A decolonized institution of knowledge is a reality, not just a hypothetical possibility. In many regions in the world unaffected by colonization, academic institutions are shielded from vestiges of non-existent colonization. An example is Thailand, formerly the Kingdom of Siam. Thailand was never colonized despite being surrounded by colonies of European countries. Decolonizing the institution involves representing historical facts accurately and with minimal or no historical bias. One way would be to ensure the perspectives of the once colonized or enslaved people are included. Another would be to openly discuss and examine the political and societal legacies of colonialism. A full examination of imperialism and its impacts may enable students to understand the legacies of colonization.

Having established that it is possible to have a decolonized institution, this essay will proceed to evaluate whether the decolonization process necessarily requires abolition of ‘typical’ academia. This essay argues that it is not strictly necessary, but the colonial mode of education is not the most fit for purpose. We will then move on to discuss what alternative institutions of knowledge could be built to replica academia.

The decolonization process can be achieved by using a third party from a neutral nation to examine first hand sources so as to reconstruct a historical narrative free from bias. A panel of historians from neutral nations from different regions could be selected to reduce bias. In addition, phrasing could be done more objectively and critically rather than to repeat propaganda. A more scientific and ‘cold’ approach can improve objectivity and decolonize entrenched biases. An example would be Germany and Japan, two losers in World War II, the last major war that closed centuries of battles and wars. The current ‘colonized’ narrative largely portrays both Germany and Japan as aggressors with dictatorial elements (Hitler and the Japanese Emperor) forcing an expansion. The post-‘colonial’ narrative is atypical of the idiom ‘history is written by the victor’. Germany and Japan’s wars were fought at the close of the era of wars. But in the middle of that same era, the Napoleanic wars spanned over 12 years and involved (i) The French Revolution, (ii) The War of the First Coalition, (ii) The War of the Second Coalition, (iii) The War of the Third Coalition, (iv) The War of the Fourth Coalition, (v) The War of the Fifth Coalition, (vi) The War of the Sixth Coalition, (vii) The War of the Seventh Coalition, (viii) The Peninsula War and (ix) The invasion of Russia. The 9 wars mimicked an era of invasions. Britain allied with Sweden, Russia, Naples, and Sicily and declared war and invaded France in 1803. Prussia led the creation of the Fourth Coalition with Russia, Saxony, and Sweden and declared war on the French in October 1806. Technically, the later German and Japanese expansionism is similar to the unilateral declaration of wars in the Napoleonic era. The main difference being that the Napoleonic wars occurred in an era where invasions were normalized whilst Germany and Japan were the last war aggressors that ended that chapter of normalized wars. The people living in the era sandwiched by the Napoleonic wars and the World Wars probably had a normalized narrative of the Napoleonic war aggressor whereas those living in an era of peace where war is not normalized would find war mongering despicable. The current sentiments slamming Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is testament to the “era bias”. Therefore, fighting against the ‘victor bias’ might lead to a ‘decolonized’ narrative. For instance, a decolonized narrative might teach students that there was a long chapter from the medieval period to the World Wars wherein conquest and war mongering was the norm. It might also teach a narrative of Germany and Japan, but add that it was in line with wars in the medieval to World War era. It could also objectively show the horrors of war and let students see first hand how wars were like. The victim of the Napoleonic war was no more affected than a victim of Nazi Germany. But perhaps it is because of ‘recency bias’ and that few people know victims or have family ties to Napoleonic war victims due to the passage of time that the aggressors in the Napoleonic wars are less condemned than Hitler or Imperial Japan. Therefore, it is possible to decolonize academia by representing narratives with zero or minimal recency bias, ‘knowing-the-victim bias’, era bias, political propaganda bias, ‘victor bias’ and so on.

However, education has two parts. One is learning for the sake of learning the truth. The other is more pragmatic and is a tool for political forces to prevent certain outcomes from happening or to shape people into behaving in a certain way. Is it necessarily wise to strip the cold truth from moral judgements? One purpose of education is to shape morality. And perhaps laden ‘fallacious’ education with colonized elements that play to a certain moral teaching may yield more social value and preventive value than merely teaching the cold and hard truth.

The reverse could also play a part in shaping social morality. For instance, immigration debates in contemporary Britain are portrayed as having many who are reluctant to embrace third world immigrants en masse. That might be a current debate with contemporary elements, but a decolonized education could have explored the colonial legacies such as civil war in Africa and the Middle East resulting as a direct consequence of colonial arbitrary geographic boundaries with little regard for cultural groups, ethnic tribes and more in the respective region. The result of an informed, decolonized education might make more modern day British voters inclined to ‘give back’ as a way of making reparations. Alternatively, it may also tighten boundaries of immigration policy and turn away or deprioritize immigrants from ‘irrelevant’ countries where Britain had no part in colonizing them. The result may be one that is more empathetic to past legacies and also more rational, rather than accepting a refugee from an ‘irrelevant’ country over one where reparations would have healed past colonization actions. For example, Britain had never colonized Albania, a source of refugees seeking asylum. Comparatively, Hong Kong was once colonized by Britain. As such, it could be more streamlined and rational to prioritize former colonies over unrelated countries.

Therefore, total decolonisation is a possibility but is likely to be subordinate to pragmatic purposes such as shaping the next generation of students to be war-avoidant, to be less racist, to not glorify torture or other military misadventures, to act in a morally upright way and to act in ways that preserve peace. Presenting a ‘decolonized’ cold and hard account of events is a lower priority and should not override overarching purposes of education - that is to teach people to behave in certain morally acceptable manners.

Finally, we will move on to the institution itself being a part of colonization itself. The content of education could be decolonized, but the institution and its spread is also part of colonization, sometimes masqueraded as ‘globalization’. However, British and British-influenced types of academia may not necessarily be a purpose-fit export. In Britain, successive governments have been attempting to reduce the number of ‘general’ degree holders (such as in literature or marketing) and promote vocational education. The creation of the BTEC, T-levels, GNVQ, Diploma, University Technical Colleges (for 14-18 year olds) are a reflection of that. Prominent figures such as House of Lords Peer Alison Wolf, former Education minister David Blunkett and Charles the Third had publicly spoken about the lack of vocational education and pushed for greater uptake of vocational education.

The majority of people around the world have a skewed perception of education, regularly defining it to ‘colonial’ standards rather than tailoring a standard that fits their job market. For instance, a highly agricultural society would benefit from technical education, an earlier mandatory minimum school leaving age, holidays during busy periods such as the harvest period or the planting period, and school hours during 11-2pm (during which an indoor setting might be more appropriate) or a timetable that would fit with part time farming so that there is less of a tradeoff. Yet, many countries have adopted a ‘colonial’ educational institution even if they were not colonized themselves.

An alternative institution of knowledge that breaks free from the colonial structure and its demerits plaguing the West might be a universal remote education that uses a Coursera online pre-recorded lecture format. This would cut down on the education cost (of employing so many teachers) and standardize education across the world. The second might be to tailor the system to the local job market. For instance, an economy that requires a lot of people in technical vocations are better off training students with a technical vocation model such as the French Polytechnique. This may also involve lowering the school leaving age back to 14 or so. Alternatively, a part time apprentice model mixed with part time traditional school could also work. The third way of constructing a more ideal system could be to run a home school system in parallel to traditional schooling, where attendance is not important, and the only benchmark of ‘passing’ and graduating is via the passing of standardized exams. This would open a range of flexible lifestyles and aid students in unconventional situations such as recuperating in hospital or school bully victims refusing to go to school. Finally, education is part done out of a basic necessity; to read, write, count and communicate. However, after primary education, the benefit mainly accrues to the individual and the future employer, not to the random taxpayer. Consequently, a non-colonial alternative institution of knowledge could be a continuous process of learning over 70 years whereby the company is the one sponsoring each year of post-primary education. This would make the economy extremely competitive and responsive to new demands in skills. This would also insulate workers as they are regularly skilled to what is in demand, rather than a mismatch due to picking their ‘passion’ that has little market value or insufficient jobs such as literature or fashion. It would also counter colonial ‘burnout’ whereby students are eager to work early or to leave school during the long 16 year continuous education, but then also become ‘burnt out’ after working continuously for a few years and then want to return to school. This alternative is also much more practical as the skills and even knowledge one learns at 10 is very different from what the field of knowledge has become 70 years later. In the last 70 years, pluto stopped a planet, gravitational waves were proven, discoveries of the yamnaya shed light to the migratory origins of those from the caucasus, computers were invented and the internet became a widespread tool. Thus, a continuous spread of educational years over 70 years may prove to be much better than the model ‘colonial’ system that is itself crumbling and a target for reform by successive governments.

In summary, education can be decolonized. However, whether a historically objective and factual ‘decolonized’ narrative is preferable to a morally laden version that shapes social values or not is up for debate. This essay argues that the particular facet of decolonization should be deprioritized over pragmatic needs to shape morality so as to prevent wars and other morally reprehensible acts from repeating. Next, the essay explored the ‘colonial style’ structure as a source of continual modern ‘colonization’. The content of education aside, the structure itself is ironically present in countries that have never been colonized due to a reverence for Western structures or due to modeling themselves on colonial structures inadvertently as part of development. The colonial structure is not tailored to modern society and may likely not be tailored to the local job market. As such, the structure should be readapted to local needs. Alternative institutions of knowledge could better fit most countries’ needs.