Search results

The immersion of global higher education in a competitive, economy-oriented paradigm calls for perspectives on internationalisation that are explicitly aimed at shaping cooperative, sustainable and alternative/decolonial futures. The authors of this chapter recognise the relevance of research perspectives that – epistemologically aligned with critical internationalisation studies – emphasise the dilemmas and contradictions of internationalisation of higher education (IHE). In this chapter, the authors therefore present reflections that confront the hegemonic discourse that portrays the phenomenon of IHE as an unconditional good. The authors dialogue with the idea of promoting a perspective of IHE from and for the Global South – that is, one that instead of suppressing, recognises the epistemic plurality of the world. To do so, the authors assume that any critical efforts to address internationalisation in the context of the Global South can be enriched when explicitly situated within colonial history. The authors argue that looking towards the future of IHE requires a look towards its past. Specifically, the authors bring together four interrelated lines of argument: (i) recognising the university as a historical producer and reproducer of colonial hierarchies; (ii) conceiving the Global South as a field of epistemic challenges; (iii) having a non-myopic view of South–South cooperation; and (iv) spreading the epistemological horizon of internationalisation. Such reflections might contribute to envisioning new horizons for IHE in the Global South and its relation with those who have been relegated to a status of invisibility.

Ahmet Kuru, in his book, suggests that the explanation for the lack of social and political development in the modern world can be traced back to a historical ‘state-ulama alliance’ from the 11th-century Saljuq empire or earlier. From the perspective of an historian, however, this dating displays some empirical problems. It is certain that the state eventually did gain the upper hand over the Muslim intellectuals, at least in the centre of the Ottoman empire. But the process to that point was different. In this comment, a different explanation is proposed that points instead to two crucial factors: the loss of a homogeneous Muslim state with the fall of the caliphate, and the rise of a unified Muslim world, an umma, through the independence, not subservience, of the class of scholars in the mediaeval period of Islam. Thus, a model is proposed that focuses on two turning points: the replacement of the effective caliphate with a fractious system of sultanates in the mid-tenth century, coinciding with the solidification of Islamic thought in a more strictly regulated form both in theology, law and in Sufism. The second moment is ca. 1500, when the period of political fragmentation comes to an end with the Ottoman state unifying the Middle East, flanked by Morocco and Iran, while challenges to the religious orthodoxy begin to grow at the margins. Such a model thus sees the ulama as actors for change as well as for orthodoxy throughout Muslim history, responding to changing developments in social and political contexts.

Pilgrimage is a special form of conscious travel – maybe even the most conscious one – and therefore, awareness is one part thereof. As a result of this quality, which is gaining importance in Western society, pilgrimage is currently experiencing a renaissance (but not just for religious or spiritual reasons). No other pilgrimage route can be compared to the Camino to Santiago de Compostela in terms of numbers of pilgrims, popularity and fascination, and with around half a million pilgrims, the city broke its record again in 2022. The focus of this essay is the following question: is there a ‘Destination Conscience’ in relation to the Camino, and if so, who creates and uses it, and does it change over time? In terms of methodology, existing scientific studies are re-analysed and the results of field studies by RWTH Aachen University evaluated, in order to examine the contributions made by various stakeholders (travellers, local population, tourism providers, institutions, etc.) to the development of a possible ‘Destination Conscience’ pilgrimage. Through personal interactions and cultural exchange, they develop common values and a common awareness. On the other hand, these different expectations and changing perspectives also lead to conflicts and misunderstandings. The example of the Camino shows that ‘Destination Conscience’ is not a state but a process, and change is an essential part of this quality.