Eurocentrism, defined as the worldview that places Europe (and by extension, the West) at the center of history, culture, and progress, serving as the universal standard against which all other societies are measured, is indeed both the primary target and, paradoxically, a significant motive force for post-colonial political theory.

Eurocentrism as the Target: Post-colonial theory emerged precisely to critique and dismantle Eurocentrism. Its central aim is to expose how colonial power structures were not merely economic or political but also deeply epistemic and cultural. Eurocentrism, in this view, has:

1. Constructed a false universalism: It presented European experiences, values, and institutions (e.g., democracy, rationality, modernity) as universally applicable and superior, thereby marginalizing or denigrating non-Western knowledge systems, cultures, and political forms.
2. Legitimized colonial domination: By portraying colonized peoples as 'primitive,' 'irrational,' or 'undeveloped,' Eurocentrism provided a moral and intellectual justification for colonial rule and exploitation, framing it as a 'civilizing mission.'
3. Created 'the Other': It established a binary opposition between the 'civilized' West and the 'barbaric' or 'exotic' non-West, shaping identities and power relations in a hierarchical manner.
4. Perpetuated intellectual hegemony: Even after formal decolonization, Eurocentric frameworks continue to dominate academic disciplines, policy-making, and global discourse, influencing how the world is understood and governed.

Post-colonial theorists like Edward Said (with his concept of Orientalism), Gayatri Spivak, and Homi Bhabha meticulously deconstruct these Eurocentric narratives, revealing their biases, power dynamics, and the violence inherent in their universalizing claims. They seek to recover subaltern voices, re-center marginalized histories, and challenge the enduring legacies of colonialism.

Eurocentrism as the Motive Force: Despite being its primary target, Eurocentrism also acts as a powerful motive force for post-colonial theory in several ways:

1. Reactive nature: Post-colonial theory is, to a significant extent, a response to Eurocentrism. Its very existence and intellectual agenda are shaped by the need to counter, analyze, and overcome the pervasive influence of European thought and power. Without Eurocentrism, the specific questions and critiques of post-colonial theory would not have arisen in the same way.
2. Engagement with Western intellectual traditions: To effectively critique Eurocentrism, post-colonial theorists often engage deeply with Western philosophical, literary, and political traditions. They use tools and concepts developed within the West (e.g., Foucault's power/knowledge, Derrida's deconstruction, Gramsci's hegemony) to dismantle Eurocentric structures. This engagement, while critical, means that Eurocentrism remains a central point of reference, even if negatively.
3. Defining the field: The ongoing struggle against Eurocentric biases provides a continuous impetus and a clear intellectual project for post-colonial studies. The persistence of Eurocentric assumptions in global politics, economics, and culture ensures that the field remains relevant and necessary.
4. The 'post' in post-colonialism: The term 'post-colonial' itself implies a relationship to the colonial past, which was fundamentally Eurocentric. The theory is concerned with the aftermath and ongoing effects of this historical encounter, making Eurocentrism an inescapable historical and conceptual anchor.

In conclusion, post-colonial political theory is locked in a dialectical relationship with Eurocentrism. It is driven by the imperative to expose and dismantle Eurocentric biases, yet in doing so, it constantly engages with and is defined by the very object of its critique. This dynamic makes Eurocentrism not just an external adversary but also an internal, constitutive element that motivates and shapes the intellectual trajectory of post-colonial thought.