Abstract Our goal in this article is to remind readers what is unsettling about decolonization. Decolonization brings about the repatriation of Indigenous land and life; it is not a metaphor for other things we want to do to improve our societies and schools. The easy adoption of decolonizing discourse by educational advocacy and scholarship, evidenced by the increasing number of calls to “decolonize our schools,” or use “decolonizing methods,” or,“decolonize student thinking”, turns decolonization into a metaphor.

Issue 35: Decolonizing Art Institutions
Edited by Ronald Kolb & Dorothee Richter
www.on-curating.org/issue-35.html

With contributions by Sabih Ahmed, Marie-Laure Allain Bonilla, Binna Choi, Eyal Danon, Claire Farago, Yolande van der Heide, Nkule Mabaso, Same Mdluli, Shaheen Merali, Ivan Muñiz-Reed, Shwetal Patel, Rohit Jain, Raqs Media Collective, Dorothee Richter, Sophie Vögele and Philippe Saner, Woon Tien Wei, Sophie J Williamson, Claire Wintle, Michelle Wong

Oncurating Issue 35 compiles the outcome of the symposium at the Kunstmuseum Basel and a summer academy at the Zurich University of the Arts. The symposium “De-colonizing Art Institutions” took place at Kunstmuseum Basel, June 21 and 22, 2017, with the speakers Sabih Ahmed (Asia Art Archive), Jeebesh Bagchi (Raqs Media Collective), Binna Choi (Casco), Eyal Danon (Holon Digital Art Archive), Kadiatou Diallo (SPARCK), Same Sizakele Mdluli (Lecturer, Wits University), Rohit Jain (ISEK, Uni Zürich), Shwetal A. Patel (Kochi-Muziris Biennale), Dorothee Richter (Postgraduate Programme in Curating, ZHdK) and Søren Grammel (Kunstmuseum Basel).
You will find contributions by the guests of the symposium and additional articles by scholars and practitioners connected to this topic.

The symposium was accompanied by a Summer Academy in Zurich held by the Postgraduate Programme in Curating, Continuing Education, Zurich University of the Arts from 13–24 June and an exhibition with the same name at the Oncurating Project Space in Zurich. The outcome of this exhibition is published in Issue 34.

Reservados los derechos para todos los países. Ninguna parte de la publicación incluido el diseño de cubierta, puede ser reproducido, almacenado o transmitido de ninguna forma, ni por ningún medio, sea este electrónico, químico, mecánico, electroóptico, grabación, fotocopia o cualquier otro, sin la previa autorización escrita por parte de la editorial. Queda hecho el depósito que marca la ley 11.723 impreso en la Argentina -Printed in Argentina INDICE prEfaCIo 7 Walter Mignolo I. págINas prElImINalEs 10 La perspectiva de la colonialidad del poder Rita Laura Segato II. aNÍBal QUIJaNo. TEXTos DE fUNDaCIÓN 43 ¿Sobrevivirá América Latina? 45 Colonialidad y modernidad-racionalidad 58 La americanidad como concepto o América en el mundo moderno-colonial 69 "Raza", "etnia" y "nación" en Mariategui: cuestiones abiertas 81 ¡Qué tal raza! 98 Colonialidad del poder, eurocentrismo y América Latina 107 III. a maNEra DE CIErrE

Employing the tools of postcolonial studies, this paper examines the manner in which the legacy of colonialism continues to influence the analysis of the Quran in the Euro-American academy. While Muslim lands are no longer directly colonized, intellectual colonialism continues to prevail in the privileging of Eurocentric systems of knowledge production to the detriment and even exclusion of modes of analysis that developed in the Islamic world for over a thousand years. This form of intellectual hegemony results in multifaceted epistemological reductionism that denies efficacy to the analytical tools developed by the classical Islamic tradition. The presumed intellectual superiority of Euro-American analytical modes has become a constitutive and persistent feature of Quranic Studies, influencing all aspects of the field. Its persistence prevents some scholars from encountering, let alone employing, the analytical tools of the classical Islamic tradition and presents obstacles to a broader discourse in the international community of Quranic Studies scholars. Acknowledging the obstacles to which the coloniality of knowledge has given rise in Quranic Studies can help us to develop more inclusive approaches in which multiple modes of analysis are incorporated and scholars from variegated intellectual backgrounds can build a more transnational field of Quranic Studies.

This article examines the politics of knowledge production in the field of Islamic Studies, including Islamic Legal Studies, in the context of the Qur’an and Islamic law. It thinks broadly and freshly about Islamic Studies, categorizing it anew, by considering the study of the Qur’an as it relates to three forms of Islamic Studies: White Supremacist Islamic
Studies (WhiSIS), Patriarchal Islamic Legal Studies (PILS), and Intersectional Islamic Studies (IIS). The article examines the fundamental assumptions of WhiSIS and PILS, uncovering their operational logics, before discussing the theoretical framework that underlies IIS’ approach to Islamic Studies. It analyzes the critiques that WhiSIS and PILS
level against IIS, and the challenges that IIS poses for both WhiSIS and PILS. It concludes by considering the role of IIS in the future of Islamic Studies.

Background: The colonial origins of schooling and the implications these
origins have on leadership is missing from educational leadership literature. Indeed little has been published on decolonizing and indigenous ways of leading schools. Purpose: In this article, we synthesize the literature on indigenous, decolonizing education leadership values and practices across national and international spaces that have been informed to various degrees by colonial models of schooling. Methodology: Through a review of the research and keywords including colonialism, educational leadership, indigenous communities, and decolonization, we identify two overarching themes. Findings: First, we found that the literature revealed a critique of the way in which Westernized Eurocentric schooling serves as a tool of imperialism, colonization, and control in the education of Indigenous peoples. Second, we discovered that the literature provided unique, but overlapping worldviews that situate the values and approaches enacted by Indigenous leaders throughout the globe. Within this second theme, we identify five strands of an Indigenous, Decolonizing School Leadership (IDSL) framework that can contribute to the development and reflection of school leadership scholars and practitioners. Specifically, we found that the five consistent and identifiable strands across IDSL include prioritizing Indigenous ancestral knowledge, enacting self-reflection and self-determination, connecting with and empowering the community, altruism, and spirituality as expressed through servant leadership, and inclusive communication practices.
Conclusion: Based on the identified worldviews and values, we conclude by offering insights on the structure and policy of post-colonial schooling, as well as implications for the theory, research and practice needed to reclaim the co-opted contributions of Indigenous leaders in ways that decenter Western colonial approaches to leadership.

Mediante este artículo cuestiono el diseño industrial como profesión que soporta el patrón civilizatorio moderno-capitalista, cuyas nocivas repercusiones son planetarias a comienzos del siglo XXI. Ante ello, planteo la posible generación de alternativas convivenciales a la civilización industrial orientada al desarrollo, a partir de equivalentes del diseño surgidos de tradiciones diferentes a la versión occidental dominante. Para ilustrarlo, examinp el potencial reparador que entrañan los resurgimientos de formas de interacción con el mundo, siempre presentes, pero ignoradas por proceder de lugares secundarios (sures) en las cartografías geográficas y epistemológicas de quienes en ámbitos hegemónicos clasifican la producción de realidades.
Palabras clave: resurgimientos, diseño, sur, convivencialidad, sumak kawsay, mitakuye oyasin

Current debates about the Anthropocene have sparked renewed interest in the relationship between ecology, technology, and coloniality. How do humans relate to one another, to the living environment, and to their material or technological artifacts; and how are these relations structured by coloniality, defined not only as a material process of appropriation and subjugation, but also as an exclusionary hierarchy of knowing and being that still pervades contemporary life? While these questions have of course received attention in decolonial theory, they have also captured the interest of scholars who self-identify with the field of political ecology. However, it can be argued that political ecology still primarily adheres to research practices and paradigms that have been developed in the West, regardless of its diversity and dynamism as a field of research. It is therefore suggested that a rapprochement between decolonial theory and political ecology can open up new perspectives on current debates that are emerging around the concept of the Anthropocene. In particular, the article takes the recent interest in the ontological implications of the Anthropocene as a point of departure to bring the decolonial notion of 'border thinking' into a conversation with the so-called 'new materialism' in political ecology. While both approaches are not necessarily opposed to values grounded in rationality, they can be seen as attempts to rethink ontological divisions such as human/nature or subject/object based on 'enchanted' ways of knowing and being-in-the-world. Yet, although enchantment has the potential to counter inherently colonial practices of appropriation, commodification and objectification, it is argued that keeping a moderately critical distance to enchanted narratives is still recommended, not because of the alleged naïveté of such narratives, but rather because enchantments may also function as and through technologies of power.

Between the late 1940s and the 1970s, Europe's empires in Africa and Asia were largely dismantled; in the late 1970s, postcolonial studies as field of scholarly inquiry, primarily in the humanities and interpretive social sciences, began to emerge in the AngloAmerican academy. What is the relationship between decolonization and postcolonial theory? How does decolonization remain an urgent task in the present? How might theory itself be decolonized? Drawing on the work of anticolonial national liberation theorists including Frantz Fanon, Aimé Césaire, and Amílcar Cabral, and postcolonial theorists like Edward Said, Homi Bhabha, and Gauri Viswanathan, this chapter examines the multiple objects and aspects of decolonization: political economy, epistemology, culture, language, and nature (including natural resources). The unevenness and incompletion of decolonization can be understood by considering the various roles that colonizers, anticolonial nationalists, and Cold War superpowers played in decolonization: too often, postcolonial Independence did not bring national liberation.

This thesis proposes that the contemporary socioecological concerns humans share regarding our collective future hinges upon a renewal of our Earth ethic. I take indigenous and traditional voices seriously, and in doing so, collate some very old advice for how to live well with each other and Earth. Following their advice, I recommend that humans without secure cultural and ecological context apprentice to Elder guidance, as offered from their multiple, yet emplaced, positions with/in
indigenous and traditional Earth minded land bases and cultures. Many Elders recommend that humans reindigenise to Earth in specifically emplaced ways, by committing to some worldview concepts that are very different from those that westernised peoples are accustomed to. Traditional and indigenous Elders, teachings, and elements of worldview conceive of the human being as a responsive, moral, intuitive, perceptive, and instinctual being that is a part of a complex web of kincentric relations. Respectful engagement with Elder wisdom, long ignored, is our first step.

In pursuing planetary futurity, I engage with these voices in order to trace a path toward a renewed Earth community. Traditional human values of respect, responsibility, reciprocity, redistribution, and reverence, as based upon relationships, can be reignited as guiding principles in our communities, but only if we engage in processes of unlearning and remembering who we are as humans. To this end, I outline a framework for worldview transformation, as a component of necessary decolonisation and rematriation processes.

Hybridity as an interpretive construct in the archaeology of colonialism has encountered many pitfalls, due largely to the way it has been set adrift from clear theoretical anchors and has been applied inconsistently to things, practices, processes, and even people. One of the telltale signs of its problematic nature is the ease with which archaeologists claim to identify the origin and existence of hybridity but the difficulty faced if asked when and how such hybridity actually ends, if it does. In that context, this paper offers a potential requiem for hybridity. If we need not go that far, archaeologists at least need to rein in the ‘‘Frankenstein’’ version of hybridity that permeates archaeology and occludes its variable and problematic origins, acknowledge the dangers of accentuating or even celebrating ‘‘pure´es,’’ and beware of the creation of cultural ‘‘mules’’ in analytical classifications and interpretations.

24/ António Costa Pinto portuguesa,,41. Um sector relativamente coeso nas suas críticas a Portugal era o Escandinavo, sobretudo a partir do final dos anos 60, que aliás passará rapidamente a apoiante humanitário e político dos movimentos de libertiü';:ãb das colónias portuguesas.

This article is about decolonization in general and decolonization in Palestine in particular. One way to consider decolonization is by asking, as in the title, when does the settler become a native? But what kind of question is that? Is it historical — how much time needs to pass for the settler to become a native? Sociological — what changes must the settler go through to become a native? Ethical — what actions must the settler undertake in order to become a native? Personal — does it suffice for the settler to start feeling like he was a native? And what is the role of the native himself in this entire process?

The article is in part forward-looking, but it does not aim to offer concrete solutions; at best, it can offer conceptual directions. In the case of Palestine/Israel, the article does not advocate a definite solution in the form of a “one-state solution” or a “two-state solution.” It does not offer a clear institutional arrangement; rather, it offers an approach that aims to transcend settler-colonialism as a dynamic order, and to move beyond the settler-native opposition. As such, the article is a conceptual one — offering ways to think about the issue without committing to a clear constitutional-institutional position.

Este libro reúne los trabajos de aquellas voces alrededor del
encuentro del III Congreso de Estudios Poscoloniales y IV Jornadas
de Feminismo Poscolonial, en Buenos Aires (2016), organizado
conjuntamente con las universidades: UBA-UNSAM-UNSJ-UNCUNAM-UAM-X-PUCP-UNMDP-UNRN-UNR.

While the recent proliferation of sociological engagements with postcolonial thought is important and welcome, central to most critiques of Eurocentrism is a concern with the realm of epistemology, with how sociology comes to know its objects of study. Such a concern, however, risks perpetuating another form of Eurocentrism, one that is responsible for instituting the very distinction between epistemology and ontology, knowledge and reality. By developing a sustained engagement with Boaventura de Sousa Santos's work, as well as establishing possible connections with what has been termed the 'turn to ontology' in anthropology, in this paper I argue that in order for sociology to become exposed to the deeply transformative potential of non-Eurocentric thinking, it needs to cultivate a decolonial imagination in order to move beyond epistemology, and to recognise that there is no social and cognitive justice without existential justice, no politics of knowledge without a politics of reality.

This Ph.D. is an ethnographic-activist-based project. It first examines the genealogy of popular nationalist-statist and religious enforcements of postcolonial cisheteronormativity in Egypt through the examination of two case studies, the Cairo 52 case in 2001 and the transgendered case of Sally Abd Allah in 1982. It then presents my fieldwork, which documents my ethnographic narrators’ resistance to these narratives. Specifically, my fieldwork investigates the neocolonial/neoimperial conditions that inform the circulatory geopolitical relationship between Islam and queerness in non-Western societies such as franchise-colonial Egypt and settler-colonial U.S./Canada, in an age where sexual and gender diversity is a hallmark of neoliberal ‘secular’ modernity, whose advent historically exposed Arabs, North Africans, and Muslims, if not all non-Europeans, to a plethora of false competing dualisms, such as secular/religious and heterogeneity/homogeneity, as well as discourses such as homonationalism (al-qawmiyyat al-mīthlīyat) and pinkwashing (al-ghaseel al-banafsajiy). My fieldwork participants offer decolonial, gender-based, readings and formulations of queerness through their diverse and complex experiences, which evade the apparent tidiness of European feminist and narrow LGBTIQA categories that characterizes most Western/non-Western political queer scholarship. While the spiritual initiatives of diasporic queer Muslims clarifies the urgent need for a radical, decolonial, reinterpretation of Islam, the revolutionary participation of queer Egyptians in the so-called ‘Arab Spring/Islamist Winter’ offers crucial challenges to both discourses on gender/sexuality in the Middle East and academic and activist literatures on radical and revolutionary social action. In this dissertation, queer Egyptians, and queer Muslims in particular, appear as single theorists of radical political activity, not the co-opted and duped, colonized pawns of the ‘Gay Empire’. This exploration of queer interventions in revolutionary Egypt will force radical social theorists to consider postcolonial/decolonial queer politics as a primary basis for determining the shape and course of future revolutionary theory and praxis in this current xenophobic and Islamophobic geopolitical moment. Utilizing intersectional/assemblage based theories, I argue that strictly adopting sexual discourses, in the absence of accounting for colonialism/imperialism as well as engaging postcolonial, critical race and feminist discourses, is insufficient to narratively/analytically understand the dynamic nature of Arab and Muslim gender and sexualities in these Islamophobic conditions.

*The Ph.D. is a forthcoming book. Nonetheless, in an effort to provide an overview of this interdisciplinary and transnational project I’m offering the table of contents, this chapter, the Bibliography and Appendix till the impending release.

" Those machines whose output was so great that all men might be clothed; those new methods of agriculture and new agricultural implements, which promised crops so big that all men might be fed—the very instruments that were to give the whole community the physical basis of a good life turned out, for the vast majority of people who possessed neither capital nor land, to be nothing short of instruments of torture. " (Mumford 1922, pp. 115-116, emphasis added) We grew corn at the xʷməθkʷəy̓ əm gardens this year, and while the corn stalks grew to be over eight feet high they were barren. The corn grew tall, but it was unable to bear fruit because of the northerly environment it grew in. Similarly, we grew a strain of tobacco that was gifted to the gardens by a company from the US, and while the tobacco grew tall, had big, beautiful leaves, and even began to flower, it did not mature to the point of bearing its seed pods. The tobacco grew tall, but it was unable to bear fruit because of the northerly environment it grew in. Post-Industrial society can be likened to such a plant, which grew tall from the seed—from the utopian myth—of industrial society but failed to bear the fruits portended by these myths because of the environment (the Paternalist Worldview [Barnesmoore 2017a; Barnesmoore 2017b; Barnesmoore 2017c]) it grew in.

Modernity and a True Return to Nature 0. Point of Departure Question How are human-nature relations and the attainment of virtue through human-nature relations understood in the classical urban theory of Geddes and Mumford? How is technology and technological power seen as mediating the relationship between humans and nature?

Este trabalho tem como propósitos (1) fundamentar e caracterizar as categorias analíticas de cisgeneridade e cisnormatividade, propondo-as como relevantes para reflexões políticas, acadêmicas, existenciais sobre as diversidades de corpos e de identidades de gênero, assim como tecer reflexões autoetnográficas atravessadas pelas localizações, limitações e potências intelectuais desta autoetnógrafa acerca (2) dos dispositivos de poder institucionais e não institucionais cisnormativos que exercem colonialidades sobre estas diversidades, bem como sobre (3) as possibilidades de resistência e enfrentamento a estes cistemas de poder interseccionalmente constituídos.
Para cumprir tais propósitos, a dissertação é composta por dois movimentos: no primeiro, o objetivo é promover diálogos sobre alguns dos conceitos que inspiram a proposição analítica de cisgeneridade, e trazem possibilidades epistêmicas e metodológicas ao trabalho, como os de autoetnografia, interseccionalidade, heterossexualidade, e branquitude. A partir de referenciais trans+feministas, queer e decoloniais, pretendese caracterizar a cisgeneridade como normatividade sobre corpos e identidades de gênero que os naturaliza e idealiza, em fantasias ciscoloniais, como pré-discursivos, binários e permanentes.
O segundo movimento se constitui pela caracterização, a partir de análises autoetnográficas, de processos cisnormativos que estabelecem colonialidades do saber, poder e ser que operam violentamente através de cistemas. Contra estes processos cisnormativos e colonialidades cistêmicas, tentamos elaborar alguns caminhos decoloniais que possam promover autodeterminação, autonomia, dignidade e liberdade às diversidades corporais e de identidades de gênero, particularmente aquelas inconformes, interseccionalmente, às cisnormatividades.

In this chapter (the first in James Akerman, ed., Decolonizing the Map: Cartography from Colony to Nation [University of Chicago Press, 2017]), I take a synoptic view of cartography and decolonization in the twentieth century and make occasional reference to nineteenth-century processes of decolonization in the Americas. The essay is intentionally broad and synthetic: it looks at colonization and decolonization across the globe and across nearly two centuries, although the primary focus is on the twentieth century. While cognizant of the fact that the particularities of decolonization varied according to time and space—something that is clear in the subsequent essays in this volume—I I have taken this wide-angle perspective in order to put the historical experiences and processes of decolonization in Africa and Asia, in North America and Latin America, in Oceania and Southwest Asia into conversation, comparison, and relation to one another. Doing so highlights certain patterns and continuities but, of course, at the risk of eliding differences and disjunctures. The essay builds on a growing body of secondary literature on cartography, colonialism, and postcolonialism in order to highlight general themes and points of comparison and contrast, while at the same time plumbing particular primary sources (maps of various kinds) that illustrate such processes or trends. While it highlights certain themes and points, it invariably also suffers from elisions, exceptions, and generalizations. In this respect the essay resembles not only a map—which is inherently selective—but also “decolonization” itself which was, as historian Prasenjit Duara observes, “neither a coherent event [. . .] nor a well-defined phenomenon.”

And now what? This anxious question torments many of us in the current socio-political moment: that of Trumpism and Brexit; of resurgent xenophobia and racism expressed through election results and policies around Europe; and of the return of fascism and Nazism. It is this moment that has prompted González-Ruibal et al. (above) to call for a new, politicised archaeology. In so doing, they urge archaeologists to abandon the soothing liberal but ineffective embrace of communities and the public. They also argue against identitarian politics and the discourse of apolitical and abstract multiculturalism. I am in broad agreement with them, and called some years ago for a shift from ethics to politics, and for an explicit, public political stance (Hamilakis 2007). If the politicisation of archaeology was important 10 years ago, it is much more urgent now. My slight unease with the authors' manifesto, however, is that its prose is too universalising, while simultaneously betraying its specific origin in a southern European context. Their dismissal of identity discourses tout court obscures the fact that phenomena such as race, for example, do not simply denote identitarian concerns. Such discourses are instead fundamental to the understanding of the production of whiteness and blackness (cf. Mbembe 2017); to colonialist, nationalist and capitalist modernity, to the class system; and to the emancipatory aspirations of all humans—not just those classified as 'coloured'. In another example, gender is not simply about certain identities. It primarily concerns the patriarchal and hetero-normative constitution of the current neoliberal order. Neither race nor gender can be disentangled from class or the genealogy of capitalist modernity. Another point of disagreement with the authors concerns their statement that " predatory capitalism does not need archaeologists, simply because it does not need legitimising " (González-Ruibal et al. above). Yet, colonialist and capitalist modernity is continually reproduced, partly through the genealogical and material narratives perpetuated by many scholars, including archaeologists. To heed the call for a politically effective archaeology in the service of social justice, we must decolonise the discipline that emerged at the intersection of colonial, racial and national modernity. What does this entail specifically? First, in undoing colonial archaeology and anthropology, we must decolonise time. This can be achieved, for example, by arguing against teleology, rejecting cultural evolutionist narratives based on hierarchical thinking, and on time as closure, destiny and causation. A decolonised, non-teleological time works against the dominant neoliberal dogma that asserts there is no alternative. For example, engagement with the deep past and with global cultural and biological diversity could contribute to greater awareness of the cohabitation of plants, animals and humans

Rodolfo Kusch, el filósofo argentino, nos ofrece la mirada descolonial más clarificante, más auténtica y comprometida. América Profunda es su libro clave. Altamente recomendado y publicado aquí para el grupo de artistas que investigan con arteresponsable centroamericano.

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the notion of decolonizing interpretive research in ways that respect and integrate the qualitative sensibilities of subaltern voices in the knowledge production of anti-colonial possibilities.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws from the decolonizing and post-colonial theoretical tradition, with a specific reference to Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak’s contribution to this analysis. Findings – Through a critical discussion of decolonizing concerns tied to qualitative interpretive interrogations, the paper points to the key assumptions that support and reinforce the sensibilities of subaltern voices in efforts to move western research approaches toward anti-colonial possibilities. In the process, this discussion supports the emergence of an itinerant epistemological lens that opens the field to decolonizing inquiry.
Practical implications – Its practical implications are tied to discursive transformations, which can impact social and material transformations within the context of research and society.
Originality/value – Moreover, the paper provides an innovative rethinking of interpretive research, in an effort to extend the analysis of decolonizing methodology to the construction of subaltern inspired intellectual labor.
Keywords Interpretive research, Post-colonial, Decolonizing, Knowledge production, Subaltern voice

"In this paper, we articulate foundational concepts for a supervision framework from a critical postcolonial
perspective: intersectionality, power, and relational safety in context. We identify opportunities, challenges,
and dilemmas encountered when engaging with students and colleagues in examining dimensions
of privilege and oppression in supervision-of-supervision and supervision of clinical work conducted by
clinicians in training. We highlight experiences of supervisees and supervisors of color throughout the
paper, bringing together our own voices as a supervisor of color and White supervisor via our shared
postcolonial lens to advance dialogue among scholars of all ethnicities. We also differentiate our
experiences, purposefully centering the voices of supervisors of color to further a critical postcolonial
agenda."

European colonialisms (circa. Late 1400) are complex, particularized, and changing political- economic-social-religious systems of domination. In the pursuit of capital accumulation and appropriation, Western European colonialisms generated and benefited from racialized and racist logics. Following the “formal” decolonization of much, but not all, of the colonized world—from Haiti in 1804, to Cameroon in 1960, to Papua New Guinea in 1975, to Timor-Leste in 2002—colonial structures, relations, and imaginaries often persisted in altered forms. Social scientists draw variously from political economy and historical materialism as well as postcolonial thought and cultural materialism within the broader field of colonial studies to both critique European colonialisms of the past and reveal the persistence(s) of colonial relations/structures in the present. Colonial “durabilities” and the “coloniality of being” continue to inform post-colonial political economies, social relations, and knowledge productions, creations, circulations, and contestations. The protraction of colonial domination(s) into the early 21st Century have given rise to reinvigorations of anti-colonial and postcolonial critique, including decolonial options and polygonal projects of decolonization. Widespread discontent regarding the persistence of “colonialism in the present” are manifested in the vocal and visible debates within early 21st Century universities around decolonizing knowledge, including struggles to decolonize the discipline of geography.