opposition to coloniality, even in the most ‘benign’ of research and policy areas, like international aid and humanitarianism. Coloniality can be understood as the perpetuation of colonial systems and technologies of domination into the present. As discussed by scholars such as Quijano, Grosfoguel, Dussel and Ndlovu-Gatsheni, the concept of decoloniality encourages systemic and historical analysis of the organised (re)production of injustice and mass human suffering. Formal colonialism (which arguably existed from 1492 to the 1960s) and transatlantic
. Gutiérrez-Rodríguez , E. ( 2010 ), Migration, Domestic Work and Affect: A Decolonial Approach on Value and the Feminization of Labor ( New York and London : Routledge ). Hackl , A. (ed.) and ILO ( 2021 ), Digital Refugee Livelihoods and Decent Work: Towards Inclusion in a Fairer Digital
. and Björkdahl , A. ( 2015 ), ‘ The “Field” in the Age of Intervention: Power, Legitimacy, and Authority Versus the “Local” ’, Millennium , 44 : 1 , 23 – 44 . Rutazibwa , O. U. ( 2019 ), ‘ What’s There to Mourn? Decolonial Reflections on (the End of
beyond borders. Yet, UNHCR-endorsed corporate and celebrity humanitarians are located within immense privilege and power, as well as being immersed in the colonial, gendered and capitalist logics of humanitarianism, rather than being wedded to the transformation of the global order and decoloniality ( Bergman Rosamond, 2015 , 2016 ). Directly relevant is also the contention that humanitarian actors, many of whom are located within a neoliberal feminist logic
Building on analyses of the relationship between race, aesthetics and politics, the volume elaborates on the epistemological possibilities arising from collaborative and decolonial methodologies at the intersection of ethnography, art, performance and the urban space. It moves from practice-based and collaborative research with young Mapuche and mestizo artists and activists in Santiago (Chile), drawing together a range of different materials: from artworks to theatre and performance; from graphics to audio and visual materials. An edited collection, the book is constructed by shifting between different authorships and changing perspectives from the individual to the collective. This approach, while to a certain extent within the classical structure of editors/authors, plays with the roles of researcher/research participant, highlighting the ambiguities, frictions and exchanges involved in this relationship. Elaborating on indigenous knowledge production, the book thus addresses the possibility of disrupting the social and material landscape of the (post)colonial city by articulating meanings through artistic and performative representations. As such, the essays contained in the book put forward alternative imaginations constructed through an aesthetic defined by the Mapuche concept of champurria (‘mixed’): a particular way of knowing and engaging with reality, and ultimately an active process of home- and self-making beyond the spatialities usually assigned to colonised bodies and subjects. Actively engaging with current debates through collective writing by indigenous people raising questions in terms of decolonisation, the book stands as both an academic and a political project, interrogating the relationship between activism and academia, and issues of representation, authorship and knowledge production.
challenge and disrupt codes of intimacy, family and domestication which animate the exclusion of people racialised as non-white from humanity. The three strategies and forms of struggle I expand upon are: 1) inversions, the inverting of the colonial gaze and its patterns of seeing against itself – this can be through forms of counter-surveillance or through practices of visual empowerment; 2) escape – that is, modes of becoming invisible and refusing to work within dominant ways of seeing; and lastly, 3) decolonial aesthesis, a political and ethical orientation used both
Bordering intimacy is a study of how borders and dominant forms of intimacy, such as family, are central to the governance of postcolonial states such as Britain. The book explores the connected history between contemporary border regimes and the policing of family with the role of borders under European and British empires. Building upon postcolonial, decolonial and black feminist theory, the investigation centres on how colonial bordering is remade in contemporary Britain through appeals to protect, sustain and make family life. Not only was family central to the making of colonial racism but claims to family continue to remake, shore up but also hide the organisation of racialised violence in liberal states. Drawing on historical investigations, the book investigates the continuity of colonial rule in numerous areas of contemporary government – family visa regimes, the policing of sham marriages, counterterror strategies, deprivation of citizenship, policing tactics, integration policy. In doing this, the book re-theorises how we think of the connection between liberal government, race, family, borders and empire. In using Britain as a case, this opens up further insights into the international/global circulations of liberal empire and its relationship to violence.
populations, I argue that such an approach still underdevelops the role that race, colonialism and mobility played in the emergence of modern liberal rule. In drawing upon the work of decolonial and postcolonial and black feminist scholars (Spillers 1987; McClintock 1995; Povinelli 2006; Lugones 2011), this provides a more historically nuanced account of the role of that ‘family’ has had in creating and sustaining colonial hierarchies of personhood – that is to say the categorisation of people and spaces into the human/not-quite/non-human (Weheliye 2014). I tie this
intersect with issues related to the politics of knowledge and decolonisation, as well as to the question of social inequality as previously addressed in works such as those of Vine Deloria, Diane Lewis, and William Willis, among others (see Kennemore, Postero 2020 ). Decolonial theorists have called for the ‘decentering’ of the academic project and ‘border thinking’ (Gloria Anzaldúa 1987 ; Mignolo 2002 ). It has been noted how the colonial construction of the relationship knower/known has restrained any shared
fantasy of eternal memory through its slow erasure” ( 2019 : 254). With these earlier discussions in both primary and secondary scholarship in mind, what differentiates the contemporary entropic monumentality I want to get to here is its clear imbrication with (undoing) coloniality associated with monuments in Italy as exertions of power. This form of entropic monumentality is inclined to decolonial fluidity (as opposed to imperial “openings”) and flows of shared terrain (Mignolo, 2018 : 135–42). 20