This project explores the empowering dimensions of silence in conflicts about postcolonial memory in contemporary Dutch society. The topic of postcolonial memory has become increasingly prominent since the 2010s and revolves around the question of how contemporary society should remember the colonial past, with its implications such as slavery, genocide and the appropriation of land. Should it be remembered as something that ended long ago, or as something that has lasting repercussions for the present day? In both theoretical and activist engagements with this topic, voice is often used as a metaphor for empowerment ('we must raise our voices'), and silence as signifying powerlessness ('we shall no longer be silenced')

Yet, speaking up is only empowering within contexts in which people are ready to listen to new voices. In contexts in which such readiness to listen is not sufficiently present, one’s voice can lead to “radical denunciation, hystericization, exclusion or criminalization” (Brown 87). Where one’s voice thus reaches its limits as an instrument of empowerment, silence emerges as a promising alternative, as a “source of protection and potentially even a source of power” (88).

A concrete example of silence’s empowering potential can be found in the decolonial activism of De Grauwe Eeuw. This group made the national news frequently between 2016 and 2018, when it claimed responsibility for spray-painted slogans such as “genocide” on Dutch colonial statues. However, despite their outspoken presence in public space, the activists refuse all participation in interviews with the national news media. On their social media platforms, they have frequently explained their silent treatment of the national media as a strategy of protecting their political voice from becoming neutralized through the media’s predetermined position with regard to Dutch postcolonial memory. They argue that their actions speak for themselves, and that “dialogue prolongs the status quo” (Engelenhoven 125).

De Grauwe Eeuw’s activism exemplifies the type of silence I will explore in my Veni project: a deliberate silence that is deployed as a joined strategy with speaking up. The group’s actions in public space and their frequent posts on social media form a loud voice against colonial glorification. Yet, it was their silent treatment of the national media that eventually became the decisive reason they were mentioned as a “potential threat” in the 2017 Terrorist Threat Assessment for the Netherlands (National Coordinator for Counterterrorism and Security). This example disproves silence’s common interpretation as a sign of powerlessness, by showing that silence can be threatening and disruptive, or in the words of De Grauwe Eeuw’s leader Michael van Zeijl: “The quieter we are, the more nervous they become” (Engelenhoven 132).

The issue with contemporary Dutch society’s dominant focus on voice as prime path to empowerment is that it puts pressure on marginalized groups to speak ever louder and clearer. Voice has become an overarching metaphor for power, referring to both the cause of, and the solution to, marginalization. Yet, if the cause of one’s marginalization is that one’s voice is not heard, how could one’s voice be expected to solve that problem? Hence, the central aim of this project is to overcome this stalemate by analyzing silence as an alternative mode of empowerment in Dutch society’s engagements with postcolonial memory.

Research questions

The two central questions of my project are:

1. Which empowering functions do silences have in conflicts about postcolonial memory in contemporary Dutch society?
2. Which modes of listening do empowering silences require?

Brought together, these two questions map out the scope of silence as an articulation strategy, respectively analyzing silence’s enactment, and its reception.

• indonesia
• material and immaterial heritage
• memory studies
• netherlands
• practicing decoloniality