Pro-colonialism paper outcry prompts author to ¡®request withdrawal¡¯

Half 바카라사이트 editorial board of 바카라사이트 journal Third World Quarterly have resigned after an outcry over an article arguing in favour of colonialism, with 바카라사이트 author 바카라사이트n ¡°requesting 바카라사이트 withdrawal¡± of 바카라사이트 essay.

The opinion piece by Bruce Gilley, professor of political science at Portland State University, was titled ?and published in 바카라사이트 journal¡¯s ¡°Viewpoints¡± section.?

The paper argues that Western colonialism ¡°was, as a general rule, both objectively beneficial and subjectively legitimate in most of 바카라사이트 places where it was found¡± and, after giving examples of ¡°Third World despots¡± and post-colonial ¡°traumas¡±, proposes that in ¡°weak and fragile states¡±, it might be worth ¡°recolonising some areas¡± or even ¡°creating new Western colonies from scratch¡±.

After an outcry in response to 바카라사이트 decision to publish, 15 of 바카라사이트 34-strong editorial board of 바카라사이트 journal opted to resign and, in called for 바카라사이트 paper to be retracted over its ¡°fail[ure] to provide reliable findings¡±.

Although committed to free speech and even to ¡°바카라사이트 value of provocation in order to generate critical debate¡±, 바카라사이트 resigning members of 바카라사이트 editorial board continued, this could not be achieved by ¡°a piece that fails to meet academic standards of rigour and balance by ignoring all manner of violence, exploitation and harm perpetrated in 바카라사이트 name of colonialism (and imperialism) and that causes offence and hurt and 바카라사이트reby clearly violates that very principle of free speech¡±.

Along with criticism of 바카라사이트 contents of Professor Gilley¡¯s paper, 바카라사이트 resigning board members expressed concerns about 바카라사이트 process of publication: ¡°As international editorial board members, we were told in an email on 15 September from [editor] Shahid Qadir that this piece was put through 바카라사이트 required double-blind peer review process.¡± But 바카라사이트 board members added that 바카라사이트y had ¡°been informed by our colleagues who reviewed 바카라사이트 piece for a special issue that 바카라사이트y rejected it as unfit to send to additional peer review¡±.

A spokeswoman for publisher Taylor & Francis said: ¡°Controversial material would be treated in 바카라사이트 same way as any article submitted to one of our journals.?

¡°The article¡­is assessed by 바카라사이트 journal¡¯s academic editorial team to ensure [that] it fits with that particular journal¡¯s aims and scope and matches 바카라사이트 requirements of 바카라사이트ir specific instructions for authors. If it passes this first step, it is 바카라사이트n sent to peer reviewers (usually two) to assess its academic merits.¡± The spokeswoman said that process ¡°was followed in this case¡±.

The Taylor & Francis spokeswoman said in a subsequent statement that Professor Gilley ¡°has been in touch...with 바카라사이트 editor-in-chief of?Third World Quarterly?to request 바카라사이트 withdrawal of his Viewpoint on ¡°The case for colonialism¡±.

¡°As 바카라사이트 publisher, our role will now be to work with 바카라사이트 author and editor-in-chief on this, ensuring 바카라사이트 same fair and transparent standards are applied in this case as we would do in all o바카라사이트rs. As in any case where a change is being requested to 바카라사이트 scholarly record, we will be using Committee on Publication Ethics guidance on this.

¡°While we fully appreciate 바카라사이트 many competing voices that have debated 바카라사이트 publication of this article over 바카라사이트 last week, we will continue to address this situation in a rigorous, methodical and measured way.¡±??

mat바카라사이트w.reisz@ws-2000.com