Jump to content
officialdaxon

Settlerism/Colonialism and Anarchism Help?

Recommended Posts

Alrighty, so I come from a very non-critical 4A circuit in OK... But starting last year, K's have found their way creeping into our debate, and my partner and I have decided to embrace them wholeheartedly. I learned the basics on debating against a K last year, and this year, we've run a K almost every round. My personal favourites are Cap and Colonialism/Settlerism.

 

Which brings me to the first part of my question... What is some good literature for colonialism? I had a very K-Based debater help me (and by that, I mean he practically cut all of it while I smiled and nodded) with writing this settlerism K, and it's all based around the colonization of indigenous lands and peoples (because, you know, Cherokee land). What is some good literature/authors to read to get a better understanding/more cards for this? Also, what are some plans/ways I can link plans into this K?

 

 

Now, onto the second part...

 

I feel that I want to take on the challenge of cutting my own K. I've had my mind set on Statism/Anarchism, but honestly it's not set in stone. What is a good beginning K to write? What is another one for my partner to start on? What are some authors to go along with them?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you looking for post-colonial literature? If so I'd recommend: Tuck and Yang, Spivak, Maldonado-Torres, Wilderson (he writes about anti-redness), Kapoor, Mignolo. There's a lot of other people who write about this; just go into google scholar and type in some keywords like "post-colonialism" "coloniality" "settlerism" You should read Decolonization is Not A Metaphor by Tuck and Yang before you go to deep into this so you can understand some of the more nuanced approaches to colonialism/settlerism; that'll prevent you from sounding like those liberal college students that claim to be "decolonized." My favorite author was Maldonado-Torres, because of his work on coloniality.

 

What do you mean by Anarchism/Statism? Also, do you understand the implications of defending these theories? You're going to be essentially arguing that all forms of political organization are bad; and the Aff can very easily make the argument that some form of organization is necessary. I would look more into a type of critique that argues that the way in which current political organizations function are bad (i.e. neoliberal governmentality, State of Exception, Anti-blackness, etc.). so you don't have to defend that EVERY form of organization is bad. The best critics of organization would be Deleuze and Guattari; of which necessitate a background on Nietzsche, Foucault, and Lacan; so I'd recommend you start with Foucault and build off form there. Foucault will open doors to philosophers like Agamben, Nietzsche, Baudrillard, Wilderson, Heidegger, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T and Y aren't Post colonialism.................. 
Post colonialism is bad imo

Look to, Jodi Byrd, Sandy Grande, Vine Deloira, Vine Deloira JR, Goeman (only if you are a native women), Churchill, Tuck and Yang (and them seperatly as authors ie Tuck and McKenize), Dunbar-Ortiz, Glen Coulthard, and Audre Simpson.(Byrd, Grande, and deloria are a must)

Also, reading history is really good. It's helped me a lot doing knowing a lot about different tribes and such. Like you should do your own work to learn history and reading the major works of each of these authors.

Edited by DHilligoss
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't know a lot about colonialism literature so I can't really help you out there, but I think that writing your own K is a good idea, especially if you want to become more familiar with them. Besides the standard Cap k, I reccomend writing a security K. Basically, the security K says that action that is based off of securitized logic causes us to act irrationally and ultimately puts ourselves in a worse position (ie, the US invaded Iraq just because there was a chance of a nuclear weapon, this ultimately escalated into violent conflict). Some authors for security iclude Ahmed, Giroux, Neocleous, etc. There are also some security k's on open evidence that you can look at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T and Y aren't Post colonialism.................. 

Post colonialism is bad imo

 

Look to, Jodi Byrd, Sandy Grande, Vine Deloira, Vine Deloira JR, Goeman (only if you are a native women), Churchill, Tuck and Yang (and them seperatly as authors ie Tuck and McKenize), Dunbar-Ortiz, Glen Coulthard, and Audre Simpson.(Byrd, Grande, and deloria are a must)

 

Also, reading history is really good. It's helped me a lot doing knowing a lot about different tribes and such. Like you should do your own work to learn history and reading the major works of each of these authors.

 

What's wrong with post-colonialism? What are Tuck and Yang then? And I thought there was a general consensus that Churchill was a pretty bad author? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's wrong with post-colonialism? What are Tuck and Yang then? And I thought there was a general consensus that Churchill was a pretty bad author?

 

Churchill is pretty darn shady author wise. He's been accused of some maybe true stuff.

 

But substance wise he gets a clear point across

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's wrong with post-colonialism? What are Tuck and Yang then? And I thought there was a general consensus that Churchill was a pretty bad

Postcolonial's theorization presumes a shift from territorial occupation to things like colonies without the material aspect , things such as economics , Neoliberalism , , british common wealth etc. I.E. the post part of post colonialism denotes an assumption of an end to the traditional colonialsim. Tuck and Yang are actually an explicit criticism of that postcolonialism because it says we should have a a return to the materiality of land instead of things like Mignolos epistemic disobedience  or delinking

 

Tuck and Yang are part of a sect of literature called Settler colonialism studies

 

While he some academic problems , he writes well and alot of people cite him for some of their arguments so its important to have that basis for theory.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Postcolonial's theorization presumes a shift from territorial occupation to things like colonies without the material aspect , things such as economics , Neoliberalism , , british common wealth etc. I.E. the post part of post colonialism denotes an assumption of an end to the traditional colonialsim. Tuck and Yang are actually an explicit criticism of that postcolonialism because it says we should have a a return to the materiality of land instead of things like Mignolos epistemic disobedience  or delinking

 

Tuck and Yang are part of a sect of literature called Settler colonialism studies

 

While he some academic problems , he writes well and alot of people cite him for some of their arguments so its important to have that basis for theory.

 

Interesting; thanks for explaining the distinction 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anibal Quijano is a good starting point to learn coloniality in particular. He's easy to read, and makes pretty clear points. You probably won't run anything from him in round, but if you have trouble with K lit then he can set the stage for future literature to read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Byrd, Grande, and deloria are a must)

 

This is where I would start as far as begining to learn more of the lit. Churchill is really good to read as far as learning the arg, as far as reading it in a round, I've never seen a problem w/ reading Churchill, but others do, so it's meh.

 

More or less though, it's less about what you read and more about how you read it, especially with this arg. Be sure to keep that in mind as devloping this in the debate space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Byrd is a must, there's a lot of lit about coloniality coming out of educational scholars in Canada and critical theorists from Australia,and look for "settler coloniality" rather than colonialism since many modern authors reject the notion that colonialism ever ended, and is an ongoing structure. Tuck and Yang is great, but specifically find indigenous authors since they better represent the issues, and are less likely to be speaking from the position criticized.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×