Decoloniality and decolonizing Critical Theory

It has become clear that Critical Theory, understood as the tradition originating from and remaining attached to the Frankfurt School, has to confront questions about its own limitations. This has been understood not just in terms of its project (which, especially in its Habermasian form, appears increasingly unable to deal with the rise of the far right in Europe and the USA) but also in terms of its own limitations as regards gender and race, and its implicitly Eurocentric orientation. It is the last limitation, its inherent Eurocentrism, that has been most resisted integration, insofar as Critical Theory from its inception has retained within it an account of the history of reason that retains a certain Hegelianism, with Europe being the stage of history, and the location of historical, cultural, and intellectual progress. While Horkheimer and Adorno criticized the development of reason in this way, they nonetheless tacitly accepted this formulation of the history of rationality as univocal and distinctly European. Habermas replicates this, even as he criticizes the univocal conception of rationality found in their work. As many have suggested, the time has come to take stock of this and see if Critical Theory cannot be revised in such a way as to make it a project that may still retain a truly universalist character while still recognizing its weaknesses, especially its implicit Eurocentrism.