In any case, to hope to subvert Western thought by operating within its framework is to fail to recognise that it only serves to further and legitimise the framework as a whole along with its claims of universal validity. The net result is the same—while the coloniser’s coloniality painted the native as fundamentally untrustworthy due to the immorality ingrained in his ‘false’ religion, postcolonial thought’s endorsement of hybridity and mimicry as tools of subversion internalises this immorality and doublespeak, thereby validating the untrustworthiness of the native.
