Intellectual Detox: A Dialogue on Decolonizing the MindBy Zeinab Benchakroun & Adnane Benchakroun

Published on L’ODJ Media, Arrissala Press Group, Morocco, 4 May 2025
Original article (in French) : “Manuel de désintoxication intellectuelle pour post-colonisés lucides”
Link to the original article: https://www.lodj.ma/Livre-Manuel-de-desintoxication-intellectuelle-pour-post-colonises-lucides_a132358.html
Translation to English: Zeinab Benchakroun

Adnane Benchakroun is CEO of L’ODJ Media in Morocco. He’s a versatile IT professional and idea-driven innovator. He co-founded Startup Maroc and launched the Startup Africa Summit, and taught entrepreneurship on Udemy. His career includes significant roles at the Moroccan Minister of Planning, National Documentation Center, and the High Commission for Planning. He remains active as Vice-President of the Alliance of Moroccan Economists and a member of the National Council of the Istiqlal Party. He is a father of three children and grandfather. Now semi-retired, he leads the multimedia platform L’ODJ Media and pursues interests in poetry, painting, and music.

Zeinab Benchakroun is a coach and facilitator of paradigm shift. She attempts to leverage 25 years of experience as an engineer and project manager in banking industry, social programs, and climate activism, in different countries (Morocco, France, and US). She later trained in coaching and facilitation, supporting individuals and organizations in their quest for meaning and transformation. She enjoys broadening her approach through continuous learning, particularly in neuroscience, somatics, and the intersectionality between climate change, colonialism, and various forms of oppression. She is a mother of three children. She aspires to contribute to a collective reconnection to our humanity, our natural environment, and our deep instinct to bequeath a livable planet to future generations.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

How can the decolonization of minds restore value to local knowledge and traditions in an increasingly globalized world?

Zeinab:

The world is indeed becoming increasingly globalized. The beneficiaries of this globalization are transnational corporations, whose political and military influence grows as human inequalities deepen. Several intellectuals, including American political scientist Sheldon Wolin (1) and American sociologist William I. Robinson (2), use the term “corporatocracy” to describe how globalized capitalism has given rise to a transnational capitalist class (multinationals, political leaders, media, international institutions, and other actors like powerful NGOs) that bypass laws, regulations, and democratic processes through lobbying, corruption, and tax evasion. As a result, states become relays for the interests of global capital.

In theory, globalization could enable a North-South knowledge transfer, outside the BRICS nations, which have begun asserting their independence. According to Robinson, this transfer reinforces power asymmetry and economic dependency. The North develops the innovation and technology needed to further entrench its models, while the South receives this knowledge in drips, never mastering it and remaining dependent on the North. Consequently, the South has dismantled its traditional social structures to be a “good student” of the IMF and World Bank, staying in the good graces of its sponsors and allies. Decolonizing minds first requires acknowledging our state of dependency on the Western world, the primary driver of the current planetary crisis. Without this acknowledgment, we lack real motivation to revalue our local knowledge, except as folklore and crafts for branding in the tourism sector.

Moreover, before asking whether mental decolonization can restore value to local knowledge, we must ask: Is the will even there? How committed are we to recentering our local knowledge? Are we questioning the dominant model? Are we ready to confront the risks inherent to this questioning? Who benefits from maintaining the status quo? Or are we waiting, like everyone else, for the planet to impose limits on the system? Do we hope the dominant model will reform itself? How much do we trust that such reform will happen in time? Are we active or passive in this reform? If reform occurs, will it serve collective interests or elites? Until clarity emerges, perhaps we can try bottom-up approaches: preserving local knowledge and traditions before they vanish—in medicine, agriculture, etc.—which may strengthen self-confidence and motivate us toward mental decolonization.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

Zeinab, what you describe as the South’s forced dependency through North-South “knowledge transfer” could also be interpreted as an exchange where the South retains significant agency. Many Southern nations, particularly BRICS countries, reinterpret and adapt these models to their contexts. They invest in local research and innovation, crafting their own development paths. Globalization has lifted many Southern regions from poverty, improving access to healthcare, education, and modern technologies. Challenges remain, but we must acknowledge globalization’s positives. Perhaps the question should be: How can Southern nations maximize the benefits of their presence while minimizing undue influence?

On revaluing local knowledge, you might underestimate their resilience. In West Africa, for example, local agricultural practices have proven effective against climate change and are increasingly integrated into sustainable development programs. This resilience shows that valuing local knowledge complements dominant model, strengthening economic sovereignty.

Education is key: integrating these traditions into school curricula to ensure recognition by younger generations. Finally, your vision of mental decolonization implies a drastic rupture with the current economic model. But is such radical transformation feasible or desirable in today’s interconnected world? A gradual adaptation, where Southern nations hybridize models by integrating their own values and knowledge, might be more pragmatic, allowing a smoother transition that respects both local realities and global interconnectedness.

Zeinab:

A 2023 UNESCO report on the decolonization of science (3) highlights structural inequalities in international scientific cooperation and reveals persistent colonial dynamics in new forms. There’s a stark asymmetry in R&D investment: developed nations spent $710 billion (3.5% of GDP) in 2021 (4), dwarfing the Global South.

In an ideal world, research would benefit all humanity regardless of location. Reality is different. Knowledge is power—military, economic, political—and thus jealously guarded. Patents, licenses, sanctions, and secrecy protect it. “Big Science,” serving war (atomic weapons, missile defense), operates under national security secrecy, with civilian applications (data encryption, satellites) emerging only after military use.

International scientific collaboration is siloed among geopolitical allies. Non-Western science (China, Russia, Iran) is often dismissed, sparking tensions. Even technology transfers ensure Northern control over knowledge and skills. These transfers aren’t free: corporations sell them at high cost, often via World Bank loans or subsidies squeezed from poor states.

We must also question limits on military science and ethics, like nuclear weapons. Space should be demilitarized, genetic manipulation strictly regulated, and defense industries governed by international treaties (e.g., Geneva Convention). In this context, the South’s maneuvering room is limited.

While globalization reduced extreme poverty and expanded access to tech, it entrenched neoliberalism. Oxfam’s 2024 report (5) notes that the top 1% own more than 95% of the poorest. Tax Justice Network (6) reveals $10 trillion hidden in tax havens. Southern nations are over-indebted: Jubilee Debt Campaign (7) found over half spend more on debt repayment than healthcare. Nobel economist Joseph Stiglitz (8) critiques “free trade” dogma and the IMF/WTO’s role in weakening Southern states.

Mental decolonization starts by rejecting myths like “free trade” or “global village” in our discourses and education. Questioning the status quo, though feared, fosters courage and imagination. A decolonized collective mindset could free us to forge local, regional, and global development paths.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

Do you believe mental decolonization requires radical changes to current education systems? If so, how?

Zeinab:

Education systems must reflect the society we aim to build. If we seek independence from hegemonic models, radical change is needed. Education should anchor Moroccans in their culture and history while equipping them to innovate for future challenges.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

Zeinab, globalization can also be seen as a process of exchange where knowledge flows in both directions. Rather than viewing Moroccan education as dependent on a hegemonic model, we might instead envision it as a space where diverse local and international knowledge can meet and coexist. Equipping citizens to adapt and thrive in a globalized economy is an asset.

Moreover, the current education model, despite its flaws, has enabled many young Moroccans to attain influential positions both nationally and internationally. A more effective approach might involve gradual adaptation, integrating local cultural elements while preserving the skills required for global competitiveness. Education should indeed strengthen a sense of belonging, but it must also prepare students for openness, cooperation, and global dialogue. We live in an era of global-scale challenges—ecological, technological, and economic.

Furthermore, education must address concrete needs. Young Moroccans aspire to employment opportunities, social mobility, and professional success. An education system overly focused on traditional knowledge, however rich in identity, might fail to equip them with the skills demanded by these aspirations. The reality is that even Moroccan businesses seek competencies aligned with global standards, necessitating an education that includes modern methodologies and knowledge. The true challenge lies in finding balance—a hybrid model that allows new generations to feel rooted in their culture while equipping them to thrive in a globalized world.

Zeinab:

Anchoring education in our local values and knowledge does not mean an exclusive focus on national identity or closing ourselves off from the world. Such closure would indeed be dangerous, as closed systems stagnate. On the contrary, healthy roots allow a tree to draw nourishment from rich soil while its branches spread in all directions. When roots are strong, exchanges flow both ways. The tree metaphor has its limits, of course, as the goal is not to isolate ourselves to build roots first. The work must happen in parallel: strengthening our foundation while transforming our external relationships into balanced exchanges. Decolonizing minds is precisely about moving beyond binary thinking toward more nuanced frameworks.

Fostering a sense of belonging must not be done carelessly. It requires a deeper, more critical reading of the past—moving beyond glorified narratives of rulers to teach difficult subjects like the practice of slavery into the last century, patriarchy, the impact of Arab culture on Amazigh cultures, urban dominance over rural areas, the existence of pre-Islamic and hybrid post-Islamic beliefs, and the destruction of local flora and fauna.

We live indeed in an era of global challenges. For our youth to become key players in addressing these challenges, they must acquire skills in fields we have underdeveloped, particularly science and technology. The aim is not to center them solely on a local perspective but to empower them to fully participate in shaping a shared future. They must develop critical thinking, openness, and curiosity about vastly different cultural approaches—from Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, East Asia, and Indigenous knowledge from Western nations—now interconnected through the digital world. They must learn to engage respectfully with these differences.

To achieve this, we must analyze the mechanisms that weaken us and make our education system susceptible to internalized forms of colonization—such as excessive admiration for Western culture as a model of success and perceptions of our own culture as backward or inferior. Deconstructing this internalized colonization is crucial to fortifying the psyche of our youth.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

How can individuals decolonize their thinking amid media and cultural dominance by Western standards?

Zeinab:

It is not easy. Already in 1988, the American linguist Noam Chomsky, in his essay Manufacturing Consent (9), considered that mainstream American media were instruments of propaganda for neoliberal ideology and the justification of US foreign policy. The current genocide in Palestine is, moreover, the most glaring example of this. One might sometimes think that the masks have fallen because the major media outlets are openly racist and no longer bother to be subtle. The directive is the relentless hammering of “everything began on October 7, 2023; any criticism of Israel or Zionism is an act of anti-Semitism.”.

Ultimately, it’s about understanding the context. Decontextualized events are easy to manipulate. Therefore, an essential element is to know the colonial history that many people are discovering for the first time, for example, concerning Palestine with the painful events unfolding there. Also, history is often written by the dominant to establish the worldviews they want to disseminate. In the case of the Middle East, the Palestinian critical thinker Edward Said deciphered “Orientalism” (the definition of the Orient by the West) as early as 1978, which allowed for the construction of the founding myths of the current supremacist ideology. So, using critical thinking, broadening one’s sources of information, and valuing “decolonized” authors—meaning authors who have no agenda with colonialism—is key.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

Zeinab, you raise a complex question by insisting on the importance of understanding historical and ideological contexts to decolonize minds in the face of dominant media narratives. However, Western media landscapes are vast and diverse, and although some major media outlets have interests or biases, one also finds journalists, researchers, and analysts within them who actively work to offer nuanced and critical perspectives.

Next, in today’s digital world, information overload also exposes one to the trap of disinformation. Seeking out alternative voices does not guarantee their reliability, and some sources may also have their own ideological biases. A “decolonization” of thought therefore requires filtering and analyzing these new perspectives with enlightened skepticism, avoiding replacing one bias with another.

Furthermore, you evoke Orientalism as described by Edward Said. In our contemporary context, these clichés are gradually being deconstructed, and even within Western societies, intellectuals, activists, and media are challenging these simplifying narratives. Indeed, the rise of social justice movements and awareness of postcolonial issues show that it is possible to dissect these myths from within.

Finally, decolonization of the mind requires an education that integrates diverse perspectives from a young age. True intellectual decolonization could thus come through programs that include the works of authors and thinkers from all backgrounds, allowing for a global and nuanced understanding of cultures and issues. Thus, the real challenge is to build a thinking that is nourished by multiple perspectives, where the West and non-Western cultures intertwine in a common quest for truth.

Zeinab:

Since the 1950s, there has been a media concentration due to the emergence of media empires, convergences, privatizations, and giant mergers in the 2000s like Disney, Amazon, or Bolloré in France. Today, in the United States, 6 major groups control 90% of the media. They have close ties to political and economic power. Mass media have lost their independence. We note a homogenization of content and priority is given to entertainment rather than information. If these media outlets do not validate sensitive information with their stakeholders, then they self-censor due to the power of lobbies (notably AIPAC).

The mechanism was dissected by Noam Chomsky as early as 1988 (9), who explains how mass media are tools of social control that manufacture consensus in favor of political and economic elites. Information is biased because major media groups defend their own interests first. The apparent diversity is misleading because the narrative frameworks are the same. Information sources are often statements from governments and corporations with a pro-war bias and a “the West” versus its “enemies” dichotomy. Sensitive subjects are avoided so as not to scare away advertisers. Dissenting voices within these media are censored or fired (like Chris Hedges or Glenn Greenwald). Independent media still exist, but their influence is almost nil. For example, The Intercept reaches less than 1% and Democracy Now less than 0.5% of the American audience compared to Fox News, which reached 30% in 2023 (10). Now, in the age of social media, things are indeed becoming more complicated.

If “orientalism” in the service of colonization is outdated, it remains an essential framework for deciphering the current foreign policy of the West, their mass media which continue to dehumanize Palestinians and Yemenis, and the resurgence of Islamophobia and an “acceptable” racism towards Arabs and Muslims.

The decolonization of minds can be seen as a common approach, among allies from all sides. It is not opposed to people of Western culture but rather to a dominant system that imposes its layers of supremacy between nations and within nations themselves. It can therefore only be achieved through the diversification of paradigms to build a living-together.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

In your opinion, is the decolonization of minds an individual process, a collective one, or both?

Zeinab:

The question invites the answer; it is probably both individual and collective. The individual must, in a way, deconstruct themself, unlearn, question fundamentals, sometimes go back, and then find new anchors. They must want to engage in this process because it takes them completely out of their comfort zone. This is where the community can help accompany them. At the same time, the community can consider working towards a decolonization of culture and a profound transformation of society.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

Zeinab, on an individual level, you suggest people must “unlearn” and question fundamentals. This is difficult to achieve for most people. Beliefs, values, and ways of seeing the world are deeply ingrained. Asking an individual to deconstruct themselves requires intense introspective work and a certain intellectual maturity. But how many individuals are truly ready to undertake such a demanding journey? In a world of fast and superficial information, many might prefer to remain in their comfort zones.

Next, the role of the community in this process is complex. A collective transformation requires structures capable of encouraging this intellectual decolonization. But here again, harmonizing a collective vision can be a challenge, because interests and values are often diverse and sometimes contradictory. The community is a melting pot of differences, and each social group can have distinct aspirations and references. Decolonization on a community scale could therefore run into internal resistance, particularly from those who fear losing their current cultural landmarks.

Furthermore, society does not evolve in a vacuum. External cultural and ideological influences are constant. In this context, how can we ensure that this process of collective “decolonization” is not itself influenced or diverted by external ideologies? Is decolonization even desirable? If decolonization means a reaffirmation of what is local and traditional, without openness to external contributions, the risk is to arrive at an isolated way of thinking and to miss out on the benefits of interculturality.

In short, the decolonization of minds faces obstacles, both personal and social. The real challenge is to establish a process where everyone can free themselves from certain patterns, without falling into the exclusion of external contributions. The journey could then become a harmonious evolution, where freedom of thought is enriched by both local roots and global interactions.

Zeinab:

The decolonization of minds should be seen as a process of emancipation that allows us to build our systems of thought and relationships in an autonomous and healthy manner, including towards the West. It is not about rejecting a currently dominant culture, nor about romanticizing a local culture. Everyone has something to gain from rebuilding a balanced and respectful relationship. Decolonization is also an even broader and deeper opening, in all directions—towards the past, towards all other cultures, and towards a future where the realm of possibility is not restricted.

We cannot expect this movement to be undertaken “en masse”. American political scientists Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan (11) noted that it only takes engaging 3.5% of the population to initiate social transformation, and according to American sociologist Damon Centola (12), mobilizing 10% of a population is needed to shift social norms. These figures remain very high. Perhaps, after all, the decolonization of minds is easier than we think among curious, flexible people eager for renewal.

The decolonization of minds on a community scale does indeed involve many obstacles, including resistance to change and all those who have an interest in keeping populations under the yoke of a dominant culture and system. It also carries risks, a hardening of perspectives, and a repression of attempts at questioning. Faced with these challenges, we must engage in it intelligently and strategically.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

What roles do the arts and literature play in the decolonization of minds, and how can they influence contemporary cultural perceptions?

Zeinab:

The arts and literature are subtle and unconscious (or sometimes conscious) vehicles of societal paradigms. The fact that Western arts and literature are so dominant is no accident. Hollywood has shaped contemporary cultural perceptions. The model of the happy consumer (the “American Way of Life”) has been sold to the entire world.

Furthermore, the degrading representations of non-white ethnicities in Hollywood films have caused a great deal of damage: Black people often portrayed as violent and dangerous, Mexicans as deceitful and thieves, Arabs as terrorists, etc. I recently saw The Dictator by Larry Charles and find it troubling that this film, where the main character represents a stupid and obscene Gaddafi, was released in 2012, just months after the Western offensive that ransacked Libya and its leader who was standing up to them too much.

It is therefore not surprising that, despite all liberation movements, racism, misogyny, bigotry, and white supremacy remain so endemic. For the good of humanity, it is fundamental to break free from this cultural domination and re-establish a diversity of paradigms for a healthy cultural ecosystem. And this happens through the arts and literature. Besides, isn’t it curious that Netflix just removed 19 Palestinian films from its offering under the pretext that their licenses had expired?

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

Zeinab, it is true that Hollywood has long promoted a stereotypical image of various communities, and this industry has helped spread the “American Way of Life” model around the world. However, the universality of this influence could be viewed differently: it results partly from the ability of Hollywood narratives to captivate a wide audience through accessible stories and striking imagery. These films also express universal themes – dreams, struggle, redemption – that resonate everywhere. This explains why the global audience continues to consume them, even while aware of certain distortions. In recent decades, growing awareness has pushed Hollywood and other cultural industries to integrate a diversity of perspectives. Admittedly, progress is slow, but recent works, whether in film or literature, address multicultural stories and give a voice to long-marginalized groups.

On the other hand, many authors, artists, and filmmakers from formerly colonized regions use their art to reinterpret their history, assert their identity, and propose alternative visions. From streaming platforms to social media, modern tools allow for a wider dissemination of these works. African, Asian, and South American cinemas, for example, are gaining popularity with an international audience. This growth testifies to a certain resistance and cultural resilience in the face of dominant currents.

Regarding the removal of certain Palestinian films by Netflix, it is true that platform decisions can seem arbitrary, but they also relate to legal and commercial constraints. Although this may be perceived as a form of censorship, it could also reflect the complexity of managing sensitive works in a tense geopolitical context. Despite these limitations, the global audience now has expanded access to diverse content, including Palestinian works, thanks to alternative distributors or independent support networks.

Thus, the challenge may lie in supporting and valorizing local cultural productions that, in turn, will enrich the global landscape. A true decolonization happens through the recognition of this creative diversity and the promotion of an ecosystem where all voices find their space for expression and dissemination.

Zeinab:

If, on the surface, Hollywood films have increased diversity in narratives and characters, the 2021 USC Annenberg study (13) on high-grossing films demonstrates that Eurocentrism is still dominant with hyper-masculine heroes, objectified women, and non-white characters often stereotyped. Hollywood collaborates with the Pentagon to use military equipment, and in return, films must make an apology for militarism and glorify the American army. Historical memory is often truncated: the discovery of the Americas is romanticized; the genocide of Native Americans is omitted, and slavery is presented as having been solved by benevolent white people. Finally, consumerism is still just as promoted.

The vast majority of directors (85%) are white. According to UNESCO figures from 2022, Hollywood still dominates the market (70% of the world’s market share), blockbusters (90%), and distribution channels. Asia and the digital realm are in the process of challenging this giant. The decolonization of minds can be seen as an awareness of this “soft power” to valorize the arts and literature of countries in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, etc.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

How could the decolonization of minds contribute to better environmental awareness?

Zeinab:

More and more researchers are talking about a multifactorial crisis (“polycrisis”) of which climate change is only one consequence, often subject to a “siloed” or “tunnel” vision where only the symptoms are seen. These researchers are interested in the deep roots of the systems involved, namely the economic model of industrial growth that depends on the ever-increasing extraction and exploitation of the Earth’s resources, both human and natural, political structures that are complicit or powerless, and colonial legacies. The decolonization of minds can play a role because it places the environmental crisis back into its global context and allows for a systemic approach. Furthermore, it can help renew ecological consciousness, reconcile with the Earth, with non-humans in an “eco-centric” relationship (humans are part of all species) instead of an “anthropocentric” one (humans are at the center of the world), and with humans different from us.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

Zeinab, to begin with, environmental awareness might be insufficient if this understanding is not accompanied by practical measures and changes at the level of public policies and lifestyles. The concept of a “polycrisis”, a multifactorial crisis where environmental problems mix with economic and social issues, can seem abstract to many people. Most individuals struggle to translate their knowledge about the environmental crisis into concrete actions. The decolonization of minds may not bring significant environmental change if it is not accompanied by a practical and accessible framework for everyone’s daily life.

Next, you propose a shift from anthropocentrism to eco-centrism, a major philosophical transition that could change our relationship with the planet. However, let’s not forget that anthropocentrism is integrated into the foundations of modern society. Changing this paradigm poses a series of challenges because it requires a profound revision of current economic and political systems. Is it realistic to think that contemporary societies, mostly oriented towards growth and personal development, will be ready to adopt an eco-centric model where their individual interests would be partially relegated to the background?

Furthermore, attempts to live in a more eco-centric manner might run into global inequalities. Developing countries are still seeking economic growth to improve their living conditions. Their priority remains the fight against poverty and the development of basic infrastructure. The decolonization of minds advocating an eco-centric vision could thus conflict with these aspirations, creating a gap between ecological ideals and the economic realities of many countries. Can we reasonably expect these nations to place biodiversity preservation above their vital and immediate needs? For this vision to become a driving force, it must be integrated into viable policies, in tune with the social and economic realities of our current world.

Zeinab:

The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) recognized in 2022 (14) that colonialism is one of the fundamental causes of climate vulnerability by exacerbating environmental degradation, eliminating sustainable land management practices, and reinforcing inequalities. This report emphasizes that colonial regimes dispossessed lands, increased deforestation, accelerated intensive agriculture, and the exploitation of resources. The use of colonized lands was reoriented towards the needs of the settlers with the importation of plant and animal species that proved invasive and damaging to ecosystems.

The IPCC notes that current economic systems (“neocolonial”) continue to dispossess local communities, favoring resource extraction and high-emission activities in Southern countries. An interesting point of this report is that even the climate adaptation and mitigation policies promoted by international institutions continue to reproduce colonial patterns favoring corporate interests over those of populations. The IPCC concludes by the necessity to adopt decolonial approaches to climate policies and to involve local communities in efforts to combat climate change.

The sustainable development sector, which was born from a desire to evolve human societies towards the protection and maintenance of a livable environment with economic and social sustainability, has itself become a very profitable colonial industry under a veneer of responsibility with a commodification of ecology, a green capitalism that supports the Western model and “extractivist” globalization, a vertical logic, and a assured optimism that science and technology will find the solutions to climate challenges.

Anthropologist and economist Jason Hickel criticizes current climate policies. Hickel dismantles the illusion of green growth and argues that capitalism and even green capitalism perpetuates global inequalities and the exploitation of the South by the dominant economic model (15). He insists on the illusion that green growth can occur without an increase in resource consumption or emissions. He notes the rebound in household consumption that cancels out the ecological gains of technological progress. He observes the limits of clean energy and the ravages of lithium and cobalt extraction that it entails. He notes the rapid collapse of biodiversity that is progressing faster than technological solutions. Finally, he reproaches the proponents of these policies for using this myth to avoid radical changes.

It is then legitimate to ask whether it is realistic to expect leaders and all those who benefit from the dominant system, whether they are adherents of the anthropocentric model or the eco-centric veneer, to abandon their personal or collective interests for a rebirth of ecological consciousness, an abstract concept though noble and inspiring.

Should we then expect, fear, or hope for radical movements fighting systemic injustice? In the face of brutal transformations that are frightening because they disrupt the order of things, cautious, pragmatic, and gradual approaches can be reassuring. But will they bring about the necessary modifications in the face of systemic challenges? Incrementalism is often criticized because it only brings marginal changes, often ends in non-binding compromises, maintains systemic injustices, and is simply too slow for the ecological emergency.

Between revolution and reform, some advocate middle paths. Canadian author and alter-globalization activist Naomi Klein advocates for transformative policies (16) by placing climate justice at the heart of the matter. She rejects false solutions and greenwashing. Klein proposes collective and egalitarian responses through popular mobilization to build a participatory democracy and counter the exploitation of crises by neoliberals to further strengthen their policies.

If, in the face of such a complex crisis, there is certainly no universal, simple, realistic, and achievable approach, environmental awareness is also not a monolith. It can be seen as an experimental, rational and subjective, dynamic, individual and collective, and contextual process—one of the key elements of the decolonization of minds.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

Do you think climate skepticism is a modern form of colonial resistance to collective responsibility? Why or why not?

Zeinab:

I think climate skepticism is fueled by those who want to continue making profits at the planet’s expense. Scientists working within Exxon and Shell companies knew, as early as the 1980s, that carbon emissions from fossil fuels risked causing +2C global warming, catastrophic climate events, the destruction of ecosystems, etc. These companies knowingly kept these reports secret until 2015 when leaks revealed their existence. To this day, Exxon and Shell have still not been held accountable for their disinformation. To this day, companies like Shell, Chevron, ExxonMobil, BP, or the Koch Foundation continue to fund energy research departments in major American universities like MIT, Stanford, Harvard, or Berkeley and appoint people working for themselves to the governance boards of these universities, in a blatant conflict of interest according to British researchers Benjamin and Geoffrey (17). The goal of these companies is to promote ideas that justify their activity (such as that gas is a clean energy) or that pragmatism must prevail over the idealism of renewable energies.

On the other hand, individualism and personal success are key elements of the dominant modern culture (like the concept of the self-made man or “success stories”) that precisely serve to weaken the very fabric of community. In this culture, it then becomes difficult to organize and have collective responsibility. Climate skepticism is one facet of colonial propaganda to undermine any form of responsibility-taking. What remains surprising is the capacity for denial and blindness in the face of the repeated and increasingly intense manifestations of climate change.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

Zeinab, climate skepticism is a complex phenomenon, drawing its roots from several factors. Beyond the interests of large companies, it is also fueled by widespread distrust of institutions and scientific discourse. This distrust is sometimes induced by a legitimate fear of economic and political manipulation. Many people, in regions historically dominated by foreign powers, perceive environmental discourses as a new form of external intrusion that imposes economic constraints in the name of protecting the planet. This reaction reveals a deeper conflict between national sovereignty and environmental obligations.

Next, the culture of individualism has become an intrinsic facet of globalized societies, whether Western or not. In developing countries, this same individualism often inspires movements for change and personal emancipation, including local ecological initiatives. Therefore, the ideology of the “self-made man” or “success stories” is a global phenomenon that, in some cases, stimulates individual responsibility-taking and environmental innovation.

Also, we might recognize that funding by oil companies for research programs or their presence on university governance boards does not necessarily mean absolute control over the results or ideas promoted. Universities host a range of voices, including researchers who actively advocate for progressive climate policies. The conflict of interest is certainly concerning, but many scientists, despite private funding, pursue objective and rigorous research on the climate crisis.

Finally, the implementation of “collective responsibility” is a universal challenge. Awareness of climate issues is often hampered by immediate concerns like employment, economic security, and daily well-being. This is a dilemma shared by both Western populations and those in developing countries.

Thus, to hope to counter climate skepticism, it may be wiser to encourage local solutions and adopt approaches that respect the economic and social aspirations specific to each community. The fight against climate skepticism requires an effort of listening and dialogue, where the decolonization of minds translates into a genuine inclusion of the voices and priorities of each people, rather than a head-on opposition to the values of individualism or personal success.

Zeinab:

Climate skepticism is certainly a complex phenomenon, and the distrust of developing countries is entirely legitimate. When we see that G20 countries, which emit 75% of global greenhouse gases, have seen their emissions increase by 5% since the Paris 2015 promises, according to UN 2023 figures (18), environmental discourses then become hollow. While they have contributed little to global warming and are already suffering its impacts, developing countries are faced with a dilemma: that of responding to critical societal priorities and that of preparing for climate changes.

The central question remains the financing of these climate actions for developing countries, which is under negotiation at every Conference of the Parties on climate (COP). In UN reports (19), we can glimpse how rich countries are struggling to keep their funding aid promises while funding needs have multiplied by 10 since 2009. The United States and the European Union block requests from G77 countries: to obtain grants, fewer loans or preferential rates, and the taxation of global transport and oil profits. As for China, it still wants to be considered a developing country to avoid having to pay for the climate transition. The lack of political will is glaring.

Since 2022, COPs have been openly under the influence of fossil fuel multinationals that slow down regulations and take advantage to engage in greenwashing. According to the NGO Global Witness (20), the presence of oil and gas lobbyists has intensified (2456 lobbyists at COP28 in 2023, four times more than the European delegation). ExxonMobil and Chevron companies have spent $200 million on lobbying since 2015. The host countries of the COP are countries with strong oil interests (United Arab Emirates in 2024 and Azerbaijan in 2025). The promoted carbon capture technologies are not yet proven. Under pressure from OPEC countries, the final COP texts mention a distant transition from fossil fuels instead of a planned phase-out. Perhaps, then, climate inertia hides a political inertia? In this context, the room for maneuver remains local solutions and a coming together and dialogue between peoples, considering their constraints, priorities, and urgencies.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

How do colonial legacies influence our relationship with consumption and nature today?

Zeinab:

We are trapped on the “consumption treadmill.” The documentary The Story of Stuff by Louis Fox, released in 2007 (21), is a good illustration of this. This economic system, which gained momentum after the Second World War, relies on the ever-increasing production of consumer goods. There are two important factors: low wages and cheap goods. Low wages mean people must work harder and cannot escape the cycle. And goods must be cheap so that populations can buy a lot of them. At the production stage, factories mix toxic chemicals with natural resources. We end up with toxic chemicals everywhere, even in our bodies. By destroying the lands that once supported farmers, the system forced them to migrate to disadvantaged urban areas. To sell the products, the system requires frantic consumerism, which is promoted by culture, media, and advertising. A strategy to keep the treadmill running at full speed is planned obsolescence and perceived obsolescence (fashion effects).

For the environment, it is a catastrophe because it overexploits available natural resources. And the waste and pollution generated by this system have destroyed the air, land, and water and accelerated climate change. Furthermore, people are not even happy in modern societies. Finally, beyond products or services, commodification has extended to everything, including ourselves. Our personal information and our “profile” constitute a commodity for internet search engines, for the media, and for all those who have something to sell to us, including Nature. The colonial legacy has been to import this system into our countries identically, to continue to sell our population to former colonial countries as cheap labor, and to accept, moreover, that their waste disappears from their sight and ends up piling up in our countries.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

Zeinab, although consumerism has historical roots in colonization and Western industrial development, it is not imposed in such a unilateral manner. This model, which relies on low wages, the production of cheap goods, and overconsumption, is now integrated into global dynamics, adopted, adapted, and often even claimed by societies and individuals worldwide.

First, many developing countries aspire to achieve a level of consumption similar to that of industrialized countries, seeing this lifestyle as a symbol of modernity and social success. The question then is why this system is so attractive. Consumerism has become a global culture, disseminated by media, social networks, and international icons. Its success lies in its ability to create universal desires, making everyone complicit in the race for “always more”.

Next, the commodification of nature and personal data is a global consequence of the transition to a digital economy and market expansion. In developed countries themselves, individuals face similar commercial exploitation, where their personal information is analyzed, sold, and used to sell even more products. This phenomenon is therefore related to a mutation of the economy than strictly to a colonial legacy. The current digital economy transforms all consumers, wherever they are, into commodities. The challenge is therefore to rethink this dynamic from a global regulation one.

As for the importation of waste into Southern countries, it is indeed problematic, but many countries accept this waste for economic reasons, in exchange for financial compensation or to meet growth objectives. It is a choice often dictated by local economic constraints. Of course, this choice is debatable and raises ethical questions. This reality testifies to a global economic hierarchy where the least industrialized countries find themselves, willingly or not, assuming the externalities of the more powerful ones. The solution lies in international regulations and the accountability of local governments to refuse these damaging agreements.

Finally, indeed, consumerism does not guarantee well-being. The quest for material satisfaction is a universal human tendency, rooted in fundamental desires for comfort and status. In short, the current dynamics of consumption are now maintained and reinforced by collective acceptance, even a global enthusiasm. The real challenge is perhaps to recognize that each society, each individual, has a role in maintaining this system. To reform this relationship with consumption, it is essential to promote alternative values, education on environmental respect, and international regulation that transcends local or historical economic interests.

Zeinab:

Indeed, consumerism as a model is not imposed unilaterally, whether within developed countries or in developing countries, and that is the nature of this form of colonization. One could say it is domination by consent rather than by oppression. Consumerism is seductive. It presents itself as a free choice of consumption, a pleasant choice (there is the dopamine rush of the act of purchase), while silencing the conditioning mechanisms that are advertising, cultural and social influences, fashion effects, or the status linked to possession. Consumers participate voluntarily and are eager for the latest trends. They are, in a way, actors in their own alienation. By replacing local systems of meaning with market values, there is a cultural homogenization that can make us believe that this way of life is inevitable.

The critique of consumer society is not new. As early as 1970, the French philosopher and sociologist Jean Baudrillard (22) saw it as a “totalizing social logic” beyond simple material accumulation. According to Baudrillard, it is a system of symbols that gives meaning to purchased objects, which can go as far as fetishism (luxury brands) in a hierarchy of differences that influences social relations (status, identity, values such as success, freedom, or happiness). According to Baudrillard, consumers live in a simulated world, a form of hyper-reality where images, brands, and media replace reality. Needs are constantly manufactured with a planned obsolescence of out-of-style objects. The act of consumption amounts to an adherence to an attractive social order, an order that has now become almost planetary thanks to globalization.

On this point, perhaps the decolonization of minds can participate in the cultural, political, and social work of promoting alternative visions and values, integrating current environmental and societal issues.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

What alternative philosophical models could be highlighted to promote a less consumerist and more sustainable way of life?

Zeinab:

The consumerist lifestyle creates permanent needs, and we find ourselves in the constant impulse to feed a mouth that struggles to be satisfied. It is therefore about filling this void by giving meaning to our existence on Earth and finding our place among others—humans, non-humans, in nature—and consequently being attentive to the quality of our relationships with others.

For this, the deep ecology of the Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess repositions nature at the heart of our attention on the principle that all living beings deserve equal moral consideration. This helps us see ourselves as part of Nature and not at the top of a hierarchy of living beings. Thus, everything we do to Nature, we do to ourselves. Science, when it is not co-opted by industry, can provide us with insights into the very nature of the Earth. The Gaia theory (developed and proven by mathematical models by the British scientist James Lovelock in the 1960s) asserts that the Earth is a set of living and non-living elements, closely linked, which acts as a self-regulating system. The Earth is therefore no longer that big inert rock that we can excavate at will. Our survival is part of its system.

Another, more recent scientific basis for ecology, linking biology, physics, and philosophy, is the systemic vision of life. The Austrian American physicist Fritjof Capra (23) defends a holistic vision of life where everything is interconnected (from cells to ecosystems). Capra criticizes scientific reductionism, which focuses on the parts, and invites us to see the relationships and processes as a whole. He argues, in particular, for an intrinsic respect for the living world.

The wisdom and spirituality of indigenous peoples, where traditions are kept alive through stories, images, and rituals, teach us the importance of respecting Nature and living in harmony with it. The Native American botanist Robin Wall Kimmerer fuses modern science and her indigenous traditions (24). Kimmerer highlights reciprocity with the Earth, plants as teachers, listening to Nature, and active restoration to nourish hope through action.

Other spiritualities or religions are also centered on the divine dimension of life, and when they are not perverted (towards power, control, and exclusion), they can guide towards a more sustainable life and more in harmony with the living. As an illustration, the Vietnamese Buddhist master and pioneer of “eco-spirituality”, Thich Nhat Hanh (25), revived Buddhism’s commitment to “Mother Earth” due to interdependence, the analogy between external and internal pollution (anger, consumerism), and the necessity to protect and regenerate all ecosystems. Another example is Islam with its foundations of environmental protection. Researchers from the Pardee School of Global Studies at Boston University (26) recall the sacredness of nature in Islam (mountains, rivers, and animals are “signs” (āyāt) of God, the obligation to preserve resources, not to pollute, not to waste, and human responsibility as guardians (khalifa) towards all creatures of the Earth. Finally, even secular visions respectful of the living invoke the intrinsic dignity of life in all its forms, as in the declaration of the rights of Mother Earth (27).

In a general way, the first step towards the decolonization of minds is to deconstruct the hegemony of the mono-myth by opening up to the cohabitation of multiple and diverse philosophies and worldviews. Indian author Sahana Chattopadhyay (28) borrows the concept of “pluriversality” from the Zapatistas, who describe “Pluriverse” as a world where many worlds coexist, in a decolonized vision of our futures. For her, the future becomes plural and is imagined in the plural with the support of a myriad of cosmologies that coexist peacefully and respectfully.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

Zeinab, these alternative visions undoubtedly offer enriching perspectives for escaping the consumerist spiral. However, it is crucial to consider the practical challenges and limitations of their application in a globalized and economically interconnected world.

First, applying moral equality among all living beings raises concrete questions: how to convince highly industrialized societies, whose economies depend on massive resource extraction, to fundamentally change their model? It remains difficult to envision the transformation of our lifestyles towards a symbiosis with nature in a global economy where GDP and growth are priorities for many governments. Moreover, the adoption of an eco-centered lifestyle requires economic sacrifices that few countries seem ready to accept.

The Gaia theory remains difficult to integrate into concrete resource management policies. Indeed, to transform the Gaia theory into a model of sustainable development, a paradigm shift would be needed at all levels of society, involving politics, economy, and industry. This change faces a dilemma: short-term economic and political decisions, motivated by immediate interests, often contradict this long-term vision. Faced with growing energy needs, few countries are ready to significantly reduce their ecological impact to honor the preservation of the “Gaia system.”

As for the “pluriversality” of the Zapatistas, it must be confronted with geopolitical realities. The cohabitation of diverse cosmologies and philosophies requires mutual tolerance, acceptance of cultural differences, and an open-mindedness that all societies do not always share. Differences in interests, values, and priorities between nations and communities are often sources of tension and conflict. “Pluriversality” then becomes an ideal difficult to achieve, as it requires a level of dialogue and cooperation rarely reached in human history. International structures capable of promoting this respectful coexistence would be needed, without it being perceived as a threat to national or cultural identities.

Finally, the wisdom and spirituality of indigenous peoples do not always align with modern priorities. Contemporary life, shaped by urbanization, technology, and the quest for material comfort, makes the adoption of these lifestyles complex. Although these alternative philosophies can inspire lifestyles to be more respectful of nature, their application on a large scale requires adjustments and compromises, especially in the context of economic development and social aspirations for millions of people in developing countries. The decolonization of minds must integrate pragmatic solutions adapted to the realities of each society. The path towards a more sustainable world will perhaps be built in the balance between these philosophical ideals and the concrete constraints of our world.

Zeinab:

These philosophical models must not be utopias, paradigms disconnected from current realities, and above all, not new dogmas. Preferably, they should integrate naturally into modern societies: education could integrate respect for the environment into curricula, the arts and literature could spark curiosity, openness, and the exploration of these plural ideas, laws and governance structures could recognize the rights of nature, of forests, rivers, ecosystems to protect them from overexploitation, and economic policies could integrate social and environmental realities (example of the Green New Deal). The resistances and obstacles to the implementation of these philosophies are numerous. The transition today appears like climbing the Himalayas with bare hands. Meanwhile, the multifactorial crisis calls us to find the delicate balance between an unrealistic optimism nourished by beautiful philosophies and a resigned nihilism due to the scale of the obstacles.

There is also the danger that these philosophies be co-opted by an elite. This elite can find itself locked in passive dreams of “saving the planet.” But does the planet need to be saved, or is it rather human life on Earth? This elite is often disconnected from social, environmental, and geopolitical urgencies. Finally, this elite is also sometimes unaware of its privileges and of an underlying racism of ethnicity or class that makes it insensitive to the sufferings of those who are different. Currently, the genocide in Palestine has brought to light the silence, indifference, and lack of solidarity from environmental movements in the Global North. These movements, which claim to be ethical and defend life, do not want to make the link between colonization, the appropriation and extraction of resources on one hand, and the annihilation of resistances, the regression of freedoms, the crumbling of democracies, and the rise of fascism on the other.

Precisely, in this context, decolonization is an invitation not only to explore the most varied perspectives but also to analyze, question, clear the ground, get off the beaten path, experiment, engage in the uncertain, cultivate courage, passion, and discomfort, know how to stop and slow down, listen and join groups that support and motivate, act without waiting to see results, accept being wrong and changing or going back, remain humble, hope, and pray.

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

In your opinion, can the decolonization of minds help overcome the economic and industrial interests that hinder ecological progress?

Zeinab:

It is certain that the colonization of minds allows the dominant system to pursue its hegemonic interests at the cost of the planet’s destruction. Albert Einstein said that “we cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” The decolonization of minds becomes almost a necessity. But it is only a first step. Today, the existential challenges we face go beyond changing modes of thought, revolutions, or dismantling structures of oppression. We are on the eve of the tipping point of the planetary balance as humanity knows it. We are therefore navigating the unknown. The Nigerian philosopher Bayo Akomolafe thus invites us to embrace this darkness and prepare to lose our way. Here too, the future is once again conjugated in the plural, and enlightenment will be collective, or it will not be. Bayo poses a post-colonial question that does not solicit answers: “How can we find each other, to be together in the unknown, in grief, in powerlessness? How can we be there for each other when we stumble? How can we be there to pick up the treasures that result from it? The unthinkable calls us.”

Adnane (L’ODJ Media):

Zeinab, decolonization of minds might be an idealistic vision that encounters limits when faced with current economic and industrial mechanisms, well-established structures, significant profits, and networks of influence. Fossil fuel industries, large technology corporations, and many other sectors have built their power over decades, with resources, infrastructures, and policies that allow them to resist changes even under external pressure. Consequently, changing minds might not be enough without firm policies and binding legislation that impose concrete measures.

Embracing “the unknown,” as proposed by Bayo Akomolafe, can inspire reflection on our interdependence. However, this philosophy lacks clear direction. Decision-makers, companies, and communities need precise benchmarks, regulations, objectives to move forward, coordinated strategies to act on urgent problems. Carbon emissions, deforestation, ocean pollution – these problems demand immediate, pragmatic, and planned responses, which cannot rely on an acceptance of uncertainty.

Furthermore, the decolonization of minds, although inspiring, risks being a long-term endeavor, while the climate emergency is already manifesting. This decolonization process is complex, requiring everyone to reconsider deep values, cultural habits, and well-entrenched beliefs. But changes in mentalities are not instantaneous. To truly transform our societies, this decolonization would need to be accompanied by economic incentive measures that modify behaviors in a rapid and tangible manner. Taxes on emissions, subsidies for renewable energies, and circular economy policies are examples of concrete measures that, allied with a decolonized awareness, could accelerate the transition towards a sustainable lifestyle.

Finally, economic and industrial actors who hinder ecological progress operate within a collective framework – that of the global market. As long as this framework remains oriented towards growth and immediate profits, even a collective enlightenment risks remaining without direct impact. The laws of the market and economic interests will therefore need to be redefined so that this “enlightenment” can translate into practical actions and substantial economic reforms to counter established interests. In short, the future of our planet will not be played out only in our consciences, but in our laws, our policies, and our economic models.

Zeinab:

The decolonization of minds is only one piece of the puzzle that can act only at the level of consciousness. To give it a somewhat more pragmatic dimension, instead of presenting it as a collective enlightenment, we can see it as a network of action groups operating in diverse regions and domains thanks to actor-leaders of transformation. These actor-leaders must know how to navigate a complex, dynamic, and unstable world, with many uncertainties, global interdependence and interconnectivity, and which carries immense socio-economic, geopolitical, and ecological risks (which one could sometimes see as opportunities). In this context, these actor-leaders should develop the capacity to be catalysts of change. They should, in particular, move towards systemic and long-term thinking, understand interconnectivity and interdependence, economic, social, and ecological pressures, as well as the links between these systems and political and economic forces, recognize how changes in one part of the system affect the whole, see the whole without neglecting the future, adopt an interdisciplinary approach, actively seek new knowledge, question received ideas, and accept that their opinions be contested. To be comfortable with complexity, they would need to be capable of translating complex issues and responding to risks, uncertainties, and dilemmas, resolve conflicts, and eventually identify and seize opportunities. As they cannot work alone, the capacity to collaborate is essential, in an inclusive manner, reconciling different worldviews, within communities and beyond geographical, cultural, and political divisions. Emotional intelligence would finally help manage the complex emotions that emerge and strengthen resilience at the individual and collective level.

A final word that is not one: for the world to become more harmonious, we must be able to visualize it, draw it, sow it, shape it, touch it, smell it, invoke it, sing it, love it… The American writer Adrienne Maree Brown sums it up well: ” Decolonization begins in the imagination. We must unlearn the world as it was imposed on us and dream together the one we feel in our bones.”

Sources :

Democracy Incorporated, 2008, Sheldon Wolin

Global Capitalism and the Crisis of Humanity”, 2014, William I. Robinson

“Decolonizing Science”, 2023, UNESCO, https://www.un-ihe.org/news/decolonising-science-towards-inclusive-and-ethical-research

How much does your country invest in R&D? UNESCO Institute of Statistics, https://uis.unesco.org/apps/visualisations/research-and-development-spending/

Inégalités des richesses mondiales, 2024, Oxfam, https://oxfam.qc.ca/analyse-oxfam-inegalites-richesses-mondiale/

The State of Tax Justice, 2023, Tax Justice Network
https://taxjustice.net/reports/the-state-of-tax-justice-2023/

Debt Data Portal, https://data.debtjustice.org.uk/

“The Overselling of Globalization”, The New York Times, 2017, Joseph Stiglitz

Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, 1988, Noam Chomsky

Media Polarization, 2023, Pew Research

Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict, 2011, E. Chenoweth, M. Stephan

Experimental Evidence for Tipping Points in Social Convention, 2028, Damon Centola

Inequality in 1,300 Popular Films, 2021, Dr. Stacy L. Smith, USC Annenberg Inclusion Initiative, https://annenberg.usc.edu/research/aii

Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, IPCC, https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/

Why Growth Can’t Be Green, 2018, Jason Hickel, https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/09/12/why-growth-cant-be-green/

This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate, 2015, Naomi Klein

The Fossil Fuel Industry’s Invisible Colonization of Academia”. The Guardian 2017, F. Benjamin, S. Geoffrey, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/mar/13/the-fossil-fuel-industrys-invisible-colonization-of-academia

UN Environnement Programme Gap Report, 2023

Position Paper on Climate Finance, United Nations Climate Change, https://unfccc.int/

COP28 verdict: After 28 attempts, governments finally agree to ”transition away” from fossil fuel use, 2023, Global Witness, https://globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/fossil-fuels/cop28-verdict-after-28-attempts-governments-finally-agree-to-transition-away-from-fossil-fuel-use/

Story of Stuff (L’histoire des choses), 2007, Louis Fox, https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xknu6x

La société de consommation, 1970, Jean Baudrillard

The Systems View of Life: A Unifying Vision, 2016, Fritjof Capra

Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge, and the Teachings of Plants, 2013, revised 2020, Robin Wall Kimmerer

The World We Have: A Buddhist Approach to Peace and Ecology, 2018, Thich Nhat Hanh

Faith and Climate Change: The Role of Islam in Environmental Stewardship”, 2024, Boston University’s Pardee School of Global Studies, https://www.bu.edu/pardee/research/faith-and-climate-change/

Proposal Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth, 2010, World People’s Conference on Climate Change, https://pwccc.wordpress.com/programa/

Reconstructing the ‘Pluriverse’ as the Hegemony Unravels, 2024, Sahana Chattopadhyay, https://medium.com/age-of-emergence/reconstructing-the-pluriverse-as-the-hegemony-unravels-iv-857154ef26cf