ABSTRACT
The concept of hybridity is losing its critical potential in the study of globalization, both, because everyone is hybrid and because awareness of hybridity might induce violence. Initially appearing as either cosmopolitanism or postcolonialism, hybridity has now turned into a subversive celebration of ineffective indoctrination of any orthodoxy or canon. Hybridity is also evidence of sited subjectivity or agency, whose unique genealogy cannot entirely be subsumed by simulating the sanctioned orthodoxy. This study advocates the concept of post-hybridity, which is different from hybridity in its assumption of a multilayer, changeable, random, and most importantly, non-synthetic, yet cyclical historiography. The study examines Hong Kong, where both dialectical and cyclical modes of existence are central. The study is primarily a pedagogical reminder of, and a remedy for, the problems associated with the concept of hybridity for teachers and students of International Relations.
