Assimilate or die! Gracelen Hawkins, ‘Comparing Assimilationist and Non-Assimilationist Approaches in Settler Colonialism: From Ancient Times to the Present’, Honors dissertation, Wright State University, 2025

27Mar26

Excerpt: Settler colonialism is multi-faceted and widely debated. Emerging in the 1990s through foundational scholars like Patrick Wolfe and Jürgen Osterhammel, the field of settler colonial studies is relatively young. Even amongst scholars, finding a definition for the term is a difficult task. Osterhammel expresses this difficulty, calling colonialism a “phenomenon of colossal vagueness.” Scholars differ in their priorities for what constitutes settler colonialism; thus, the term varies in interpretation and often conflicts between authors. Beginning by defining settler colonialism from the perspectives of Osterhammel and Veracini, I stress the universal question of settler polities: What should be done with the native population? I explore the ways in which settlers decide to deal with indigenous populations, either through assimilation of natives into the settler colonial society or via non-assimilationist, exclusionary tactics. In examining historical examples of settler colonialism, I argue that assimilation, as an expression of settler colonial removal and replacement of indigenous people, is one of the defining characteristics of settler colonialism. To further develop a framework of assimilation in settler colonialism, one must also understand exceptions to this element. Nonassimilationist practices occurred to claim lands, prevent indigenous uprisings, and promote exclusion through racial hierarchy. Conversely, assimilation occurred in settler societies as part of a demand for labor, reproduction, and land acquisition. While not present in all examples, such as the ancient Greeks, early United States, and present-day Israel, assimilation is a core strategy in suppressing indigenous peoples as seen in Rome, New Spain, and New Zealand.