By engaging with the critical lens of Kavish Chetty, a scholar whose work interrogates the assumptions and contradictions of decolonial theory, we can reframe Goan identity—or “Goan-ness”—not as a rigid construct bound by the prescriptive frameworks of decoloniality, but as a dynamic, lived experience that defies the policing tendencies of other decolonial projects.
Chetty’s critiques, particularly his skepticism of decoloniality’s romanticism and its tendency to homogenize non-Western cultures, offer a pathway to understanding Goan-ness as a plural, evolving identity shaped by historical migrations, cultural hybridity, and global connections, rather than a static essence to be “protected” or “purified” through decolonial dogmas.
Decoloniality’s Pitfalls: Chetty’s Critique
Kavish Chetty, a PhD candidate at the University of Cape Town, has consistently challenged the grand narratives of decoloniality, particularly as articulated by thinkers like Walter Mignolo. In his review of Mignolo’s The Politics of Decolonial Investigations (2021), Chetty argues that decoloniality often collapses into cultural relativism and a romanticized view of the “Other,” portraying non-Western cultures as inherently noble or untainted by the complexities of history.
He critiques the notion of a “colonial matrix of power” (CMP) as an overly simplistic metanarrative that attributes all contemporary oppressions to a singular colonial origin, flattening diverse histories into a monolithic struggle against “the West.” This approach, Chetty warns, risks creating new forms of segregation by essentializing cultural identities and demanding epistemic purity, where non-Western cultures are expected to reject Western influences to reclaim an authentic past.
Chetty’s critique is particularly relevant when examining Goan-ness, an identity shaped by centuries of Portuguese colonialism, Indian nationalism, and global migration. Unlike other decolonial projects that might seek to “purify” identity by rejecting colonial legacies or enforcing a singular narrative of resistance, Goan-ness resists such policing. It is an identity that thrives in its hybridity, embracing its Portuguese, Indian, and diasporic elements without succumbing to the decolonial impulse to erase or romanticize any single thread. Thus, Goan-ness embraces many Goan-nesses.
Goan-ness: A Historical and Transnational Tapestry
Goan identity is inherently the making , forged through layers of historical migration and cultural exchange. As outlined in Global Goans: Migration Movements and Identity in a Historical Perspective, Goan-ness has been shaped by translocal, transnational, and global movements across the Indian Ocean and beyond. From the 16th century, Portuguese colonialism integrated Goa into a vast imperial network, connecting it to Africa, Asia, and Europe. Hence, Goan-ness certainly is marked by those influences and cannot be simply totalized as evolved out of Portuguese colonialism alone . This wider networks created a diaspora that continues to thrive today, with Goans in the some African countries who also later migrated to UK ,and elsewhere . There ais Goan diaspora in other parts of the workd maintaining cultural practices like village feasts, tiatr performances, and Konkani language use. These practices are not frozen in time but adapt to new contexts, blending with local cultures while retaining a distinct Goan flavor.
Unlike decolonial frameworks that might demand a return to a pre-colonial “authentic” Goan identity, Goan-ness embraces its multiplicity. The Portuguese legacy, for instance, is not rejected as a colonial imposition but selectively chosen and woven into the fabric of Goan culture—seen in its cuisine, architecture, and Catholic traditions.
At the same time, Goans assert their Indian-ness through language (Konkani) and participation in India’s post-colonial nation-building and , even as they navigate tensions around script and linguistic nationalism. Catholics have the distiction of serving the Indian Army. Chetty’s warning against decoloniality’s nostalgia for a pre-colonial past resonates here: Goan-ness does not seek to excavate a lost, “pure” identity but instead celebrates its layered history as a site of creative adaptation and resistance.
The Diaspora and the Question of “Authenticity”
The global Goan diaspora complicates any attempt to police Goan-ness through decolonial lenses. Over the past decade, more than 25,000 Indian passports were surrendered in Goa, largely by Goans seeking Portuguese citizenship to access opportunities in the EU, particularly post-Brexit. This migration reflects economic pragmatism rather than a rejection of Goan identity. In places like Swindon or London, Goans recreate their culture through Konkani radio stations, village clubs, and culinary traditions, adapting to new environments while maintaining ties to “home.” These practices challenge the decolonial insistence on rootedness or epistemic purity, as Goans abroad do not abandon their identity but transform it, blending global influences with local traditions.Chetty’s critique of decoloniality’s tendency to homogenize non-Western cultures as “noble savages” is particularly apt here. Goan-ness is not a static essence to be preserved against Western contamination, nor is it a monolithic resistance to colonialism.
Instead, it is a living identity that evolves through migration and cultural exchange. The diaspora’s embrace of Konkani alongside English, or tiatr alongside global music, reflects what Chetty might describe as a refusal to be confined to a singular epistemic vantage point. Goans do not need to reject their colonial past or their global present to assert their identity—they inhabit both simultaneously.
Resisting Identity Policing
Decoloniality, as Chetty notes, often imposes a new form of identity policing by demanding that colonized peoples reject Western influences and reclaim indigenous knowledge systems. This can lead to what he calls a “new segregation,” where cultures are expected to remain distinct and untainted. In contrast, Goan-ness resists such prescriptions. It is not about policing boundaries but about embracing fluidity. For instance, the debate over dual citizenship in Goa, driven by the Portuguese colonial legacy, reflects a practical negotiation of identity rather than a purist rejection of foreign ties. Similarly, the Goan diaspora’s engagement with both Indian and Portuguese cultural elements defies the decolonial binary of “West vs. Rest.
”Chetty’s skepticism of decoloniality’s “utopian seductions” also warns against romanticizing Goan-ness as a perfect antidote to colonial legacies. Goan identity is not without its tensions—caste dynamics, linguistic nationalism, and demographic changes due to migration pose challenges. Yet, these tensions are navigated through lived experience, not through the imposition of a grand decolonial narrative. Goans do not need to “decolonize” their identity by erasing their Portuguese heritage or global connections; instead, they live their identity through everyday practices that blend the local and the global.
Toward a Decoloniality Without PolicingIf we take Chetty’s critique seriously, Goan-ness offers a model for a decoloniality that does not police identity but embraces its multiplicity. Unlike other decolonial projects that risk becoming dogmatic, Goan-ness is grounded in what Chetty might call a rejection of “hyperbole” and romanticism. It does not claim a singular origin or enemy but acknowledges the messy, interconnected histories that shape it. Social institutions like the church, clubs, and schools have historically facilitated this identity formation, not by enforcing purity but by providing spaces for cultural negotiation and adaptation.
In this sense, Goan-ness aligns with Chetty’s call for a critical engagement with history that avoids the pitfalls of decolonial absolutism. It is an identity that thrives in its “translocal, transnational, and global temporal layers,” refusing to be reduced to a battle against a monolithic “West.” By living their identity through migration, cultural hybridity, and pragmatic adaptation, Goans demonstrate that decoloniality need not be about policing boundaries but about embracing the fluidity of human experience.
Conclusion
Goan-ness, viewed through Kavish Chetty’s critical lens, emerges as an identity that resists the prescriptive tendencies of decoloniality. It is not about purging colonial legacies or romanticizing a pre-colonial past but about navigating a complex history with creativity and resilience. By embracing its Portuguese, Indian, and diasporic elements, Goan-ness defies the policing impulses of other decolonial projects, offering a vision of identity that is plural, adaptive, and unapologetically global. In a world where decoloniality often risks becoming a new orthodoxy, Goan-ness reminds us that true liberation lies in the freedom to define oneself beyond rigid narratives, living identity as a dynamic, ever-evolving practice.
