Week 11

I found all the readings assigned for this week very interesting, but I was most struck by “The Colonialism of the Present”, and his framing of the ongoing settler colonialism in Canada. I was relatively unfamiliar with the current struggles of indigenous peoples in Canada, although I assumed they would be relatively similar to what Native Americans and Aboriginal Australians – to only cite a few – have been facing. There were indeed parallels to be drawn in the shocking instances of oppression committed by each settler state upon their indigenous population, such as between Canadian residential schools and the Australian “Stolen Generations”. This makes tackling such issues all the more important, as questions of colonial oppression and recognition are still relevant in many countries across the globe in spite of the supposedly post-colonial era we now live in.

I wasn’t at all familiar with Glenn Coulthard before reading this interview – even though he actually teaches here – but now that I have found out about him I am definitely going to try to read more of his work. His insistence that “indigenous land-based direct action is positioned in a very crucial and important place for radical social change” is very good to see in a context where indigenous struggles are often minimised, and much effort is put into removing them from any political context. Coulthard’s emphasis on using Marx’s analysis of the violence inherent in primitive accumulation is particularly interesting, and helps reinstate the importance of such struggles. His call to the political Left to consider present cases of colonial violence more seriously is also an important step that needs to be taken in order to achieve meaningful social change, and instances such as the PCR-RCP’s stance on the indigenous struggle in Canada are essential in that regard.

Coulthard’s use of Fanon’s theory of colonial misrecognition is also very insightful, although it’s pretty saddening that this concept has lost such little relevance nowadays, over 60 years later. Using Fanon as background, Stephen Harper’s official apology to the indigenous peoples of Canada certainly comes across as rather pathetic, and doesn’t even come close to addressing the full scope of the matter. It also makes Coulthard’s call for politically directed outrage and anger towards the state committing colonial violence seem like the only viable option left for indigenous peoples. Also, his argument that anger is too often “seen in a negative light, as being debilitating and pacifying and self-destructive” can definitely be linked with what Sara Ahmed writes in “Embodying diversity: problems and paradoxes for Black feminists”, as can the Canadian state’s inadequate apology with Ahmed ‘s description of neoliberal pacification. The way in which both texts describe the radical potential of anger is very insightful, and I’m hoping we’ll get to talk about it more in this week’s classes.