Hertz discusses "Decolonization is Not a Metaphor" by Tuck & Yan

[@aleixbrowne2644]

THANK GOD, this paper was an absolute horror show to interpret....... thankyou

[@stevenbourget]

Very helpful. Thank you. Reading that was brutal.

[@camillapenzo]

I see that in your notes you write "decolonialization" instead of "decolonization". I had not yet come across writings making that difference in English. What do you mean with it and would you have some references? thank you and thanks for the explanation on the paper too!

[@balkanwitch5747]

he wrote that wrong, he was meant to write decolonization

[@pretend2twinkie472]

Great video thankyou!

[@joshjohnsen7995]

Great breakdown

[@timbooth8226]

Wonderful video--thank you!

[@anderspape88]

thanks!!

[@MrSickNoodle]

My question is what would genuine decolonization in America mean for the average settler, be they white, black or what ever? I've heard a lot of different answers, some range from really extreme things like deportation of every none indigenous person back to the "ancestral homelands", which is basically just ethno statism and also super unrealistic and dangerous, to more positive things like a redistribution of land that benefits everyone in the working classes, or an end of private property in the Marxist or Proudhonist sense. I'm also not sure how you can simultaneously repatriate land (which implies ownership) while simultaneously abolishing private property. Which is it? Also the "Indian grandmother" myth was something I was taught growing up, turned out to not be true at all. Its pretty messed up how common it is.

[@quentins8921]

Hi! I think the answer to your question about how to rapatriate land and at the same time abolish private property is very simple on the paper but would probably be difficult to effectively realize. It is easy on the paper, because in the course of history we have many examples of concrete commonalization of lands in many diffrent contexts. I don't know about the USA but basically you declare by law that such land is a common land, and you put legal mechanisms that protect the Common, and impeach any private interest to make something else of it. If a portion of land comes to be under the sovereignty of an Indigenous community, it doesn't mean that it is "privatized". Instead, the local community decides to manage collectively the land and makes sure that no private interest comes in play. We have forgotten today that until 19th century many places in the world were administered in such a way, and that the colonial capitalism made everything to destroy any common place. Today you can find many reflexions on the Commons, as a way of getting out of capitalism. Concretely in the US, to provide the legal frame to the refusal of private property would certainly be very difficult because Law is so much entangled with private interests. But yes, if you take a look at history you will find many examples of common lands managed by local communities, that can inspire the present-day struggle against colonialism

[@MrSickNoodle]

@@quentins8921 that makes sense, common land ownership is what I personally aspire to. What about the people who say decolonization is literally sending everyone back go their "ancestral homelands", is that just an extremist opinion?

[@quentins8921]

@@MrSickNoodle mmm honestly, I don't know about that question. I would be extremely carefull in using the term "extremist" because such demand comes from people trying to find solutions to exit colonialism. I have never read anything about this idea, which doesnt mean that nobody says that but yes, I think it is quite unrealistic. But I dont think it is the question. Taking this question seriously would imply an analysis of something that has not happened yet, so personaly instead of thinking about that I would suggest to achieve the recognition of disputed lands and territories, which is far from what we have in the current situation

[@leora_in_london]

@@MrSickNoodle The problem with sending people back to their "ancestral homelands" is that no one is the result of just one ancestry, so where exactly would people go back to? I think the important part of this essay is to refocus what "decolonization" actually means, since it has been coopted by neo-liberalism as another stand in term for "diversity".

[@MrSickNoodle]

@@leora_in_londonNo I totally agree with the fact that you cant sent people back to their ancestral homelands. There are around a billion non indigenous people in north and south America and most of us are not any "pure race". Even as a "white person" I'm German, Norwegian, Irish, Hebrew and probably things I dont know about. Hell my step brother recently found out hes part middle Eastern, so who knows where my ancestors are actually from. I'm international by default, I have no national homeland so cant go back to something I never had in the first place. So that's where my apprehension with portions of the decolonization movement come from. I can never get a straight answer about what decolonization means. Some people say it means getting rid of all non indigenous people, which to me is grossly authoritarian, while others say it means abolishing private property and the state or at least the colonial state, wether they want to replace it with a new state depends on the political tendency. So I would consider myself on board with the type of decolonization that advocates land redistribution or property abolition, but the type of decolonization that advocates "sending colonizers back to their homelands" seems like ethno statism to me. In fact I've seem neo nazis and those type of decolonization advocates bro out about how "diversity is the enemy of all races" and creepy stuff like that. Which I'm not sure people are aware of that issue or not. Not that this type of fascist creep is necessarily unique to anti colonialism, there are 3rd positionists everywhere in the corners I suppose.

[@jacoblove7576]

lad its spelled decolonisation not decolonialisation

[@kenelliott6897]

This is grossly incorrect. In Canada, Natives accepted the King/Queen as their protectors/managers.