researcher and force a sense of vulnerability and empathy, while still centering analysis.

Much of the power in this phrase for me resonates from 1. My experience working with my undergraduate faculty advisor on his anti-colonial praxis around the post-colonial conditions in the Caribbean –he would always remind me “nothing is ever ‘just’ or ‘simple’—and 2. Smith’s deployment of colonial grammar against itself to indicate that the education designed by the colonizer was not passive or neutral; instead, it was/is an active, mobile, and deliberate entity.

p.25 – the description of the third definition of imperialism (in the context of spirit (Geist) as applied to time/temporality (Sein)) reminds me of this recent interview with Lisa Lowe (author of The Intimacies of Four Continents) and Ariella Aïsha Azoulay:

Azoulay, A. A., Lowe, L., Caspari, M., & Daly, R. (2023). Against Imperial Knowledges: Lisa Lowe and Ariella Aïsha Azoulay in Conversation. Parallax, 29(2), 154-172.

            See also the discussion late on p.26 and at the beginning of p.27

I really wish that these had been the types of exercises given to me during my intro to theory courses because they are so well-thought-out as both a primer and a praxis for learners new to these schools of thought.

Imagine a world without data, a world without method, a world without a hegemonic politics of evidence...

• Can I theorize from the ground up, rooted in marginalized students’ realities? 

• Can I teach history as contested and relational, not as a universal truth? 

o   Mean/Matter: This shook me. I think so often we are concerned with finding the “truth” that we do not stop and think about how at the end of the day, the truth does not matter because people act on what they consider to be the truth. I think about journalism and the importance of verifying what a source is saying. How does that come into play when doing research? I am still processing this.

o   Mean/Matter: This is interesting because in the Tracy text- post-colonialism stated to consider Indigenous ways of knowing- counter to what is being presented here. As Tuhiwai Smith continues, they look at the difference between intent and impact. While the intent to help might be present, the impact of actions still can have a negative effect and should not be ignored. It is important in my work to think about this. How might I be unintentionally negatively impacting those I am studying by not centering their voices and what matters to them?

Key Takeaways

• This was a very fun read!

• I understand that paradigms act as lenses shaped by ontology, epistemology, axiology, and methodology, and that researchers often move across paradigmatic boundaries rather than staying fixed in one.

• I understand that positivist/post-positivist paradigms emphasize objectivity and triangulation, interpretive paradigms stress social construction and empathy, critical paradigms highlight power and transformation, and post paradigms reject singular truths in favor of multiplicity and marginalized ways of knowing.

• I understand that qualitative genres: case study, grounded theory, ethnography, phenomenology, PAR, narrative/autoethnography, and arts-based research, each provide different ways of generating and representing knowledge but can overlap and complement one another.

• I understand that choosing a paradigm or genre is less about rigid categories and more about reflexively asking which approach best addresses the research question and context.

Tools 

• Verstehen (interpretive paradigm) emphasizes empathy and understanding the world from participants’ perspectives.

• The Ologies

  • Related to my research, settler-colonialism weaponizes each one to serve its goal

  • Ontology - The Nature of Reality/Existence

    • Erasure of Indigenous People

  • Epistemology - How We Know What We Know

    • Erasure of Indigenous Knowledge

      • Epistemicide

  • Axiology - What We Value and Why We Value It

    • Dehumanization of Indigenous Peoples

  • Methodology - How Do We Collect Information and Gather Data

    • Indigenous Knowledges are not “reliable” for data collection

• Ethnography requires long-term immersion; ethnography of communication focuses on the rules of language and identity in communities.

• Phenomenology aims to uncover the essence of lived experience 

• PAR frames participants as co-researchers, emphasizing collaboration and transformation.

• Narrative inquiry and autoethnography use stories to construct meaning, identity, and reflexivity.

• Arts-based research values sensory, embodied, and creative ways of knowing.

• This is one of my favorite reads and I enjoyed re-reading it.

• I understand that Imperialism, and specifically settler-colonialism, are predicated off of erasing Indigenous people.

  • This includes rendering Indigenous knowledge systems as “primitive”

• I understand that Imperialism, epistemologically, is based on Enlightenment era thinking

  • This means that knowledges that are not rooted in Enlightenment era knowledge are considered as “unproductive” and “unworthy”

• I understand that Post-Colonial does not mean that colonialism has ended, but rather that we live in a world that deals with the fallout of colonial missions.

• I understand that views of history as totality are rooted in positivist and Eurocentric epistemologies

• I understand that views of history as apolitical, Truthful, or unbiased allow for dominant narratives to be assumed as True and remain unchallenged

Implications for my work

• As a scholar who works with Post-Colonial Theory and Settler-Colonial theory, the work of Smith is very relevant

• I’ve employed Smith’s work to build my understanding of Post-Colonialism and Settler-Colonialism from Indigenous centered perspectives rather than solely relying on White interpretations of these theories

• While Smith does not explicitly state that settler-colonialism and imperialism are uniquely Western or White phenomena, her work puts for the assumption imperialism and settler-colonialism are endemic to Whiteness

• My work challenges this assumption by using the logics put forth by Smith and other decolonial scholars to identify and critique non-White/non-Western settler-colonial states like Turkey and Japan

Another way that language affects meaning. By excluding non-written stories as traditions, we (intentionally or not) exclude them from the idea of "history".

“Who is doing the writing is important in the politics of the Third World and African America, and indeed for Indigenous peoples; it is even more important in the politics of how these worlds are being represented ‘back to’ the West.”

How would this decision even be made? While image is important, isn't silencing Indigenous voices because they aren't saying the "right things" just another aspect of colonialism? You would removing voices because they don't fit the idea the group wants to project, which both gives a false impression of homogeneity and also shows another deference to whatever the prevailing power is.

Everyday life is affected by resistance to or acceptance of power structures. Data collected in qualitative research is not outside of this relationship. Interpretation of qualitative data is shaped by the prevailing ideology of the researcher. From the Tuhiwai-Smith reading, this ideology is often colonial in nature and erases or favors certain voices.

Interpretation: This area of research appears challenging due to the subjective nature of values, which are often influenced by people’s traditions, customs, and societal accepted practices.

It asks questions like:

• What is valuable in life?

• What makes actions right or wrong?

• What counts as beauty or meaning?

Question: How does this change? Go to the local school board? Exert power over the Department of Education? If the teacher goes outside the approved curriculum, punishment may result.

Took me back to college years studying international development of 3rd world countries. Developing technology and final products always yield the most revenue, but what was produced in third world country were raw materials.

Had a big discussion with my wife about the use of "indigenous" vs indian, and how in El Salvador you can not call anyone either one of these terms due to the perception that it represents backwardness and rudimentary.

As qual researchers, I think our background can be our greatest strength and allow us access to certain communities and allow us to be insiders.

As I was reading this chapter, this is a concept that stood out to me, and that was because it marginalizes many indigenous cultures who did not have "writing" (or was destroyed) and it makes them seem as inferior.