Abstract: With the multi-faceted, complex dynamics of the Israeli Occupation of Palestine, a feasible solution seems further away than ever. Yet, all sorts of forms of resistance occur aiming to oppose the settler-colonial power structure. So does the understudied notion of beautiful resistance. It is defined as the means, and practices aiming to build peace within oneself through arts, education, and culture. This thesis explores the concept of beautiful resistance by unpacking it through three analytical categories. Central to this thesis is, therefore, the question of how practices of beautiful resistance can be understood as a strategy to decolonise Palestine. Beautiful resistance can only be sufficiently understood, once its practices are understood in the context of settler-colonialism and its political economy. Based on eight weeks of ethnographic fieldwork, practices of beautiful resistance are analysed by observing and discussing the complex dynamics between art, culture, and resistance with key agents in the field. This thesis presents a critical exploration of beautiful resistance by demonstrating 1) the inextricable relation with settler-colonialism, 2) the complex network of actors constituting the political economy in which beautiful resistance is embedded, and 3) how in this context practices of beautiful resistance result in the normalisation of the status quo, in other words, the continuation of the Occupation of the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza. The academic and practical application of the notion of beautiful resistance demands a contextspecific framework adapted to the oppressive structures of settler-colonialism and its adherent political economy.


Excerpt: This work appraises settler-colonial Australia’s strategic contribution to the transnational political traditions of what James Belich (2009) seminally called the global ‘settler revolution’. Specifically, this paper discusses settler Australia’s self-appointed role as sociopolitical ‘laboratory’ during the early decades of the twentieth century, after the settler revolution had entered a period of crisis elsewhere. The federal Commonwealth took this role seriously. The Torrens title, a mode of registering and transferring real estate that systematically erases all traces of prior ownership, the ‘Australian ballot’, identifying a specific settler-colonial form of democratic governance impervious to ‘Old World’ patronage, the constitutionally enshrined exclusion of Indigenous and exogenous alterities through the White Australia policy, and the Court of Arbitration were all institutional devices tested in Australia before being exported elsewhere. A cluster of interlocking political experiments, some older, some more recent, would coalesce in what Paul Kelly in another seminal intervention defined as the ‘Australian Settlement’ (1992). The Australian imperial nationalists loudly lamented the ‘Tyranny of Distance’ (see Blainey 1966), but in crucial ways ‘Australia’ was imagined as a globally relevant laboratory of sociopolitical experimentation precisely because of its assumed isolation. There is no laboratory without a controlled environment.