Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/2201473x.2023.2185939
J. Lahti, R. Kuokkanen, J. McIntyre, Magdalena Naum, Rebecca Weaver-Hightower
This is a statement of fresh starts and vibrancy. Taking up the editorship of an academic journal is arguably both a privilege and a responsibility. It calls for knowledge, energy and passion even. It allows a scholar to serve the profession, observe and scout for the latest exciting scholarship in a particular field, and network with scholars around the world. It garners an exceptional vantage point into the latest of scholarly trends and possibilities. But it also comes with expectations, a premise of delivering, of building and nurturing a community and advancing the reputation of your journal. In many ways serving as an editor is about taking care of the journal and its field. It is about encouraging all potential scholars to join in and contributing, especially those younger to the profession, but also the seasoned veterans. It is about providing a dynamic and safe environment for lively debates, varied opinions and different theoretical orientations and epistemologies. In the end, people matter, all those already working on settler colonial topics and themes, and those contemplating doing so in the future. Without the contributors, reviewers and readers there would be no Settler Colonial Studies. Taking on the editorship of this journal, we envision Settler Colonial Studies to develop further as a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary endeavor, attracting interest and submissions from multiple different academic disciplines, including, but not limited to, history, literature, Indigenous studies, areaand cultural studies, archeology, anthropology, environmental humanities, genocide studies and memory studies. We hope for engagements and entanglements. And we try to steer the journal toward exciting and more inclusive futures. Settler Colonial Studies navigates and addresses a fundamentally intersected and networked global reality, past and present, seeking to reflect and respond to it. It strives to be a global forum for nuanced and varied discussions, welcoming submissions from scholars regardless of their nationality, creed, race, ethnicity and gender. The articles in this issue reveal a vibrant field, of research operating on varying analytical scales from the local to the global. Demonstrating the geographical reach of settler colonialism, in this issue we track settler colonialism in the Middle-East, Northern Europe, South America, North America and Australia. We learn of infrastructures as sites of contest between empire and settlers in British Palestine before heading into more modern-day Israel/Palestine. There we have studies on labor and dispossession through incorporation as well as on the relationship of historical narratives and current activism. We also get to read about the use of language as a form of elimination in Chile and on the connections between immigrant material conditions and Indigenous dispossession in Canadian media. Then there is also an examination of settler colonial dynamics in the Swedish state’s relation t
{"title":"Editors’ note","authors":"J. Lahti, R. Kuokkanen, J. McIntyre, Magdalena Naum, Rebecca Weaver-Hightower","doi":"10.1080/2201473x.2023.2185939","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473x.2023.2185939","url":null,"abstract":"This is a statement of fresh starts and vibrancy. Taking up the editorship of an academic journal is arguably both a privilege and a responsibility. It calls for knowledge, energy and passion even. It allows a scholar to serve the profession, observe and scout for the latest exciting scholarship in a particular field, and network with scholars around the world. It garners an exceptional vantage point into the latest of scholarly trends and possibilities. But it also comes with expectations, a premise of delivering, of building and nurturing a community and advancing the reputation of your journal. In many ways serving as an editor is about taking care of the journal and its field. It is about encouraging all potential scholars to join in and contributing, especially those younger to the profession, but also the seasoned veterans. It is about providing a dynamic and safe environment for lively debates, varied opinions and different theoretical orientations and epistemologies. In the end, people matter, all those already working on settler colonial topics and themes, and those contemplating doing so in the future. Without the contributors, reviewers and readers there would be no Settler Colonial Studies. Taking on the editorship of this journal, we envision Settler Colonial Studies to develop further as a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary endeavor, attracting interest and submissions from multiple different academic disciplines, including, but not limited to, history, literature, Indigenous studies, areaand cultural studies, archeology, anthropology, environmental humanities, genocide studies and memory studies. We hope for engagements and entanglements. And we try to steer the journal toward exciting and more inclusive futures. Settler Colonial Studies navigates and addresses a fundamentally intersected and networked global reality, past and present, seeking to reflect and respond to it. It strives to be a global forum for nuanced and varied discussions, welcoming submissions from scholars regardless of their nationality, creed, race, ethnicity and gender. The articles in this issue reveal a vibrant field, of research operating on varying analytical scales from the local to the global. Demonstrating the geographical reach of settler colonialism, in this issue we track settler colonialism in the Middle-East, Northern Europe, South America, North America and Australia. We learn of infrastructures as sites of contest between empire and settlers in British Palestine before heading into more modern-day Israel/Palestine. There we have studies on labor and dispossession through incorporation as well as on the relationship of historical narratives and current activism. We also get to read about the use of language as a form of elimination in Chile and on the connections between immigrant material conditions and Indigenous dispossession in Canadian media. Then there is also an examination of settler colonial dynamics in the Swedish state’s relation t","PeriodicalId":46232,"journal":{"name":"Settler Colonial Studies","volume":"72 1","pages":"1 - 2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82981129","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-09DOI: 10.1080/2201473X.2022.2112426
Robert Flahive
ABSTRACT This paper frames Morocco as a settler state in order to map how the structural logic of settler colonialism persists through the transformation of the built environment in contemporary Casablanca. Rather than focus on commonly-referenced settler states, such as Israel or America, this paper analyzes Morocco, where formal decolonization occurred through the end of the French Protectorate 1956, but there has been an ongoing settler colonial project in Western Sahara since 1975. The logic of elimination of Indigenous populations and territorial expansion of the settler polity endure through urban planning, documentation of the built environment, and architectural preservation. I argue that the structural logic of settler colonialism was produced by the convergence of French military strategy of domination during the Protectorate era was adapted through forms of knowledge and institutions shaping urban space through architectural preservation in contemporary Casablanca. I map the production of knowledge by French academics, then show how this knowledge shaped the preservation agenda that reproduced the structural logic of settler colonialism. The entanglement of institutions, forms of knowledge, and the applications of that knowledge by preservationists highlights how the structural logic of settler colonialism adapts to the changing conditions for settler colonial theory.
{"title":"Settler colonialism within the settler state: remaking the past through the built environment in Casablanca*","authors":"Robert Flahive","doi":"10.1080/2201473X.2022.2112426","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2022.2112426","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper frames Morocco as a settler state in order to map how the structural logic of settler colonialism persists through the transformation of the built environment in contemporary Casablanca. Rather than focus on commonly-referenced settler states, such as Israel or America, this paper analyzes Morocco, where formal decolonization occurred through the end of the French Protectorate 1956, but there has been an ongoing settler colonial project in Western Sahara since 1975. The logic of elimination of Indigenous populations and territorial expansion of the settler polity endure through urban planning, documentation of the built environment, and architectural preservation. I argue that the structural logic of settler colonialism was produced by the convergence of French military strategy of domination during the Protectorate era was adapted through forms of knowledge and institutions shaping urban space through architectural preservation in contemporary Casablanca. I map the production of knowledge by French academics, then show how this knowledge shaped the preservation agenda that reproduced the structural logic of settler colonialism. The entanglement of institutions, forms of knowledge, and the applications of that knowledge by preservationists highlights how the structural logic of settler colonialism adapts to the changing conditions for settler colonial theory.","PeriodicalId":46232,"journal":{"name":"Settler Colonial Studies","volume":"24 1","pages":"305 - 324"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77289228","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-18DOI: 10.1080/2201473X.2022.2112427
Katherine Natanel
ABSTRACT What happens when we pay attention to the sensations of our research? Based on an image and encounter during fieldwork in West Jerusalem, this article traces how a feeling of discomfort both confirms and challenges what we (think we) know about settler colonialism in Palestine/Israel. Rather than dismissing the moments when narratives, objects and exchanges generate unease, I suggest that exploring this ‘data’ attunes us to how settlers navigate the complex and contradictory conditions of coloniality – how they create resources for living. Structuralist accounts of settler colonialism are not fully capable of engaging this texture, even as they might invoke or attempt to harness emotion through mechanisms including the logic of elimination, settler indigenisation and heteropatriarchy. While thinking with this existing theory, I ask scholars and activists to consider what exceeds our dominant frames, following how affects spill over, attach and circulate among settler subjects in ways that have material consequences. This uneasy approach entails letting things play out, accepting our own implication in power and taking theorisation seriously as an ethical practice. At the same time, it is profoundly future-facing, enabling us to better identify what must be done as we work toward decolonial futures.
{"title":"Affect, excess & settler colonialism in Palestine/Israel","authors":"Katherine Natanel","doi":"10.1080/2201473X.2022.2112427","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2022.2112427","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT What happens when we pay attention to the sensations of our research? Based on an image and encounter during fieldwork in West Jerusalem, this article traces how a feeling of discomfort both confirms and challenges what we (think we) know about settler colonialism in Palestine/Israel. Rather than dismissing the moments when narratives, objects and exchanges generate unease, I suggest that exploring this ‘data’ attunes us to how settlers navigate the complex and contradictory conditions of coloniality – how they create resources for living. Structuralist accounts of settler colonialism are not fully capable of engaging this texture, even as they might invoke or attempt to harness emotion through mechanisms including the logic of elimination, settler indigenisation and heteropatriarchy. While thinking with this existing theory, I ask scholars and activists to consider what exceeds our dominant frames, following how affects spill over, attach and circulate among settler subjects in ways that have material consequences. This uneasy approach entails letting things play out, accepting our own implication in power and taking theorisation seriously as an ethical practice. At the same time, it is profoundly future-facing, enabling us to better identify what must be done as we work toward decolonial futures.","PeriodicalId":46232,"journal":{"name":"Settler Colonial Studies","volume":"78 1","pages":"325 - 348"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77198645","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-04DOI: 10.1080/2201473X.2022.2091870
Jasmin Habib, Amir Locker-Biletzki
ABSTRACT Settler colonial projects are not only focused on the economy of a population and the formation of a settler state, they are also cultural undertakings whereby the settlers form their own settler culture. In this article, we explore the dynamics of Zionist settler culture from the point of view of its most radical critics, Jewish-Israeli Communists. We analyze the ways Zionist settler culture has been both absorbed and negated by BANKI (Young Israeli Communist League). In an analysis of musical practices, as well as the lyrics of Israeli pseudo-folk songs, known colloquially as SLI (Songs of the Land of Israel), we discuss how BANKI members created their own Israeli national non-Zionist singing culture, and formed a singing culture that was both part of, as well as distinct from, the Socialist-Zionist youth movements. In this way, we explore how, from the 1920s through the 1960s, Zionist settler-colonial culture was informed as well as co-created by Jewish-Israeli Communist youth.
移民殖民项目不仅关注人口的经济和移民国家的形成，而且是移民形成自己的移民文化的文化事业。在这篇文章中，我们从犹太复国主义定居者文化最激进的批评者——犹太-以色列共产党人的角度，探讨了犹太复国主义定居者文化的动态。本文分析了以色列共青团对犹太复国主义定居者文化的吸收与否定。在对音乐实践以及以色列伪民谣(俗称SLI, songs of the Land of Israel)歌词的分析中，我们讨论了BANKI成员如何创造自己的以色列民族非犹太复国主义歌唱文化，并形成了一种既属于社会主义犹太复国主义青年运动的一部分，又与之截然不同的歌唱文化。通过这种方式，我们探索了从20世纪20年代到60年代，犹太复国主义定居者-殖民文化是如何被犹太-以色列共产主义青年告知并共同创造的。
{"title":"Shirat hano’ar h’kommunisti: exploring the cultural dynamics and influence in the songs of Israeli-Jewish Communist youth in Palestine/Israel","authors":"Jasmin Habib, Amir Locker-Biletzki","doi":"10.1080/2201473X.2022.2091870","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2022.2091870","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Settler colonial projects are not only focused on the economy of a population and the formation of a settler state, they are also cultural undertakings whereby the settlers form their own settler culture. In this article, we explore the dynamics of Zionist settler culture from the point of view of its most radical critics, Jewish-Israeli Communists. We analyze the ways Zionist settler culture has been both absorbed and negated by BANKI (Young Israeli Communist League). In an analysis of musical practices, as well as the lyrics of Israeli pseudo-folk songs, known colloquially as SLI (Songs of the Land of Israel), we discuss how BANKI members created their own Israeli national non-Zionist singing culture, and formed a singing culture that was both part of, as well as distinct from, the Socialist-Zionist youth movements. In this way, we explore how, from the 1920s through the 1960s, Zionist settler-colonial culture was informed as well as co-created by Jewish-Israeli Communist youth.","PeriodicalId":46232,"journal":{"name":"Settler Colonial Studies","volume":"76 1","pages":"284 - 302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83859297","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-02DOI: 10.1080/2201473X.2022.2077900
Heather L. Elliott, M. Mulrennan, A. Cuerrier
ABSTRACT Despite the disproportionate food injustice experienced by Indigenous Peoples, Black people and people of color, food movements have been dominated by white settlers who have had limited success in addressing this injustice. Settler colonialism is increasingly recognized as a root cause of food insecurity for Indigenous Peoples on Turtle Island; it is also a key contributor to food insecurity experienced by Black people and people of color. The racialized exploitation of land and labor central to both settler colonialism and racial capitalism continue to form the backbone of the Canadian food system today, elucidating the important role food movements hold in the struggle for decolonization and racial justice. In this paper we present a case study of the (im)possibilities of white/settlers working towards Indigenous Food Sovereignty and food justice. By analyzing protests linked to Food Secure Canada’s 2018 Assembly, we find that an implicit reliance on representation may have limited the organization’s capacity for change. We propose that unsettling (un)learning, organizational transformation, and participation in broader anticolonial/anticapitalist struggle – what we are calling decolonial prefiguration – offers a more constructive path to decolonized futures that support food sovereignty and justice for all.
{"title":"‘We have a lot of (un)learning to do’: whiteness and decolonial prefiguration in a food movement organization","authors":"Heather L. Elliott, M. Mulrennan, A. Cuerrier","doi":"10.1080/2201473X.2022.2077900","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2022.2077900","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Despite the disproportionate food injustice experienced by Indigenous Peoples, Black people and people of color, food movements have been dominated by white settlers who have had limited success in addressing this injustice. Settler colonialism is increasingly recognized as a root cause of food insecurity for Indigenous Peoples on Turtle Island; it is also a key contributor to food insecurity experienced by Black people and people of color. The racialized exploitation of land and labor central to both settler colonialism and racial capitalism continue to form the backbone of the Canadian food system today, elucidating the important role food movements hold in the struggle for decolonization and racial justice. In this paper we present a case study of the (im)possibilities of white/settlers working towards Indigenous Food Sovereignty and food justice. By analyzing protests linked to Food Secure Canada’s 2018 Assembly, we find that an implicit reliance on representation may have limited the organization’s capacity for change. We propose that unsettling (un)learning, organizational transformation, and participation in broader anticolonial/anticapitalist struggle – what we are calling decolonial prefiguration – offers a more constructive path to decolonized futures that support food sovereignty and justice for all.","PeriodicalId":46232,"journal":{"name":"Settler Colonial Studies","volume":"42 1","pages":"194 - 218"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86003354","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-01DOI: 10.1080/2201473X.2022.2077901
Keavy Martin
ABSTRACT Indigenous oral histories say that Treaty No. 6 (1876) was not only a legal transaction but rather a ceremony of adoption whereby incoming settler peoples became relatives. With Indigenous theories of relationality now informing many disciplines, how do white settler peoples take up the framework of kinship without using it only as a metaphor—and thereby as yet another tool of settler-colonial displacement? This essay examines this risk by considering the figurative use of kinship terms by Commissioner Alexander Morris at the negotiations for Treaty No. 6, in what is now Saskatchewan, Canada. Morris’s reliance on a borrowed vocabulary of kinship was, like his participation in the ceremony of the sacred pipestem, an invocation of relationality as a rhetorical device aimed at securing the ‘surrender’ of the lands. While metaphor is a figure that can mislead, coerce, or yoke, however, it can also make relationships, make things akin. In light of the continued relevance of the Indigenous legal framework known as treaty, this discussion takes up the possibility of kinship metaphors as not only figurative but also as literal, binding, and central to the possibility of good relations in the prairies today.
{"title":"Kinship is not a metaphor","authors":"Keavy Martin","doi":"10.1080/2201473X.2022.2077901","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2022.2077901","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Indigenous oral histories say that Treaty No. 6 (1876) was not only a legal transaction but rather a ceremony of adoption whereby incoming settler peoples became relatives. With Indigenous theories of relationality now informing many disciplines, how do white settler peoples take up the framework of kinship without using it only as a metaphor—and thereby as yet another tool of settler-colonial displacement? This essay examines this risk by considering the figurative use of kinship terms by Commissioner Alexander Morris at the negotiations for Treaty No. 6, in what is now Saskatchewan, Canada. Morris’s reliance on a borrowed vocabulary of kinship was, like his participation in the ceremony of the sacred pipestem, an invocation of relationality as a rhetorical device aimed at securing the ‘surrender’ of the lands. While metaphor is a figure that can mislead, coerce, or yoke, however, it can also make relationships, make things akin. In light of the continued relevance of the Indigenous legal framework known as treaty, this discussion takes up the possibility of kinship metaphors as not only figurative but also as literal, binding, and central to the possibility of good relations in the prairies today.","PeriodicalId":46232,"journal":{"name":"Settler Colonial Studies","volume":"19 1","pages":"219 - 240"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77919042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-24DOI: 10.1080/2201473X.2022.2078468
Matt Henderson
ABSTRACT This paper analyses The Manitoba Teacher, the principal publication of the Manitoba Teachers’ Society, since its first publication in 1919. The analysis focuses on what has changed and what has remained the same in terms of how Indigenous learners have been perceived by settler educators over a century. This paper argues that over the century Indigenous people in Manitoba have been prohibited from the conception, design, and management of their own education. Coupled with this, there has always existed an intense desire on the part of settlers to provide a system of education with a variety of aims stemming from eradication, integration, and good intentions. The tension between the prohibition and intent to provide a colonial education has also been shadowed by moments and movements of resistance, resurgence, and reclamation. Indigenous communities began to counter the cultural erasure in The Manitoba Teacher by the 1970s. There are hints and glimpses of Indigenous communities and allies trying to wake teachers up and advocating for Indigenous control of education in the name of the inclusion of land, language, and culture in schools.
{"title":"Indigenous learners in the Manitoba Teacher, 1919–2019","authors":"Matt Henderson","doi":"10.1080/2201473X.2022.2078468","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2022.2078468","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper analyses The Manitoba Teacher, the principal publication of the Manitoba Teachers’ Society, since its first publication in 1919. The analysis focuses on what has changed and what has remained the same in terms of how Indigenous learners have been perceived by settler educators over a century. This paper argues that over the century Indigenous people in Manitoba have been prohibited from the conception, design, and management of their own education. Coupled with this, there has always existed an intense desire on the part of settlers to provide a system of education with a variety of aims stemming from eradication, integration, and good intentions. The tension between the prohibition and intent to provide a colonial education has also been shadowed by moments and movements of resistance, resurgence, and reclamation. Indigenous communities began to counter the cultural erasure in The Manitoba Teacher by the 1970s. There are hints and glimpses of Indigenous communities and allies trying to wake teachers up and advocating for Indigenous control of education in the name of the inclusion of land, language, and culture in schools.","PeriodicalId":46232,"journal":{"name":"Settler Colonial Studies","volume":"37 1","pages":"266 - 283"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73776610","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-17DOI: 10.1080/2201473X.2022.2064148
Trycia Bazinet
ABSTRACT The Val d'Or crisis began in 2015 with local Indigenous women naming the violence they faced at the hands of police officers in a news report, which culminated in 37 documented cases yet no criminal charges. In response to the outcry, the provincial ‘Viens Commission: Listening, Reconciliation and Progress' was launched in 2016. The mandate of the commission was to determine if Indigenous people faced discrimination in Quebec's public services. This paper reviews the terms and limits of this commission when it is understood as a discursive production of modern liberal settler-colonial nations. My analysis proposes that the commission, unwittingly or not, is bound by the conditions of existence of ongoing settler-colonization, that is the imperative of land access. The issue of discrimination against Indigenous people can then be discussed and ‘resolved' as disconnected from issues of land sovereignty. As per Goeman’s conception of scales of spatial injustices, it mostly leaves the alienation between the interconnected scales targeted by settler-colonial violence (such as body and land) unchanged. By paying attention to the way violence is presented and managed, I discuss how the commission may be oriented by larger conditions interested in re-settling the present and in veiling land sovereignty questions.
{"title":"Tracing understanding of sovereignty and settler-colonial violence in the Quebec’s Viens Commission (2016–2019)","authors":"Trycia Bazinet","doi":"10.1080/2201473X.2022.2064148","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2022.2064148","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Val d'Or crisis began in 2015 with local Indigenous women naming the violence they faced at the hands of police officers in a news report, which culminated in 37 documented cases yet no criminal charges. In response to the outcry, the provincial ‘Viens Commission: Listening, Reconciliation and Progress' was launched in 2016. The mandate of the commission was to determine if Indigenous people faced discrimination in Quebec's public services. This paper reviews the terms and limits of this commission when it is understood as a discursive production of modern liberal settler-colonial nations. My analysis proposes that the commission, unwittingly or not, is bound by the conditions of existence of ongoing settler-colonization, that is the imperative of land access. The issue of discrimination against Indigenous people can then be discussed and ‘resolved' as disconnected from issues of land sovereignty. As per Goeman’s conception of scales of spatial injustices, it mostly leaves the alienation between the interconnected scales targeted by settler-colonial violence (such as body and land) unchanged. By paying attention to the way violence is presented and managed, I discuss how the commission may be oriented by larger conditions interested in re-settling the present and in veiling land sovereignty questions.","PeriodicalId":46232,"journal":{"name":"Settler Colonial Studies","volume":"96 1","pages":"174 - 193"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83375318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-21DOI: 10.1080/2201473X.2022.2038483
Yara Sa’di-Ibraheem, Tovi Fenster
ABSTRACT This article analyzes a spontaneous encounter between a Palestinian refugee—stepping over the threshold of her childhood home for the first time in seventy years, following its expropriation—and the current Israeli Jewish owner. This unusual encounter led us to propose a new understanding of dispossession based on both its personal (symbolic–emotional) and collective (economic–political) meanings. The former dimension is expressed in the Palestinians’ acts of remembering and visiting their pre-1948 homes, not only as a reflection of the past and a nostalgic impulse, but also as a way of shaping, intervening in, and influencing the present. The latter, collective meaning, explores the multiplicity of dispossession processes in a settler-colonial society in which the capitalist mode of production already existed before the settlers arrived. This article focuses on one particular form of dispossession through a micro-geographical study of one house in Jerusalem that was once a Palestinian family home. We also offer an expanded interpretation of dispossession as personal and collective by analyzing three modes of experience relating to dispossessed property: settler-colonial property, stolen property, and property as nativeness.
{"title":"Settler-colonial dispossession in West Jerusalem: between the personal and the collective","authors":"Yara Sa’di-Ibraheem, Tovi Fenster","doi":"10.1080/2201473X.2022.2038483","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2022.2038483","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article analyzes a spontaneous encounter between a Palestinian refugee—stepping over the threshold of her childhood home for the first time in seventy years, following its expropriation—and the current Israeli Jewish owner. This unusual encounter led us to propose a new understanding of dispossession based on both its personal (symbolic–emotional) and collective (economic–political) meanings. The former dimension is expressed in the Palestinians’ acts of remembering and visiting their pre-1948 homes, not only as a reflection of the past and a nostalgic impulse, but also as a way of shaping, intervening in, and influencing the present. The latter, collective meaning, explores the multiplicity of dispossession processes in a settler-colonial society in which the capitalist mode of production already existed before the settlers arrived. This article focuses on one particular form of dispossession through a micro-geographical study of one house in Jerusalem that was once a Palestinian family home. We also offer an expanded interpretation of dispossession as personal and collective by analyzing three modes of experience relating to dispossessed property: settler-colonial property, stolen property, and property as nativeness.","PeriodicalId":46232,"journal":{"name":"Settler Colonial Studies","volume":"14 1","pages":"159 - 173"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79311843","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-02-10DOI: 10.1080/2201473X.2022.2039506
Tim Calabria
ABSTRACT Drawing from Kingsley Fairbridge's writings, this article explores the first Fairbridge Farm School from its establishment in 1913 until Fairbridge's death in 1924. Fairbridge's scheme sought to turn poor, urban British children into agriculturists who would occupy contested land in the colonies. Fairbridge attempted to instil the children with ‘love of the land’ by determining their conditions of existence in quite complete ways. I draw from the history and philosophy of childhood to understand how Fairbridge – much like A O Neville – targeted childhood as a distinctive site of ideological intervention. At his first farm school, Fairbridge sought to exclude the person that each child was going to become. But this explicit repression of existing urban identities often failed; most of the first thirty-five farm school alumni elected to live in Australian cities. Just one member of that group ran a successful farm, and only one other worked as a farm hand into middle age. Ultimately, though, the children's escape from the life that Fairbridge attempted to impose on them did not mean escaping the settler colonial structure; most remained in Australia throughout their lives. Nonetheless, many felt the loss of family and the person they might have been.
本文从金斯莱·费尔布里奇的著作中，探讨了第一所费尔布里奇农场学校从1913年成立到1924年费尔布里奇去世。费尔布里奇的计划旨在将贫穷的英国城市儿童转变为农民，他们将占据殖民地有争议的土地。费尔布里奇试图通过以相当完整的方式确定孩子们的生存条件，向他们灌输“对土地的热爱”。我从童年的历史和哲学中汲取灵感，来理解费尔布里奇是如何像A O Neville一样，将童年作为意识形态干预的独特场所的。在他的第一所农场学校，费尔布里奇试图排除每个孩子将要成为的人。但这种对现有城市身份的明确压制往往失败;首批35名农业学校校友中的大多数选择在澳大利亚的城市生活。该小组中只有一个成员经营着一家成功的农场，另外只有一个人在农场工作到中年。然而，最终，孩子们逃离费尔布里奇试图强加给他们的生活并不意味着逃离移民殖民结构;大多数人一生都留在了澳大利亚。尽管如此，许多人还是感到失去了家人，失去了曾经的自己。
{"title":"Agents of settler colonialism?: childhood, time and exclusion in the fairbridge scheme, 1913–1924","authors":"Tim Calabria","doi":"10.1080/2201473X.2022.2039506","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2201473X.2022.2039506","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Drawing from Kingsley Fairbridge's writings, this article explores the first Fairbridge Farm School from its establishment in 1913 until Fairbridge's death in 1924. Fairbridge's scheme sought to turn poor, urban British children into agriculturists who would occupy contested land in the colonies. Fairbridge attempted to instil the children with ‘love of the land’ by determining their conditions of existence in quite complete ways. I draw from the history and philosophy of childhood to understand how Fairbridge – much like A O Neville – targeted childhood as a distinctive site of ideological intervention. At his first farm school, Fairbridge sought to exclude the person that each child was going to become. But this explicit repression of existing urban identities often failed; most of the first thirty-five farm school alumni elected to live in Australian cities. Just one member of that group ran a successful farm, and only one other worked as a farm hand into middle age. Ultimately, though, the children's escape from the life that Fairbridge attempted to impose on them did not mean escaping the settler colonial structure; most remained in Australia throughout their lives. Nonetheless, many felt the loss of family and the person they might have been.","PeriodicalId":46232,"journal":{"name":"Settler Colonial Studies","volume":"14 1","pages":"133 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79922026","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：