCEPTS ............................................................................................................................... 13 LIST OF DIAGRAMS, SOURCES, TABLES, FIGURES & PHOTOGRAPHS ......................................................... 14 CHAPTER ONE: RESEARCH OVERVIEW ....................................................................................... 16 1.1. INTRODUCTION: A CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND .................................................... 16 1.2. WHERE TO FROM HERE? .................................................................................................. 24 1.3. LOCATING THE PROBLEM ............................................................................................... 30 1.4. THEORETICAL INTERVENTION: META-THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .................. 32 1.5. AIMS BEHIND THE THESIS ............................................................................................... 35 1.6. RESEARCH QUESTIONS ............................................................................................................. 35 1.7. STRUCTURE OF THESIS ............................................................................................................. 36 CHAPTER TWO: CHARTING THE GENEALOGY OF DECOLONISATION ......................................................... 38 2.1. INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 38 2.1.1. UNDERSTANDING COLONIALISM ............................................................................................ 38 2.1.2. UNDERSTANDING COLONIALITY ............................................................................................. 41 2.2. DECOLONISATION: GLOBAL TRENDS AND DEBATES .................................................................. 49 2.3. DISCOURSE ON DECOLONISATION: SOUTH AFRICAN PESPERTIVES ........................................... 61 2.3.1. #FALLISM A CALL FOR DECOLONISATION .......................................................................... 61 2.3.2. THE PROCESS OF DECOLONIZATION IN SOUTH AFRICA ..................................................... 63 2.3.3. WAYS OF DECOLONIZING THE CURRICULUM .................................................................... 66 2.4. CONCLUDING REMARKS ........................................................................................................... 72 CHAPTER THREE: LOCATING DECOLONISATION FROM THE INCLUSIVITY DISCOURSE ................................................................................................................................................................ 73 3.1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 73 3.2. TRENDS AND POLICIES THAT SHAPED INCLUSIVE EDUCATION .................................................. 74 3.3. THE KNOT OF INCLUSIVE EDUCATION: A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE ................................................ 81 3.4. POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND BACKGROUND: A SOUTH AFRICAN CASE ...................................... 86 3 | P a g e 3.5. A MISSING IDIOM IN INCLUSIVE EDUCATION ............................................................................ 91 3.6. INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS ...................................................................................... 101 3.7. A CONVERGING POINT BETWEEN DECOLONISATION AND INCLUSIVITY .................................. 104 3.8. CONCLUDING REMAKRS ......................................................................................................... 109 CHAPTER FOUR: THEORETICAL INTERVENTION: META-THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .............................. 110 4.1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 110 4.2. POSITIVISM: AN EXPLANATORY APPROACH ............................................................................ 111 4.3. EPISTEMOLOGICAL REALISM: POSTULATIONS ........................................................................ 115 4.4. POSTMODERNISM: NATURE OF EPISTEMOLOGY .................................................................... 119 4.5. CONCLUDING REMARKS ......................................................................................................... 127 CHAPTER FIVE: FROM A CRITICAL ACCOUNT OF THE IMPLICATION OF COLONIAL-APARTHEID HISTORY CURRICULUM TO A NEW REJOINDER ..................................................................................................... 128 5.1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 128 5.2.1. HISTORY SYLLABUS AS A TOOL TO PROMOTE WESTERN DOCTRINES............................... 128 5.2.2. ELEMENTS OF POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES IN THE SYLLABUS ................................................. 131 5.2.3. PERPETUATING ‘OTHERING’ AND INFERIORIZATION THROUGH THE SYLLABUS ............... 133 5.2.4. MYTHS OF AFRICA AS A DARK CONTINENT AND SUBJECTIVITY IN HISTORY ..................... 134 5.2.5. JUSTIFYING OF LAND THEFT THROUGH THE HISTORY SYLLABUS AND TEXTBOOKS .......... 137 5.2.6. A RETORT OF THE WESTERN AND APARTHEID PROPAGANDA ......................................... 141 5.3. POST-COLONIAL-APARTHEID HISTORY CURRICULUM: KNOWLEDGE CONCERNS ..................... 143 5.3.1. NATURE OF EPISTEMOLOGY IN CURRICULUM 2005 (C2005) ........................................... 143 5.3.2. REVISED NATIONAL CURRICULUM STATEMENT (RNCS): NATURE OF KNOWLEDGE ......... 144 5.3.4. REPRESENTATION OF KNOWLEDGE IN NATIONAL CURRICULUM STATEMENT (NCS) ....... 150 5.3.5. AN OUTLOOK OF KNOWLEDGE IN CURRICULUM ASSESSMENT STATEMENTS (CAPS): CONVERTS OR CONTINUANCE? ...................................................................................... 151 152 5.4. NEW APPROACH: A DECOLONIAL AND INCLUSIVE MODEL ...................................................... 155 5.5. CONCLUDING REMARKS ......................................................................................................... 158 CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUDING THOUGHTS AND FUTURE PROSPECTS ........................................................ 160 6.1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 160 6.2. IN SEARCH FOR MY SOUL: MY PERSONAL HISTORY ................................................................. 160 6.3. A POINT OF CONVERGENCE .................................................................................................... 164 6.4. BY WAY OF CONCLUSION: MAIN THOUGHTS RAISED .............................................................. 167 REFERENCE LIST ..................................................................................................................................... 170 ANNEXTURE .......................................................................................................................................... 226 4 | P a g e 5 | P a g e ABSTRACT Today, in the 20th-century, colonialism survives through coloniality. That means the traits of colonialism such as, amongst others, dominance and subjugation are maintained through coloniality, masquerading as modernity. It is in light of this view that curriculums in the Global South still perpetuate domination. Therefore, this thesis investigates how colonialism and coloniality have been perpetuated through the history curriculum. The investigation focuses both on the colonial- apartheid epoch and post-apartheid society. Hence, the apartheid history syllabus and also the post-apartheid history curriculums namely, the Revised National Curriculum Statements (RNCS), National Curriculum Statements (NCS), and Curriculum Assessment Policy Statements (CAPS) were investigated. A part of the findings suggests that history as a school subject has been used as a political tool to perpetuate racism, sexism, exclusion, alienation, negation, and domination. Hence, the need to decolonize and foster inclusive education emerges from the fact that the history curriculum is still exclusive of the LGBT+ community, ‘people with impairments indigenous people, local people, and women`s historical discourses. In essence, the thesis examines the epistemological implication of decolonizing and fostering inclusivity in the history curriculum. A meta- theoretical framework comprised of positivism, epistemological realism, and postmodernism was deployed as a tool to understand the knowledge that is envisaged by decolonization and inclusive education. The meta-theoretical framework revealed that decolonization and inclusive education are favored by the multiplicity of knowledge as opposed to the universality of knowledge. As a point of exit, the thesis proposes a new model that can be used to decolonize and foster inclusivity in the history curriculum. 6 | P a g e KEYWORDS: Colonialism, Coloniality, Decolonisation, Inclusive Education, Epistemic Violence, Epistemological Realism, Positivism, Postmodernism, Indigenous Knowledge Systems, Justice. 7 | P a g e DECLARATIONS I Bongani Shabangu declare that this thesis, Investigating (Possible) Tensions and Possibilities of Decolonising History Curriculum as a Locus to Foster Inclusive Education in South African Schools is my work excerpt in instances where I have quoted information, and I have referenced that information as a way of acknowledging the sources. Lastly, I also declare that this thesis has not been submitted for degree conferment at any university except the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. 8 | P a g e DECLARATIONS I Bongani Shabangu declare that this thesis, Investigating (Possible) Tensions and Possibilities of Decolonising History Curriculum as a Locus to Foster Inclusive Education in South African Schools is my work excerpt in instances where I have quoted information, and I have referenced that information as a way of acknowledging the sources. Lastly, I also declare that this thesis has not been submitted for degree conferment at any university except the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. Student: Bongani Shabangu Signature: _______________________ Date: _______________________ Supervisor: Dr Louis Botha Signature: _______________________ Date: _______________________ 06/12/2021 06/12/2021 9 | P a g e 10 | P a g e DEDICATIONS This thesis is dedicated to those whose voices continue to be suppressed and silenced in society: to the sons and daughters of Africa who have been deprived of an opportunity to learn about their indigeneity and their local experiences, to the rape victims whose stories are not told because of their geographical location (i.e. rural areas) where such issues do not reach the mainstream media and because their perpetrators are well-known people in society (i.e. pastors and politicians) or because of public shaming manifesting in questions such as ‘what was she wearing? Did she provoke him? Why did she get drunk?’, to the men who are languishing in jail because they were falsely accused of rape that they never committed, to the victims of gender- based violence (both men and women), particularly men who find it difficult to talk about their abuse experiences in society due to fear that society might turn their pain into a ‘laughing stock’, to all the freedom fighters whose history is not told in society, to the victims of #MarikanaMassacre who were killed by the African National Congress (ANC) government, to the #FeesMustFall students who are in a quest for a free and decolonized education that was promised to them by the ANC, to the landless black people who live in impoverished and congested areas where the phrase ‘service delivery’ does not exist in their vocabulary, to the LGBT+ community whose existence is shamed, to the victims of femicide, and to the women and disabled people whose histories and contributions in society continue to be ignored. Most importantly, it is dedicated to my late grandmother, Masabana Anna Lekhuleni who positively and enormously influenced my educational journey. May your soul rest in eternal peace. 11 | P a g e ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The journey to completing this thesis was met with several obstacles and challenges. Amidst those obstacles and challenges, I found myself languishing in a state of despair, but I was reminded that “our very survival depends on our ability to stay awake, to adjust to new ideas, to remain vigilant and to face the challenge…” Martin Luther King Jr. Further, inspiration also came from Franz Fanon`s words which reads: “Each generation must discover its mission, fulfill it or betray it, in relative opacity”. Franz Fanon`s words helped me to understand that I embarked on a journey (generational mission) to decolonize the history curriculum and foster inclusivity. Although it was a challenging mission, it did not mean I should betray it by giving up. Thus, I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Louis Botha for his amazing guidance and unwavering support and my friend Gift Siphosethu Sonkqayi who has been mentoring me throughout my studies. Their detailed feedback and constructive inputs towards my thesis helped me not to betray my generational mission. There are a number of people that played a significant role in ensuring that amidst despair, I stay awake vigilant and face the challenge. Consequently, I would like to thank Lihle Luthwitsha for always reading and editing my work. Further, words of appreciation are in order to my friends (just to mention a few Evans Mbanda, Simphiwe Sedibe, Sinenhlahla Cotshani, Surprise Silowe, Thabo Cyril Makwakwa, Bongokuhle Mazibane, Tiyani Qhibi) and family (just to mention a few Thabo Shabangu, Eddie Lekhuleni, Witness Shabangu, Bonginkosi Selby Shabangu, Standford Shabangu) who always believe in me and constantly reminds me that there`s a light at the end of the tunnel. It is with no doubt that our constantly engagements have abundantly shaped my thesis. 12 | P a g e LIST OF ACRONYMS AIKS African Indigenous Knowledge Systems ANC African National Congress CAPS Curriculum Assessment Policy Statement DBE Department of Basic Education DOE Department of Education DA Democratic Alliance IK Indigenous Knowledge IKS Indigenous Knowledge Systems NCS National Curriculum Statement NSC National Senior Certificate RNCS Revised National Curriculum Statement SA South Africa SASA South African Schools Act SADTU South African Democratic Teachers’ Union 13 | P a g e DEFINING CONCEPTS Indigenous: “originating or belonging in a particular place; it can also be referred to as being native to that particular social space or place” (Sonkqayi, 2020, p. xii). Western Scientific Knowledge: “refers to the science or knowledge that is taught and perceived as being universal and normal in schooling systems” (Sonkqayi, 2020, p. xii). Coloniality: “coloniality denotes the long-standing power patterns that originate from colonialism and that are now exercised in the absence of the colonial administration” (Maldonado-Torres 2007 cited in Sithole, 2014, p. vi). Inclusive education: is defined as an educational approach that seeks to address learners’ diversity by increasing their participation and reducing exclusion within and from education (UNESCO, 2008). While originally, it was established to combat discrimination faced by learners with disabilities and/or special needs. Inclusive education now goes far beyond the issue of disability [sic] (Booth and Ainscow, 2002). Decolonization: refers to the process of undoing and reversing all practices that were imposed by the colonizers in society. 14 | P a g e LIST OF DIAGRAMS, SOURCES, TABLES, FIGURES & PHOTOGRAPHS Diagram 1: A threefold meta-theoretical framework: page 33 Diagram 2: A model of coloniality developed by Grosfoguel: page 43 Source A: An extract unpacking the word disability: page 73 Source B: An extract from a Timeslive DA mayor, showing his views about changing of Port Elizabeth name: page 94 Source C: The description of Princess Krotoa`s life: page 95 Table 1: An extract of inclusive education declarations and conventions, cited from Du Plessis, 2013 and Dreyer (2017): page 76 Table: 5.1. Syllabus pointing out elements showing Western doctrines: page 130 Table 5.2. Extract from the Transvaal Education Department, syllabus for history standard 9-10 of 1967: page 134 Figure 1: A map illustrating the Baakens River that passes through the city formerly known as Port Elizabeth, cited from Muller and Strydom (2015, p.747): page 93 Figure 2: An illustration of local ways of knowing and doing, the Murray people: page 103 Figure 3: An illustration of local ways of knowing and doing, the San people: page 104 Figure 4: A Nubian stone tablet taken from Vincent Francigny/Sedeinga archaeological mission: page 142 Figure 5: A graph showing xenophobic acts between 2006 and 2018 in South Africa: page 146 Figure 6: short biographies of African-American, who were disabled and had a drastic impact in history: page 149 Figure 7: An illustration of Foucaultian`s epistemic principles: page 256 Figure 8: A model through which decolonizing the history curriculum can be understood: page 167 15 | P a g e Photograph A: An illustration of a black woman looking after a white toddler, taken from a place in the City: A people`s history of South Africa by Luli Callinicos, 1992, Johannesburg: page 152 Photograph B: An illustration of a white woman doing house chores in the kitchen, taken from www.proquestkiz.com: page 153 Photograph C: An illustration of militant women with Amilcar Cabral: page 154 16 | P a g e CHAPTER ONE: RESEARCH OVERVIEW 1.1. INTRODUCTION: A CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND Chinua Achebe, a prominent Nigerian novelist, and essayist in a 1994 interview with the Paris Review, in a dispirited voice avowed that ‘there is that great proverb — that until the lions have their historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.’ The proverb illuminates the darkness of colonialism that continues to influence and shape the African education system. This is because the literature contains knowledge that depicts Africans in a manner that alienates and dehumanizes their existence as rational beings. In a broader sense, the thought here is that until Africans learn to write their candid narratives that embody and convey their personal stories, knowledge systems, and experiences, their existence will remain told from the specious and shambles of European perspectives. Nonetheless, it is noteworthy that Africans have been engaging in scholarly work, documenting their existence and experiences. But despite this, their knowledge still faces exclusion in modern society. In the context of this thesis, the proverb implies that history as a school subject from its inception in South Africa has been telling the story of the ‘hunt’. This goes to show that the history curriculum has been eulogizing the existence of Europeans while maintaining a narrative that Africans are inferior, thus requiring a white man to be their ‘savior’. Therefore, there is a prerequisite for the revivification of African history that was suppressed by colonial European history (Chawane, 2016). This revivification of African history lies within the locus of decolonization and inclusive education. Consequently, it focuses on knowledge envisaged by local experiences of all social groups, and with an emphasis on indigenous or native people`s experiences. Speaking of this, the intention is to circumvent a situation whereby there is a prolongation of negating or silencing Africans` experiences in the history curriculum. Ndlovu-Gatsheni and Ndlovu (2021) capture the centrality of circumventing this through recovering and restoring the true history of Africans. This is resuscitated by the notion that “for a long time, all kinds of myths and prejudices concealed the true history of Africa from the world at large. African societies were looked upon as societies that could have no history” (Ki-Zerbo, 1981, p. XVll). Ogot (2009) explains that this creates an impression that Africa was a ‘dark continent’ whose history only began after the advent of white people on the shores of Africa. This insinuates that the history of Africa has been and is still confined with the colonial-apartheid stereotypes of being characterized by deficit and 17 | P a g e stigmatization. Further to the above, a nuanced understanding of our outcry against the canonical works of colonialism and coloniality of denying the existence of the African subject is well captured by the rhymes of ‘Senzeni Na’ song. In English, the title of the song translates as ‘What have we done?’ It is the rhymes that evoke one with a sense as to why the African subject has been masked with myths and prejudices. According to Xulu, (2018) this song has been sung mainly at funerals, protest marches, and rallies during the dark days of the apartheid era, with the following repetitive lyrics: Senzeni Na? |What have we done? Sono sethu, ubumnyama | is our sin is that we are black? Sono sethu yinaniso | is our sin the truth? Sibulawayo | we are being killed Mayibuye I Africa |Return Africa The song poses rhetorical and probing questions that are not meant to be answered but rather meant to evoke internal responses from the subconscious (Xulu, 2018) of those who have been casting bigotries against the natives through the history curriculum. This unveils the incessantly problematic antique of having history curriculums that fabricate, exclude, and taint our African stories. This exclusion happens because “…those who have the power to dominate and colonize others whose knowledge becomes reified. The worldviews and perspectives of ‘Others’ (Those who are on the margin of the global village) are side-lined and vilified as “traditional”, “irrational”, “backward” and “obsolete.” (Shiza, 2013, p. 5). Hence, I sing along to ask what we have done as Africans to deserve such curriculums encompassing stories that do not speak to our local experiences and indigenous knowledge systems. Instead, our knowledge systems are regarded as ‘backward’ and ‘primitive’. Further to this contention, the ‘Sibulawayo | we are being killed’ reminds us of the epistemicide of local African knowledge systems agitated by Western knowledge systems. This view submits that the main intention behind destroying the African subject was to erase the existence of Africans as people who had a meaningful past. Thus, communicating the wrong identity of the indigenous people. This speaks to the notion of the African histories; cultures and knowledge that have been 18 | P a g e destroyed by the colonial settlers. For this reason, Chawane (2016) states that “since the advent of colonialism and the transatlantic slave trade, information on African history has been presented from a European point of view. This viewpoint sought to justify the colonization of Africa and the enslavement of Africans” (p.79). The colonial history curriculum did not only attempt to erase the experiences and knowledge of the natives, but it also told a domineering misogynist story of ‘white men’. It is for this reason that history was once, though in a flippant manner, called ‘His’ ‘Story’, referring to the male-only history. This denotes that the only history that was considered in the curriculum was one that only reflected the triumphs and experiences of white men. Interestingly, although we today live in a democratic society in South Africa, there seems to be a resurgence of misoneism and patriarchy in the history curriculum towards women. While still on the concept of democracy, we also find ourselves grappling with the exclusion of other social groups such as Coloureds; those of the LGBT+ ‘lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community; ‘disabled’ community, and others. This is because the experiences and knowledge of the aforementioned social groups do not form part of the history curriculum. This goes against the principles of a democratic society which amongst others are to create a just, accepting, and inclusive society. A notable example of a curriculum that promotes inclusivity in society would recognize the experiences and ways of living of all social groups. Take for example; the historical knowledge in the curriculum that focuses on ‘apartheid’ can align the knowledge with the experiences of all social groups. This will problematize the fact that apartheid was not just a policy that mainly affected black people. It will show that it was a policy that affected the daily lives of all social groups. That is to say, the knowledge should be drawn on different accounts sourced from local settings. Autobiographies amongst others, such as ‘Born a Crime’ can be used to highlight the daily lived experiences of people in South Africa during the apartheid era. More so, ‘Born a Crime’ is a memoir about Trevor Noah`s childhood life in South Africa, with frequent asides describing the atmosphere and his livelihood during the apartheid time (Noah, 2016). This can function as the knowledge that highlights the daily experiences of Coloureds during the apartheid era. Such knowledge about the daily lived experiences of people would bring to the fore that different social groups during the apartheid era had different experiences. As in this case, growing up for Trevor Noah who is a descendant of the Coloureds social group was unbearable. This is because 19 | P a g e his mother was black, and his father was a white German man (Noah, 2016). At that time, according to the ‘Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act, Act No 55 of 1949’ ‘Europeans’ and ‘non- Europeans’ were not allowed to be married or even be in a romantic relationship. Therefore, having him as a mixed-race child could have been considered to be evidence of a crime committed by his parents. This could have resulted in the arrest of both of his parents (Noah, 2016). At some point, Trevor Noah had to be hidden and prevented from leaving the yard at his grandmother`s house in Soweto or else he would have been taken away by the police (Noah, 2016). This is the local aspect of knowledge that is still missing for many social groups in the history curriculum. Not to mention that during the colonial-apartheid era, it was swept under the carpet. As a consequence, we still find our history and knowledge systems written by foreign people who glorify colonialism and deprecate the inclusion of local histories. Undeniably, our histories are engendered within a European cultural construct. It follows then for Franz Fanon that: without underestimating the pervading and overwhelming presence of settler culture among indigenous communities of the world as the autochthon continues to speak and write through the language of the colonizer, pursues his/her philosophy and knowledge system, there is still a need, in view of the catastrophic effects of colonialism, to unwrap the shroud that continues to cling around the African body. In many ways this includes construction of knowledge that has been made sacrosanct and given as truth even in colonial academia and interpreted as epistemological violence (cited in Bam, Ntsebeza& Zinn, 2018, p.17). It is not surprising then that, the former colonial subjects continuously articulate and express themselves through Eurocentric-lenses, which positioned themselves as a solitary source of knowledge. In simple terms, the colonial hegemonic legacy is still persistent. This is because it continues to inform the education systems of the former colonial subjects (Makgoba, 1997). What then follows from this are the negating, erasing, and silencing of indigenous epistemologies within the curriculum. As things stand, there are also concerns with the nature of knowledge existing in the South African history curriculum. These concerns have been longstanding, but their interests were revoked after calls to make the history discipline compulsory in basic education. Currently, the history discipline offered both in the intermediate and senior phase is integrated with geography as Social Sciences learning area. On the other hand, in the Further Education and Training (FET) phase, history is offered as an optional subject. As a result, the call to make history a compulsory subject became a prominent heated debate, concurrently an issue in South Africa. 20 | P a g e At the center of this heated debate on the call to make history a compulsory subject, there are two dominant views. One view is that history should be offered as a compulsory subject. The impetus for such is that it will address social transformation; heal the social ills and wounds of the past, enhance social cohesion, function as a tool for nation-building, promote nationhood; patriotism, and inclusivity (SADTU, 2014; DBE, 2015; Maravanyika, 2015; Kukard, 2015; ANC, 2017 & Maluleka, 2018). It is without a doubt, in this case, that there is an exigent need for a compulsory history curriculum that will address the aforementioned issues. It follows from this that the compulsory history curriculum should be relevant to all South Africans, with an emphasis on their lived experiences and indigenous knowledge systems. However, Charlot (cited in, Sonkqayi (2020) is skeptical as to where the inclusion of indigenous knowledge systems in the curriculum will be beneficial or be detrimental to certain groups. Sonkqayi (2020) upheld that this “is because school knowledge is an ‘object of thought’ and not that of experience” (p.4). By the same token, school knowledge being an object of thought simply refers to the fact that reality is objectified for learners to question it and reconstruct it (Sonkqayi, 2020). Charlot (2009) expounded that schools do not exist to teach learners about their reality as it is experienced. Instead, schools exist to cultivate the learner’s intellectual capacity. Despite this, Taber (2009) believes that the content taught in schools should not be separable from the lived experiences of learners. Equally so, there should be a connection between the content in the history curriculum and the lived experiences of learners, which includes amongst others indigenous knowledge systems. Nevertheless, the other view opposes the making of history a compulsory subject. Accordingly, the critics of the move to make history a compulsory subject argued that such a move was an attempt by the government of today, the African National Congress (ANC), to capture the history curriculum and utilize it as a mechanism to perpetuate party political propaganda and ideology (Sieborger, 2016 & Jansen, 2018). Directly put, the diverging view casts doubts about the notion of making history a compulsory subject. Thus, contending that it might be used as a tool for political gains and as a way of driving certain narratives by those who hold political power. The reason for this qualm is buttressed by Nussey (2018) who contends that: during the apartheid era, there was an explicit connection made between history education, nation-building, and the National Party. History education was seen as an instrument of propaganda that was used to justify a particular interpretation of the past, namely, that of the 21 | P a g e Afrikaner nationalists, and the result was history education that focused on an exclusive group and the result was that it fomented hatred and conflict (p.2). It is perceptible from this quote that the apartheid government effectively used the school history curriculum to justify its discriminative and chauvinistic policies and political actions. The use of history as a political tool to push certain agendas did not end with the colonial-apartheid regime, as the first post-apartheid curriculum (C2005) has been critiqued for similar deeds. In further explicating this, Jonathan Jansen (cited in Davids, 2016) clearly stated the first apartheid history curriculum was critiqued for its “political symbolism” which was a discernible and viable tool during the apartheid era. This suggests that the history curriculum has been created from sheer political manipulation. This simply highlights that C2005 has been utilized as an ideological tool to foster and perpetuate certain narratives by those who hold political power in society as it was the case before 1994, as it will be shown in the thesis. It is observable in this case that any attempt to link history education to a particular view of nation-building or patriotism will be viewed with suspicion. Accordingly, for Jonathan Jansen (cited in Davids, 2016), any proposal to make the history curriculum compulsory would seem to as a perpetuation of the same dilemma of political symbolism. Recently such suspicion was reawakened by the South Africa Democratic Teachers Union, Department of Education, and the African National Congress which were at the forefront of calling for history to be made a compulsory subject (SADTU, 2014; DBE, 2015; & ANC, 2017). It is clear from the opposing views above that both parties (those who are arguing for and arguing against the making of the history curriculum compulsory) raised valid concerns. Except for the latter concern that the history curriculum should not be made compulsory at all on the basis that there is the looming fear of using history for political symbolism without even providing any alternatives. Although the latter assertion carries some merit in it, it also comes short by failing to provide an account of history that will be insulated from the sheer of political manipulation. While one could support the proposal put forward by SADTU (2014); DBE (2015), and ANC (2017) of making history a compulsory subject, it does not mean one should turn a blind eye to the fact that history has been used as a political weapon for those who hold political power since the curriculum`s inception. Kukard (2015) notes that the call to make history compulsory is meant to expose learners to a more [South] African history. This encapsulation refers to the localization of African knowledge, 22 | P a g e as a canon that has been missing for years in the curriculum. The South African Society for History Teaching (SASHT) joined the discourse but in support of the proposal to make history compulsory. Subsequently, the SASHT made a comprehensive submission that as much as the history curriculum should be made compulsory, the knowledge-encompassing curriculum should not be undermined or weakened (Maluleka, 2018). In other words, it was warning those who hold political power that they should not make any attempts to capture the subject for political use. Although bold submissions were made, there is still a failure to account for the resurfacing of factors in our society that are inimical to inclusivity and nation-building for all. They fail to account for the rise in cases of racism, tribalism, discrimination, bullying, and non- representation of local experiences and stories. Kwame Ture adds weight to the above contention specifically with racism by stating that elements of racism continue to happen because “Africa is constantly undermined because of racism and as being seen to have not contributed to the world” (Chawane, 2016, p.90). It is worrisome because racism together with the other traits such as discrimination and bullying tend to occur mostly in institutions of learning where the students were supposed to be conscious of such. A similar logical bearing is evident in Makoelle`s (2014) contention that “South Africa continues to experience racism in schools. The history of racism has come a long way since the apartheid government introduced the policy of separate development according to racial groups” (p.285). A notable example of racism at schools was in 2016 in Pretoria Girls High School. This is where a then 13-year-old Zulaikha Patel, with her classmates held a demonstration against the school's code of conduct regarding black girls' hair. The protest was triggered when one of her educators told her to fix her Afro which was deemed to be untidy and inappropriate by the educator. In other words, the educator was requesting her to change and ‘fix’ her hair as per the Western norms of beauty. She [Zulaikha Patel] however, furiously said “asking me to change my hair is like asking me to erase my blackness”. This proves that “part of what racism has always tried to do is to damage its victims' capacity to help themselves. For instance, racism has encouraged its victims to perceive themselves as powerless, that is, as victims even when they were actively engaged in myriad acts of self-assertion” (Mbembe, 2016, p. 8). This was a way of domesticating black bodies to believe that their cultures and identities are uncivilized and indecent. Therefore, creating an impression 23 | P a g e that black bodies are not worth a dignified recognition in the society. For Mbembe (2015) this is a “new configuration of racism that is emerging worldwide” (p.28). Nonetheless, despite the two diverging views on whether history should be made compulsory or not, there seems to be a consensus on the need for the study of history. This apparent consensus, therefore, presupposes by implication, the existence of one-mindedness on the need for the country to use History as a tool for social cohesion, inclusivity, and progress. Subsequently, a History Ministerial Task Team (HMTT)1 had to be established to oversee the implementation of compulsory history in the FET phase (Van Eeden & Warnich, 2018). Finally, in the year 2018, the HMTT as part of its mandate tabled as its resolution that the study of history in the FET phase is compulsory (see the HMTT report, 2018). Such a resolution came despite the existence of opposing views where different interpretations were afforded to the current study of history. Not only did the HMTT take such a resolution, but it also raised an important point that: the history curriculum should be revised using an African nationalist paradigm, informed by the framework of Ubuntu, and secondly, it stressed the significance of multi-perspectives in History while favoring an approach that uses an African nationalist paradigm, informed by Ubuntu, to assist with nation-building (Nussey, 2018, p.1). One can infer from this extract that there is a need for the history curriculum to be informed by social justice. This social justice is meant for people who have been historically marginalized and subjected to social injustices such as racism, discrimination, and non-representation of their experiences and stories. To put it bluntly, the notion of social justice will bring about historical consciousness and socio-political literacy in society (Crocco & Davis, 2002; & Stanley, 2005). This cannot happen without diversifying the knowledge in the history curriculum. This supposes that knowledge that should be included in the history curriculum should be driven by equal and just representation of all social groups, and it should be free from biases. Ultimately, the HMTT hoped for a similar History curriculum, envisaged by addressing social pathologies which include racism, sexism, and xenophobia. Those who have been on the advocacy campaign for making history compulsory such as SADTU and the SASTH will be convinced that a certain landmark of moving towards having a history 1 the Department of Basic Education (DBE) established the History Ministerial Task Team (HMTT) in 2015 to oversee the implementation of compulsory History in the Further Education and Training (FET) phase (Republic of South Africa, Department of Basic Education, “Executive summary of the History Ministerial Task Team”, January 2018, p.1). 24 | P a g e curriculum that promotes a social-cohesiveness, inclusiveness, and building one nation has been achieved. Such a resolution came despite the existence of opposing views for making history compulsory and different interpretations afforded to the current study of history. As stated earlier that there are two dominant varying and diverging sentiments on the making of history curriculum compulsory, it is content and what it represents. Without derogating the resolution of making history compulsory, only one side of the milestone has been introduced, which is the compulsory study of past events and experiences which continue to define and inform the country’s trajectory. One way or the other, this will to some extent endeavour at instilling minimum social consciousness to learners. None of these two views explicitly unpack the content that should constitute the compulsory history curriculum and most importantly, the role and place of local- school history in the scheme of the study of history. Nevertheless, those who have been calling for the compulsory study of history to achieve ideals like social cohesion and patriotism, have only made bold pronouncements without detailing the kind of history that will result in the achievement of these ideals. Those mounting criticism against the post-Apartheid history curriculum of “political symbolism” (Jansen cited in Davids, 2016) have only done so in an armchair fashion, without delving into taking the assumption of providing a concrete alternative as already stressed. 1.2. WHERE TO FROM HERE? Where to from here? This is a question emancipating from the ongoing discussion and aforementioned issues. It intends to provide a way forward that can be utilized to free the history curriculum from the evils of colonialism and coloniality. On this disposition, the way forward posture can be necessitated by firstly outlining the purpose of history in relation to the thesis. In line with the purpose of history Fitzgerald (2020) advanced that: history serves as the collective memory of mankind. Just as our own individual memory serves as a basis for establishing a sense of personal identity, an under- standing of what we are as individuals, so historical or collective memory serves as a basis for establishing our societal identity, an understanding of what our society is” (p.82). 25 | P a g e In brief, history seeks to bring about consciousness of our social surroundings and experiences. At the same time, it reminds us of whom we are concerning our interaction with society. Congruently, according to Collingwood (1946): history is for human self-knowledge. It is generally thought to be of importance to man[sic] that he[sic] should know himself [sic]2: where knowing himself[sic] means knowing not his merely personal peculiarities, the things that distinguish him[sic] from other men[sic], but his nature as man. Knowing yourself means knowing, first, what it is to be a man[sic]; secondly, knowing what it is to be the kind of man you are; and thirdly, knowing what it is to be the man you are and nobody else is (p.10). This indicates that the prominence of history lies in understanding one`s existence and how that sets us apart from others. This refers to the notion that history is about self-consciousness. On this elucidation, Collingwood (1946) is of the view that: knowing yourself means knowing what you can do; and since nobody knows what he can do until he [sic] tries, the only clue to what man [sic] can do is what man[sic] has done. The value of history, then, is that it teaches us what man has done and thus what man is (p.10). In Fitzgerald`s (2020) understanding, history serves the purpose of teaching us about what we are, who we are, or where we stand in the light of where we hail from. Consistently, Fitzgerald (2020) posits that we cannot talk about our present social and communal life in any meaningful way without considering how that life took up its present forms, for these forms are inseparable from the past which involves our indigenous ways of living. Therefore, in retort to the question at hand, the way forward which ties with the purpose of history, is that the history curriculum should be decolonized in a manner that fosters inclusive education. This should be done to provide a framework that will rise from the dustbin, the necessity and relevance of local history in the mainstream history curriculum. With that being said, the knowledge in the history curriculum will thus resonate with its surroundings, conscientize people to be aware of their stories, and possibly lead to the attainment of social inclusion. This assertion finds an elaborate expression in Es”kia Mphahlele`s quest for an identity, where he was attempting to rediscover his eroded identity (Mphahlele, 1974). This implies that he was on a journey to locate his origins, ancestral history, and cultural practice which formulate his identity. To show his seriousness, Mphahlele changed his Hebrew name to 2 The [sic] has been used to acknowledge the sexist language that exists in Collingwood`s (1946) quotations. 26 | P a g e Es”kia or Zeke. This was a part of his search for his Africaness or African identity (Mogoboya, 2011). In line with the purpose of history, that is to say, the knowledge in the history curriculum should be coined in a way that affirms people`s identities in their respective local settings. Just like for Es”kia Mphahlele, a history curriculum that affirms people`s identities will revive their eroded identities that include inter alia traditions, customs, heritage, and roots. Es” Kia Mphahlele`s attempt at self-definition and self-creation is a testimony of Africa’s endeavour to carve her identity in the face of dislocation and cultural denigration (Mogoboya, 2011). However, the call for affirming the African identity is not tantamount to the exclusion of others` identities or experiences from the curriculum. Hence, an equal representation of histories sourced from local settings should be foregrounded in the curriculum. At this juxtaposition, the point put forward is that there is no social cohesion and inclusivity in education that could be achieved if local history is undermined and treated as being in a perpetual state of childhood. Otherwise, such a putative social cohesion and inclusivity will be bogus and disingenuous. Devastatingly, it will lead to the compounding of social ills and delay the country from enjoying social and political stability and justice. Further, the rationale is triggered and inspired by the wave of protests contesting the domineering colonial legacies that continue to brand and delimit institutions of higher learning in South Africa. Consequently, in the years 2015 to 2017, institutions of higher learning were swamped by a storm of fallism (Silowe, 2020). The #RhodesMustFall (#RMF) and #FeesMustFall (#FMF), followed by the #AfrikaansMustFall (#AMF) movements vociferously and unrelentingly called for the decolonization of university space and free decolonized education in higher education (Heleta, 2016 & Le Grange, 2016). This view submits that there is a need to change the environment and curricula to open up accessibility. The call had far-reaching effects, as it also evoked the same sentiments in basic education, and speaking of it, the minister of basic education Angie Motshekga resuscitated the call for decolonization. According to the minister, the education system in South Africa is still colonial; hence there is a need to decolonize it. In brief, Le Grange (2018) contends that to decolonize is to undo colonialism. According to Sonkqayi (2020), this implies the valuing of indigenous ways of knowing. It is in light of this background that Angie Motshekga is justified in contending that there is a need to do away with the colonial education system. 27 | P a g e Incidentally, the history curriculum is also accused of being colonial as mentioned hitherto. Since the colonial elements of the curriculum date back to the colonial-apartheid era, it becomes imperative for one to provide the context of the history curriculum from its inception. Maluleka (2018) is of the view that the teaching of history before 1994 was characterized by the knowledge that promoted British culture and Afrikaner nationalism. Witz (2000) further propounded that the spread of Afrikaner nationalism took place in the early years of the twentieth century when history was taught on a large scale in both primary and secondary government schools. To be precise, the knowledge in the history curriculum reflected a Eurocentric and Afrikaner nationalist perspective (Bertram, 2020). After this curriculum which was exclusive of other social groups` experiences, histories, and cultures, the anticipation from the democratically elected government was that it should ameliorate the curriculum and make it inclusive. However, even in the post- apartheid era, the history curriculum has been accused of having colonial and apartheid elements. For instance, just to highlight the most recent curriculum, Kallaway (2012) points out that “although CAPS has rescued history as a knowledge discipline from the clutches of Outcome-Based Education (OBE), it still seems to hold older apartheid-era ideas” (p.33). This is because it promotes the teaching of history as an objective phenomenon (Kallaway, 2012). It can be extrapolated that this type of history promotes myths as was the case during the colonial- apartheid era (Kallaway, 2012). Additionally, the curriculum is also accused of being exclusive of women`s histories and experiences (Wills, 2016). Further to this, Wills (2016) contends that the curriculum does not represent women`s political discourses, experiences, and contributions towards civilizations. Similarly, the history curriculum does not consider local histories and experiences, it is exclusive of the LGBTQIA+ and ‘impairment’ community`s experiences. It is for this reason that the thesis will first explore knowledge in the history of the apartheid curriculum. Thereafter, it will explore different post-apartheid history curriculum statements, namely Curriculum 2005 (C2005) Revised National Curriculum Statements (RNCS) of 2002, the National Curriculum Statements (NCS) of 2007, and the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) of 2011. Since the thesis also engages mainly with curriculum, it, therefore, becomes significant to pinpoint what it entails within the confines of this thesis. The curriculum is a complex phenomenon to describe, therefore, “offering a widely adequate definition of curriculum is a nigh-impossible task due to different conceptions of a curriculum” (Su, 2012, n.p). 28 | P a g e In this context “a curriculum is the offering of socially valued knowledge, skills, and attitudes made available to students through a variety of arrangements during the time they are at school, college or university” (Robert 1971, cited in Stenhouse, 1975, p. 104). This tie with the skills envisaged by the principles of decolonization and inclusive education. These include the recognition, respect, value, and inclusion of others` knowledge systems. Equally so, at the center of the history curriculum, there should be social attitudes and values such as Ubuntu, respect for diversity, and inclusivity that are imparted. That is to say, there should be a multiplicity of knowledge that is valued and respected in the history curriculum. As a consequence, the concern of this thesis lies with the pursuit of bringing about social justice to the former colonial subjects who endured epistemic violence. Directly put, African knowledge has been dominated for the past 500 years (Sithole, 2014). Hence, there is a need to have a curriculum that acknowledges the existence of multiple knowledge systems. In South Africa, epistemic violence has been subjugated by the colonial-apartheid knowledge systems and its legacy that continues to haunt the history curricula. For, Sithole (2014) “this knowledge was useful, but it is now exhausted in accounting for the lived experience of those who are at the underside of Euro-North American episteme” (p.1). That is why today's history should embrace social justice as a central tenant in developing an inclusive and decolonized history curriculum. Clough contends that inclusivity is “concerned with socially just ways of organizing teaching and learning” (cited in Nind, 2005, p. 525). Similarly, decolonization is also concerned with social justice. This is evident in Lebone (2017) where he states that “decolonizing the school curriculum for equity and social justice in South Africa will serve as an emancipatory radical paradigm shift (change) in which all relevant factors which could lead to improvement thereof will be integrated” (p.5). The above assertion infers that social justice in education cannot be divorced from both inclusive education and decolonization. This is where the novelty of the thesis lies, in not only bridging the gap between inclusive education, history education, and decolonization debates but taking such an epistemological posture in arguing that diversity or inclusivity in history should not only be based on practical grounds (i.e., who and what is included) but also epistemological grounds (i.e., what counts as valid in history education and at what or whose expense? In essence, such justice is meant for people who were previously and who continue to be marginalized such as people 29 | P a g e with physical disabilities[sic] (Ainscow, 2005); LGBTQI+ community (Browne, Bakshi, and Lim, 2012); people who face social exclusion (Nelson and Prilleltensky, 2010) and Indigenous people (Smith, 2012) as mentioned earlier on. The inclusion of different knowledge systems is a necessity to cognitive justice which can be linked to the idea of social justice (Le Grange, 2016). In line with the history curriculum, scholars such as Wills (2016), Maluleka (2018), and Godsell (2019) argue that such cognitive justice can be necessitated through the Africanisation of the curriculum. As a result, putting IKS at the forefront of the content, the presentation of Africa and her people humanly and respectfully remain vital, and last but not least, an equal representation of history for all social groups regardless of their sexual orientation or gender also remains a requisite. Tavernaro-Haidarian’s (2018c) conceptualization of ‘development and Ubuntu’ offers a vision of social justice, as Tavernaro-Haidarian’s (2018c) points out that “Ubuntu offers a definition of development as a process of ‘mutual empowerment’, which enables people and societies, individuals and communities, to realize their full material, social and spiritual potential” (n.d). This is to say, people in their local context must cooperate so that they can achieve self- actualization. Hence, the history knowledge taught should be provisioned towards serving the totality of the community and be inclusive rather than exclusive (Tavernaro-Haidarian, 2018c). This insinuates that the history curriculum “plays a pivotal role in all areas of reconstructing and presenting a more equitable and inclusive South African history while ensuring that apartheid atrocities and anti-apartheid struggles capture the stories, knowledge, and everyday survival of the people involved” (Subreenduth, 2013, p.218). Therefore, the entry point is that the thesis seeks to investigate possible epistemic ways of decolonizing the history curriculum to foster inclusive education in the context of South African local schools. It is important to understand that the concept ‘local’ for this thesis refers to local history of which is the study of history in a geographically local context. It often concentrates on the local community`s past (Bam et al. 2018). In most cases, it involves the cultural and social experiences of people who reside in that particular local region (Bam et al., 2018). In other words, local history is the study of past events in a given geographical location but one which is based on a wide variety of documentary evidence and placed in a comparative context that is both regional and national. The rationale for having a local aspect in the history curriculum emerges from the conception that the current history is not narrated from the perspectives of the local people, drawing from their indigenous and community experiences. To be precise, history as a school subject has been and is still 30 | P a g e utilized as a tool to perpetuate colonial knowledge and reproduce a Eurocentric orthodoxy focused on an unproblematized history of the evolution of public schooling (Chisholm, Friedman & Sindoh, 2018). 1.3. LOCATING THE PROBLEM The apparent problem emanating from this discussion so far is that knowledge in the history curriculum is not sourced from local settings where the schools are situated. It is rather told from a paternalistic, national view and somewhat binding to all the schools. There has been a discrepancy concerning how the history curriculum has been constructed. Primarily because; it tends to exclude the social and geographical histories of diverse communities (Masondo, 2013). Hence, Masondo (2013) claims that the history curriculum is incomplete as it consist of omissions of histories that are aligned with the environments. In simple terms, the curriculum does not draw from locale experiences. The crux of this problem is the framework from which this national and paternalistic history is rooted. Most history texts are written from a Western gaze, by western writers who are largely influenced by their social, political, and cultural prejudices (Bam et al. 2018). Such a gaze inadvertently results in the reproduction of historical phenomena. In a context like South Africa, it results in the reproduction of colonial anthropology, epistemology, and ontology. Hence, the abundance of racism, alienation, and subversion of local experiences continue to persist in society. On this disposition, Chen, and Reed (n.d) identified that the history curriculum has evolved out of a system that is inequitable, non-inclusive, and couched in systemic racism. Conventional sources of history have left out the voices, experiences, and some stories of groups of people, creating a ‘feel good’ version of history that diminishes the issues of inequality, inequity, and race, ultimately reinforcing the view that racism was an issue of the past. The above contention suggests that history curricula are selective and biased towards particular narratives based on race and power, with the history of non- Europeans and other marginalized groups facing the axe of exclusion. This has been happening even though history forms the social, cultural, economic, and political fibre of every individual, community, society, and nation (Stearns, 1998). In the South African context, the history curriculum is not underpinned by a study of past events and experiences which define and inform the local communities of their 31 | P a g e trajectories and victories (Bam et al. 2018). For instance, political elites such as the ANC use their power to manipulate the history curriculum to only tell the trajectories and victories of the ANC during the apartheid era on a large scale. As a result, the trajectories and victories of other social groups who fought against the apartheid regime become marginalized. That is why we barely hear about the contributions made by the likes of [amongst others] John Kani, Brenda Fassie, Hugh Masekela, Miriam Makeba, Winnie Madikizela Mandela, John Clegg, and Black Mambazo. All of these people played a significant role in the fight against the brutal system of apartheid through their art as a way of conscientizing and mobilizing the global community. Furthermore, South Africa as a former colonial and apartheid society was bequeathed a Eurocentric world view of knowledge production, construction, and consumption (Makgoba, 1997 & Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2018). By implication, the history curriculum is informed by colonial discourses. Thus, the South African history curriculum from its inception can be seen as predominantly written by Western scholars who are premised on their prejudices of glorifying Western European history and colonialism while alienating and neglecting the history of local people (Bam et al. 2018). These Western historical events, scientific discoveries, and cultural movements are reproduced in the school curriculum as the only side of history. The school curriculum currently as it stands is paternalistic in the sense that it assumes a national, top-down posture cascading of history to all the schools (Witernburg & Ntuli, 2013). This implies the side- lining of local experiences as little is done to consider the local histories where these schools are situated as the starting point of a bottom-up approach to the teaching and provision of historical studies. Therefore, the undertaking by the HMTT vividly presupposes and points to the alienating and Eurocentric substance in the history curriculum which continues to socialize the South African society to reproduce acts, amongst others of racism, sexism, subversion, patriarchy, and excision of local knowledge. Gravely concerning, is the effect of this paternalistic and external history on local education. A history that materially excludes local contributions plants a seed of apathy with learners in especially, although not exclusively, rural and township settings when it comes to choosing the study of history. In a qualitative thesis study carried out by Mhlongo (2013), it was revealed that learners do not choose the history subject as it is distant from their local experiences. This is because the content thereof bears no reference to their daily livelihoods but 32 | P a g e rather breaks their indigenous chain of interaction and living. It is upon this identified knowledge gap that the researcher intends to gain deeper insights into the ideal of decolonization and inclusive education in the context of a history curriculum. This will function as a way of enhancing social justice that is “undeniably grounded in efforts at circumventing provisions that seek to uphold ostracism and exclusionary practices” (Hlale, 2012, p.111), which have permeated South African local historiography for extensive periods. 1.4. THEORETICAL INTERVENTION: META-THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Can history knowledge be verified through human senses or emerge as a result of induction or scientific methods? (Positivism) Is it possible to have historical knowledge that is only universally accepted by everyone? (Epistemological realism) Or there exists a multiplicity of knowledge when it comes to history? (Postmodernism). These are the underlying philosophical assumptions that provoke one to think about a philosophical stance that should undergird the thesis. Precisely, these speak to the question of what makes knowledge valid and its implications for the conceptions of decolonizing the history curriculum as a way of fostering inclusivity. This shows that there are epistemological concerns at the centre of what counts as historical knowledge, which will be shown as the discussion advances. Hence, the thesis is placed within the following germane of a meta-theoretical framework to determine one philosophical stance that does not undermine the wishes of decolonization and inclusive education: 33 | P a g e Diagram 1: A threefold meta-theoretical framework. The threefold diagram shows the meta-theoretical framework was chosen because it will allow one to “see reality from a meta-theoretical perspective rather than just a theoretical outlook which by itself is also influenced by a particular meta-theory” (Sonkqayi, 2020, p.70). To begin with, the positivism philosophy holds the view that true knowledge can only be generated from the experience of natural phenomena and their properties and relations (Majeed, 2020). In other words, data derived from sensory experience, which is understood through means of reason and logic, forms the exclusive source of all certain knowledge (Majeed, 2020). The notion that true knowledge can be only accessed through senses undermines the acuity that knowledge in history is generated through oral and archeologically sources. Thus, negating the application of decolonization in the history curriculum as a tool that could be utilized to foster inclusivity. That is because you cannot also use senses to determine whether someone`s history [knowledge] is true or not. On the other hand, the epistemological realism philosophy maintains that true knowledge can only exist in the context of universal truth, hence knowledge should be underpinned by truth and that truth is universal all the time (Horsthemke, 2010 & Sonkqayi, 2020). That is to say, 34 | P a g e knowledge is driven by facts that are (at all times) backed up by scope and evidence, and secondly, truth is not a matter of context (Elgin, 2004, cited in Horsthemke, 2010, 329). This view of true knowledge advanced above carries within itself elements of colonialism and coloniality. That is because; it insinuates that for example, if indigenous people cannot prove that their local ways of being and knowing amounts to true knowledge, then such knowledge will be deemed as invalid. This is because there are claims that knowledge for many years has been considered to be a justified true belief (see, Gettier 1963 & Sosa 1991). Thus, resulting in the exclusion of such knowledge from the curriculum. This exclusion is not a matter of claiming that knowledge is a justified true belief as claimed by Gettier (1963) and Sosa (1991). It is just that “knowledge creation is a political and ideological process. When it comes to school knowledge, it is those that control political and economic resources that impose their ideas, opinions, thoughts, and ideologies on those considered ‘subordinates’” (Shiza, 2013, p. 1). The imposition of ideas by those who hold political power goes against the principles of decolonization and inclusive education. Although it is such, there is postmodernism philosophy that believes in the acknowledgment of epistemic pluralism. This is because according to postmodernism philosophy, knowledge is seen as a social construct. That is to say, knowledge is not innate; hence, it calls for all knowledge systems to be recognized as true knowledge (Giroux, 1998 & Green, 2012). In line with the ideologies of decolonization and inclusive education, postmodernism seems to recognize the inclusion of others` knowledge systems and experiences. That is because; postmodernism is premised on the pluriversity of knowledge. While, the other two philosophical stances, rejects the aspiration of decolonization and fostering inclusivity of ‘multiple knowledge systems’, postmodernism embraces it. The implication of undergirding the thesis with either positivism or epistemological realism would be the marginalization and/or disqualification of indigenous epistemologies as ‘invalid’ ways of knowing and living, and other social groups` knowledge and experiences. This thesis will therefore be underpinned by postmodernism which contends that there are multiple ways of knowing and being. 35 | P a g e 1.5. AIMS BEHIND THE THESIS Given the issues amongst others identified in the previous section, of a history curriculum that is deemed to be Eurocentric, not inclusive, and side-lining local histories, the thesis aims to, firstly, investigates the nature of current attempts at establishing a post-apartheid history curriculum concerning demands for such curricula to be inclusive (White Paper 6, 2001) and decolonized. Secondly, it aims to examine possibilities for and the practicality of fostering inclusive education through ensuring that knowledge systems of people who are marginalized are acknowledged and prevalent in the curriculum. Frankly put, the research seeks to determine possible ways in which the history curriculum can embrace inclusivity that values reclaiming and foregrounding indigenous voices and the multiplicity knowledge of local people through acknowledging a multiplicity of knowledge. Lastly, it aims to analyze if colonial aspects and practices are still prevalent in the current curricula in terms of epistemology and ideology. 1.6. RESEARCH QUESTIONS The research questions do not arise out of a vacuum; thus, their manifestation can be derived from the previous sections. To begin with, it was brought to the fore that knowledge in [South] African curriculums does not embody nor convey the true tales and experiences of Africans. That is because curriculums in Africa remain dominated by Western knowledge. This, in turn, relegates and marginalizes non- Western knowledge systems, and excludes the experiences and ways of knowing of other social groups as discussed somewhere in the chapter. As a result, a way forward as a vehicle to resolve the issue at hand was proposed. A decisive locus was taken to say, the African identity must be affirmed but at the same time, the knowledge and experiences of other social groups had to form part of the curricula. That being said, the foundational or overarching question of this research is: In which ways could be decolonizing the history curriculum foster a more inclusive approach to the teaching and learning of local history in South African schools? Below are the ancillary questions that follow from the main research question: a) What kinds of knowledge do decolonization and inclusive education envisage and promote in education for the point of a socially just/decolonized/African education? 36 | P a g e b) What are the possible contextual factors shaping such knowledge envisaged by decolonization and inclusive education in the context of history teaching and learning? c) What are the (possible) epistemic implications of such perceptions or delineations of decolonization and inclusive education in the context of the history curriculum? 1.7. STRUCTURE OF THESIS The thesis engages mainly with literature as opposed to conducting an empirical study. Hence, a literature review methodology was deployed to collect data. A literature review methodology can “be described as a more or less systematic way of collecting and synthesizing previous research” (Snyder, 2019, p.333). To be precise, a literature review methodology is a research methodology used to collect data from existing data or knowledge. In its application, a literature review methodology, “represents a formal data collection process wherein information is gathered in a comprehensive way” (Frels & Onwuegbuzie, 2013, p.49). Data is extracted from empirical findings, different literature perspectives, and other relevant sources (such; poetry; song lyrics; cartoons; internet; online news platforms; and photographs) in a comprehensive way (Frels and Onwuegbuzie, 2013 & Snyder, 2019). Since the process of decolonization is based on the recognition of pluriversity of knowledge, the thesis opted for the use of various sources mentioned above. The intention of using such sources is to show that decolonization is not a linear process. Frankena’s (1973) threefold methods of inquiry namely (1) descriptive inquiry; (2) analytical inquiry and (3) normative inquiry were also deployed. It is pertinent for an elaborate account of the three methods which were deployed to provide a model of analyzing knowledge in accordance with a syllogism. In other words, this will allow one to have a better understanding of values and attitudes that the teaching of history knowledge seeks to impart. The first inquiry is concerned with describing or explaining the phenomena, the second inquiry focuses on analyzing the nature of a specific subject in an attempt to elicit measurable facts. In essence, the analytical inquiry “asks and tries to answer logical, epistemological or semantically questions” (Frankena, 1973, p.5). The third inquiry is a standard used for evaluating or making judgments of a certain phenomenon. Adding to this, Frankena (1973) asserts that normative inquiry can also be 37 | P a g e understood as a “form of debating with someone else about what is good or right in a particular case or as a general principle, and then forming some such normative judgment as a conclusion” (p. 4). In line with this view, the thesis first offers a descriptive account, and, in some instances, it provides an analytical account of decolonization in Chapter 2, followed by another descriptive and normative account of inclusive education in Chapter 3. In essence, the thesis traces the genealogy of decolonization regarding its earliest days that date back to the Haitian revolution, led by Toussaint Louverture3. Further, it also traces the etymology of inclusive education from its first days of the 'Salamanca Statement' adopted at the 'World Conference on Special Educational Needs. In chapter 4, the thesis provides an analytical account of philosophy (see the threefold diagram) that aligns or converges with knowledge envisaged by decolonization and inclusive education. Chapter 5 will be normative since it seeks to provide a version of a decolonized history curriculum that fosters inclusivity. Concomitantly, it will also consist of an analytical account that unpacks if the knowledge that perpetuates sexism; patriarch; Eurocentric perspectives and exclusion still exists in the post- apartheid history curriculum as claimed earlier on. In so doing, the thesis starts by looking at the nature of knowledge in the history curriculum from its inception to the current date. In Chapter 6, the thesis provides a conclusion by looking at possible thriving thesis topics which are similar to this thesis. This chapter also suggests a guideline on future similar topics to be persuaded. 3 François Dominique Toussaint, (born c. 1743, Bréda, near Cap-Français, Saint-Domingue [Haiti] — died April 7, 1803, Fort-de-Joux, France), leader of the Haitian independence movement during the French Revolution (1787–99). He emancipated the slaves and negotiated for the French colony on Hispaniola, Saint-Domingue (later Haiti), to be governed, briefly, by Black former slaves as a French protectorate (James, 2001). 38 | P a g e CHAPTER TWO: CHARTING THE GENEALOGY OF DECOLONISATION 2.1. INTRODUCTION Decolonization cannot be fully understood without tracing an explicit distillation of its cardinal conceptual pillar known as colonialism. This view submits that colonialism and decolonization are binary concepts with historical and ideological origins from the phenomenon of a colony (Sommer, 2011). Subsequently, reference to decolonization acknowledges prior colonialism (Mampane; Omidire & Aluko, 2018). The concepts of colonialism and decolonization are interlinked and inseparable. Therefore, it becomes imperative to first explain what colonialism entails in the context of this dissertation, before explicating the essence of decolonization. It is also worth noting that the entire chapter will be descriptive as it ought to chart the etymology and explication of decolonization. 2.1.1. UNDERSTANDING COLONIALISM The idea of colonialism comes from the two ancient Latin words: Colonia denoting an outpost and imperium denoting control (Bulhan, 2015). In essence, colonialism began in the Americas with European invasion, occupation, and exploitation. It later expanded to other parts of the world (Quijano, 2000). It is observable from this delineation that colonialism can be defined as: …the direct territorial appropriation of another geopolitical entity, combined with forthright exploitation of its resources and labour, and systematic interference in the capacity of the appropriated culture (itself not necessarily a homogeneous entity) to organize its dispensations of power (McClintock, 1992, p. 88). Plainly put, colonialism is a domineering and imposition of control of one society by another4. The driving force for colonialism was not only in pursuit of material exploitation and cultural dominance as evident in the above quotation. It was also a way for European self- aggrandizement to compensate for gnawing doubts on the wholeness and integrity of the self that, in different ways and intensity, assail people everywhere (Bulhan, 2015). This view submits that colonialism was a tool used to expand Europeans` control and power over other societies throughout the globe, and such was instigated through the use of force. According to 4 The thesis took into cognizance of the fact that the idea of a country or a nation-state is a product of colonialism and that there were no countries in the pre-colonial era, thus opted to use the word society instead of country. 39 | P a g e Osterchammel (cited from Sommer, 2011), colonialism implies three standpoints which are as follows: Firstly, one society completely deprives another one of its potentials for autonomous development; that an entire society is remote controlled and reconfigured in accordance with the colonial rulers. Secondly, the ruling and ruled are permanently divided by a cultural gap. Thirdly, the intellectual yoke of an ideology whose purpose is to legitimize colonial expansion (p.189). In this case, the life of those who are ruled or colonized is determined by those who impose colonial practices. Hence, colonialism influenced the thought, intellectual landscape; social- cultural behavior, and political and economic settings of those who are colonized. Herein, it destroyed and devalued indigenous people’s social practices as related to literature, religion, education, and history (Ngugi wa Thiong’o 1986). Consequently, colonialism can be seen as a “disruptive, ‘decivilizing,’ dehumanizing, exploitative, racist, violent, brutal, covetous, and ‘thingifying’ system” (Cesaire, 2000, p.32). In other words, colonialism is understood as a system of domination and subjugation of people from another culture, including all forms of imperial rule and cultural differences that exist between the government and the governed (Blunt, 2005 & Sommer, 2011). Heleta (2016) postulated that "one of the most destructive effects of colonialism was the subjugation of local knowledge and promotion of the Western knowledge as the universal knowledge" (p.9). According to Ocheni and Nwankwo (2012) arguing in the African context, this destructiveness occurred because Western education and the so-called civilization were presented as the only true universal knowledge. Ocheni and Nwankwo (2012) note that some tend to regard the project of colonial education as a good one. By implication, this form of education is seen as a positive contribution towards African development. However, this is not true because colonial domination undermined the African capacity for self-development. Ocheni and Nwankwo (2012) bemoan that the argument insinuating that the colonial education was good for the development of Africa “will appear to be true on the surface level or superficially, but if it is subjected to critical analysis, it will reveal the hollowness or emptiness of colonial education which is partially responsible for the present African underdevelopment” (p.51). This is because colonial education was not rooted in African culture. This implies that colonial education could not foster any meaningful development within the African environment because 40 | P a g e it had no organic linkage (Ocheni & Nwankwo, 2012). It can be extrapolated that colonial education brought about distortions and disarticulations of African indigenous patterns of education which were rooted in African technology5. Ocheni and Nwankwo (2012) further maintained that the colonial education system, essentially aimed at training clerks, interpreters, produces inspectors, artisans, which would help them in the exploitation of Africa’s rich resources. This tie with the notion of colonialism understood from a point of Marxism view. That is why it sights a form of capitalism, imposing exploitation and social variation. According to Marxism, education or schooling serve a vital role in enforcing colonialism. Hence, Althusser (1971) was of the view that the educational apparatus has taken over from the church of olden times which used to be the leading institution in enforcing colonialism. In short, education is seen or perceived to be the most powerful tool to control the minds of the working class. Furthermore, the impetus for education taking the lead role is owing to the view that it absorbs children from an early age and subjects them to the measure of the elite or ruling class via subjects such as history, civics, morals, and philosophy (Althusser, 1971). This is done in a way that is in line with the demands of colonialism and the capitalist system. In addition, the implied or subliminal knowledge that children are taught includes what is assumed to be the correct way of behaviour, ways of conversing, thinking, acting, and cooperating (Althusser 1971). In other words, the education system is imposing the cultures of the middle class and leaving the poor experiencing symbolic violence (see Bourdieu, 1970). In simple terms, from a Marxist perspective, the role of education in a capitalist state is to reproduce societal inequalities i.e., class hegemony and values of the ruling class (Sussisa, 2010). Nonetheless, though colonialism might have ended, it is said to continue manifesting itself through coloniality, meaning, it now survives through coloniality. As Grosfoguel (2002) puts it, we have moved from a period of global colonialism to the current period of global coloniality. 5 Before fully embracing colonial education, Africans were good technologists, advancing at their own rates with the resources within their environment. For example, Africans were good sculptors, carvers, cloth weavers, miners, blacksmiths, etc. They were able to provide and satisfy the technological need of the various African societies. The introduction of colonial education encouraged Africans to abandon their indigenous technological skills and education in preference to one which mainly emphasizes reading and writing (Ocheni & Nwankwo, 2012). 41 | P a g e 2.1.2. UNDERSTANDING COLONIALITY To sharpen the meaning of decolonization, it is significant to first clarify what is meant by coloniality. To begin with, coloniality is not coterminous to colonialism; instead, it is an epoch that survives colonialism (Mignolo, 2000a & Quijano, 2000). Coloniality illuminates the darker side of colonialism which exists as “an embedded logic” that continues to enforce domination, exploitation and it is always portrayed as being good for everyone (Mignolo (2005). It is without a doubt that the notion of colonialism is reinforced through coloniality. The central view of coloniality is that it manifests itself as a good phenomenon whereas it perpetuates and reinforces domination and exploitation. Similar to Mignolo, Maldonado-Torres (2008a) has it that coloniality strives through the pretension of modernity, hiding its exact essence. In Arias` (2013) understanding, this shows that after the end of colonialism, early instruments of social domination survived and continued to shape Eurocentric forms of rationality and modernity through coloniality. For Sithole (2014) this insinuates that coloniality still carries with it the baggage of colonialism, but it seeks to modify itself by hiding what it is. This line of thought can be associated with colonial repression. Quijano (2007) holds the view that the colonial repression fell, in particular, on the “modes of knowing, of producing knowledge, of producing perspectives, images, and systems of images, symbols, modes of signification” (p.169) of colonized cultures, as well as on their “resources, patterns, and instruments of formalized and objective expression” (p.169). Simply put coloniality which is said to be the long-standing pattern of power that occurred ensuing from colonialism, had its effects on the destruction of indigenous societies and their cultures. Hence, Africans are still grappling with having knowledge systems that speak and relate to their realities in curriculums. Hence, the annihilations of African knowledge systems are maintained: alive in books, in the criteria for academic performance, in cultural patterns, in common sense, in the self-image of peoples, in aspirations of self, and so many other aspects of our modern experience. In a way, as modern subjects, we breathe coloniality all the time and every day (Maldonado-Torres, 2007, p.243). In this construal, education in a capitalist society maintains coloniality through training children in the skills and qualities of the working class as a way to ensure that there is a reproduction of 42 | P a g e workers in the future. That is why “for more than a century, Indigenous students have been part of a forced assimilation plan — their heritage and knowledge rejected and suppressed, and ignored by the education system” (Battiste, 2017, p.23). This was done to equip Africans with the knowledge that would cultivate skills desired by coloniality. In view of that, Maldonado-Torres outlines that, coloniality emerged as a result of colonialism, emanating from the Western monopoly of power and hegemonic knowledge. In support of this claim, Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2005) contends that institutions such as schools, colleges, universities, and churches are continually reproducing coloniality. In addition to this Maldonado-Torres (2008a) observes that the long-standing patterns of colonialism, which survives through coloniality, continue to define the socio-economic, political, and cultural conditions of the former colonized in absentia of colonial administration. This means coloniality is the persistence of European subjection. For this to be possible Grosfoguel opines that “one aspect that has made the modern/colonial world system particularly successful is its ability to make its subjects, located on the oppressed side, think epistemically like the people in dominant positions” (2007, p. 213). Such is a result of the universality of knowledge claimed by the Western gaze. Grosfoguel (2007) amplifies this by asserting that, the Western gaze presents their knowledge systems as the only knowledge that can achieve a universal consciousness; therefore, everyone is expected to think within the confines of Coloniality. According to Bulhan (2015) coloniality denotes enduring patterns of power; a way of thinking and behaving that emerged from colonialism. This contention is amplified by the following model of coloniality developed by Grosfoguel (2007, p. 203): 43 | P a g e Diagram 2: A model of coloniality developed by Grosfoguel. The model signifies that coloniality is ratified by coloniality of power, coloniality of knowledge, and coloniality of being. More so, the model serves the purpose of illustrating the interrelating practices and colonial-like power relations existing in formerly colonized regions (Ndlovu- Gatsheni, 2015). In the same line, it is Ndlovu- Gatsheni (2015) who clarified that coloniality of power is about control of authority and power; coloniality of being is about control of gender and sexuality, and lastly, coloniality of knowledge is about control of epistemology and subjectivity. Seroto (2018) is of the view that the three lenses that undergird coloniality should be unpacked separately so that we can understand how power structures, colonized knowledge systems, and beings could be decolonized. However, at this juncture, a different line of thought has been brought to the fore by critical theorists, who tend to criticize what is assumed to be the status quo and argue for an important change to the prevalent structures within the society (Gage 1989). It is not surprising then, that critical theory tends to put more emphasis on the correlation of schools and teaching with society (Gage, 1989). Teaching, textbooks, and curriculum productions are aspects that illustrate societal power relations which are carried out by coloniality (Gage 1989). Critical theorists stress the significance of societal power in the functioning of the schooling system and delineating social reality (Gage 1989). Critical theorists suggested that we should be looking at the relationship of schools and teaching to society-the political and economic foundations of our constructions of 44 | P a g e knowledge, curriculum, and teaching. The critical theorists emphasized the importance of power in society and the function of schools in defining social reality. They stressed the ways in which education served the interests of the dominant social class, which in our society has consisted of the rich, the white, and the male, as against the poor and the female. These class interests had led educators to serve, however unwittingly, the functions of reproducing the in-equitable social class structure and other arrangements that currently proceed as if the societal status quo should go unquestioned. 2.1.2.1. COLONIALITY OF POWER Coloniality of power is an expression coined by Quijano (2000a) and Quijano (2007) to identify and describe the domination of power structures such as political; social and racial orders imposed by European colonialism. Quijano points out that, such social and political hierarchies continue to exist even after the epoch of colonialism and that is because they are entangled within structural hierarchies such as global capitalism. It is therefore clear that the colonial structure of power creates forces that perpetuate social domination and discrimination (Quijano, 2007). As such, coloniality of power should be understood as a ‘global political order that has been constructed, constituted, and configured into a racially hierarchized, Euro-American- centric, Christian-centric, patriarchal, capitalist, hetero-normative, hegemonic, asymmetrical, and modern power structure (Ndlovu-Gatsheni, 2015). It outlines the bequest left by colonialism in societies that were once colonized, and it does that through means of social discrimination that survived formal colonialism and became assimilated in succeeding social orders. As a consequence, the systems of hierarchies posited by Quijano (2008) are grounded on racial classifications and differences. Quijano writes that race is central to the circulation of coloniality of power. This line of thought is also advanced in the critical race theory where it is argued that race (hate), de facto segregation continues to have an influence and a profound impact on one`s way of knowing (epistemology) and one`s relationship to what is there to know (ontology) (Woodson, 2000). According to Ladson-Billings (2000), epistemology is more than a way of knowing. For her, it is a “system of knowing that has both an internal logic and external validity (Ladson-Billings, 2000, p.257). In this instance, Norman, Lincoln, and Smith (2008) amplify that, a differentiation between a way of knowing and a system of knowledge is made, where in the former every person has a 45 | P a g e relationship to what is there to know (and obviously the relationships differ). While in the latter case, some ways of knowing are valued and validated while others are not dependent on one`s position. This validation is done based on race where it serves the purpose of sustaining power for the colonizers. However, the view of the race put forward does not include social class and gender as part of its framework due to its focus on race (Hiraldo, 2010). It fails to consider that women, and women of color, in particular, are faced with different struggles which involve sexism and classism rooted in patriarchy. Race cannot be the only facet that perpetuates coloniality of power, as there are social structures and the individuals within them which create and reproduce inequalities linked to sex/gender, race, class, religion, ethnicity, and other differences. In this sense, people are encouraged to believe that (only) white men are fully human; and because (only) white men are fully human, society is organized around their needs, the reality is seen from their perspectives, their attributes are seen as most valuable and productive, and they (naturally) dominate politics and culture. This, in turn, oppresses and suppresses women and negates their experiences as they are seen as objects that do not deserve power. It is notable that in accordance with the system of patriarchy, power is only reserved for white men. Notwithstanding, one must not ignore the fact that struggles faced by women often vary with race, class, and other differences. This creates hierarchies of power in society. According to Sithole (2018): it is through the idea of race where there are hierarchies and classifications. This also includes the idea of who belongs and who does not—the logic of inclusion and exclusion. The idea of race determines how coloniality of power operates, since those who are considered, inferior races will be at the receiving end of subjection (p.61). In explaining the above extract, it is clear that Sithole`s notion of race is a pillar of coloniality of power that is used to determine who should be valued in society and whose knowledge is considered to be substantial. Hence, Quijano (2000b) enunciated that: terms such as Spanish and Portuguese, and much later European, which until then indicated only geographic origin or country of origin, acquired from then on, a racial connotation about the new identities. Insofar as the social relations that were being configured were relations of domination, such identities were considered constitutive of the hierarchies, places, and corresponding social roles, and consequently of the model of colonial domination that was being imposed (p.535). 46 | P a g e In this view, race and racial identity were established as instruments of basic social classification (Quijano, 2000b). This denotes then that racial classification has permitted the ascription of inferiority and superiority based on phenotypes and pigmentation. Subsequently, such a racial hierarchical system is used to justify the domination of Europeans. This can be associated with racism which according to Freeman (1995) was restrictively conceived as an “intentional and irrational deviation by a conscious wrongdoer from otherwise neutral rational and just ways of distributing jobs, power, prestige and wealth” (p.xiv). On this view, racism is seen as a social construct that is used to necessitate and legitimize the myths of the colonial meritocracy. 2.1.2.2. COLONIALITY OF KNOWLEDGE Concerning coloniality of knowledge Dussel and Mignolo (cited from Hoagland, 2020) argue that it “presumes commensurability with Western discourse and is a process of translating and rewriting other cultures, other knowledge, other ways of being into Western understanding” (p.56). This refers to the distorting, silencing, erasing, and neglecting of others` knowledge systems by covering it with the Euro- North America global discourse. Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2015) describes it as indigenous knowledge that was pushed to what became known as the barbarian margins of society. Such knowledge remains in the margins as there is little coverage of it in the curriculums. More to this Sithole (2018) articulates that “coloniality of knowledge originates from epistemic violence and racism that dates back 500 centuries of five centuries” (p.69). Coloniality of knowledge is thus a consequence of the impact of colonization, which it had on the different zones of knowledge production. Mpofu (2013) expounds on this idea by articulating that: the colonizer does not only distort the history of the colonized, slaughter their knowledge systems, and