Pedagogy of Genocide and "Imperial Liberal Knowledge": Rethinking education in 'conflict' as an act of epistemic disobedience

• In Event: Highlighted Session: Knowledge production, displacement, and identity: Challenges, theories, and reflexive experiences from conflict and post-conflict contexts

Proposal

This presentation introduces a novel framework for understanding and engaging with education in ‘conflict’, specifically through the intersection of pedagogy of genocide and "Imperial Liberal Knowledge." By examining the cases of Palestine and India, we propose a theoretical approach that extends existing paradigms within the field of conflict and education. This approach deepens the understanding of genocide as a pedagogical process and highlights the role of imperial liberal knowledge production in reinforcing it. We offer new insights into the distinction between academic complicity and implicatedness in the context of genocide, advocating for solidarity and accountability that recognise the interconnected nature of liberation. We expand on Rothberg’s "Implicated Subject" by examining how liberal ideologies, often seen as neutral, are complicit in genocidal pedagogies, calling for a re-evaluation of liberalism's ties to imperial and genocidal agendas. Grounded in an intersectional framework as articulated by bell hooks, Angela Davis, and other feminist scholars, our methodology addresses the interlocking forms of oppression — sexism, racism, capitalism, colonialism, imperialism, and ableism — and emphasises the need for a globally informed, solidarity-based perspective.

Our analytical approach draws on Mignolo’s (2009)concepts of the "geo-politics of knowledge" and the "geo-politics of knowing" to examine the complex politics involved in creating and disseminating narratives of ‘conflict.’ This exploration focuses on who generates knowledge, when and why it is produced, and the consequences of its creation. By shifting the emphasis from the content of knowledge to the context and conditions of its production, we reveal the power dynamics that shape how and why certain narratives of 'conflict' are constructed. This approach underscores the importance of context, authority, and purpose in knowledge generation, drawing on the concept of "situated knowledges," which highlights the significance of the environments in which knowledge is created. We challenge the Eurocentric epistemology that perpetuates the illusion of context-free knowledge across the social sciences, humanities, natural sciences, and professional disciplines. This epistemology assumes that the knowing subject is ahistorical, operating from a neutral standpoint, unaffected by geopolitical configurations (Castro-Gómez, 2007). The concept of "epistemic disobedience" captures the act of rejecting this illusion, advocating for a shift away from the idea of a context-free epistemology of education and 'conflict.'
Our study critically examines how education and research on ‘conflict’ have been used to legitimise imperial policies, the civilising mission, and the war on terror. We argue that these narratives are not neutral; they actively reinforce genocidal pedagogies by subtly promoting hate, exclusion, scholasticide, epistemic racism, and dominance, thereby shaping specific narratives of ‘conflict.’ Our research reveals how scholars and international development actors, even those using the language of social justice, may unintentionally sustain systems of domination and injustice in contexts affected by genocidal pedagogies. We highlight how these ideologies and narratives are embedded in the 'everyday' life of Westernised universities, which often exclude the lived experiences and critical anti-genocide perspectives of scholars from genocide-affected contexts, limiting the scope and depth of the analysis. Our approach seeks to address this issue by centering these critical anti-genocide perspectives, emphasising their importance in understanding the structural and ‘everyday’ dimensions of genocidal violence within education and research shaped by global power dynamics.

Our methodological approach represents an innovative contribution to the field by incorporating a critical feminist lens and critical genocide studies literature that centers the voices of anti-genocide scholars in India and Palestine. This research employs a range of innovative methods, including a purposive sampling of prominent anti-genocide feminist voices, critical incidents, the choice of language and narratives, and the use of both online and offline data sources such as articles, blogs, social media and webinars. Our data includes observations from informal conversations, analysis of public statements, and reflections on personal and historical experiences. By integrating critical reflexivity and positionality, our approach considers our own historical and institutional contexts, as well as the personal journeys that inform our scholarly inquiries. Our approach bridges academia and activism, drawing on our direct participation in anti-genocide movements.

The presentation raises profound questions about the role of scholars and educational practitioners in addressing genocide. It interrogates our ethical responsibilities when populations face genocide, the limits of academic freedom in the face of war and imperialism, and how our geopolitical location influences the generation of knowledge. We propose that the study of conflict and education cannot advance without a fundamental reconsideration of how genocidal pedagogies are reinforced through Imperial Liberal Knowledge. Our presentation offers new tools for decolonizing knowledge production around ‘conflict’ and promoting effective strategies for genocide prevention.

By bringing these fresh perspectives and methodologies to the forefront, our work makes an original contribution to the CIES 2025 Conference Theme and the broader field of comparative and international education. We provide a critical framework, grounded in empirical research and innovative analysis, that challenges conventional understandings of 'conflict' and opens new pathways for scholarly engagement and practical application.

Authors

• Laila Kadiwal, IOE-UCL

• Mai Abu Moghli, Center for Lebanese Studies