Paper short abstract:

Anthropologists across the globe are being penalized for not publishing in ISI top-ranked journals, which are usually American or British. This paper explores different ways in which international anthropologists may attempt to break this Anglo-American stranglehold.

Paper long abstract:

Anglo-American hegemony in anthropology is apparent in that across the globe anthropologists are being rewarded or penalized for publishing or failing to publish in ISI top-ranked journals, the large majority of which are American or British. Given the increasing neoliberalization and accounting mentality of universities worldwide, this is how anthropologists are being measured as to their worth

From an anthropological perspective, this has an unpleasant echo of Morgan and Tylor, with the Anglo-American center portrayed as the pinnacle to which all anthropologists should aspire. Top anthropological journals have made an effort to bring more international members onto their Editorial Boards, but the problem remains. An international anthropologist must conform to Anglo-American anthropological norms and forms of argument to be published in the Anglo-American center.

There are, however, different ways in which this Anglo-American stranglehold can be circumvented in an international anthropologist's career. One way is to have two parallel writing tracks, one in English following Anglo-American norms, and the other in one's native language, dealing with a very different set of themes and concerns. Another is to focus on books more than articles, which aren't so tied to the tyranny of citation indexes. A third way is to try to forego the Anglo-American publishing core entirely, by publishing on the internet. All these strategies have their problems; but they do represent attempts, on an individual basis, to level the global anthropological playing field, as I explore in this paper.