Abstract: This chapter is based on a post-colonial reading of contemporary politics and an appreciation of the long struggle against colonialism that can be traced back centuries. It contextualises the current ‘colonial memorialisation’ struggle as a component of that larger struggle, which is evident to me will continue for as long as the colonial political, economic and cultural order (i.e., imperial order) remains in place. Informed by my reading of the past, and a capacity to identify the ways the past continues to exist in the present, this chapter analyses the global memorialisation of colonisers and colonialism. The memorials discussed in this chapter include statues, flags, place and building names and dates of commemoration, beginning in 2015 with the #RhodesMustFall movement. It is argued that the monuments and memorials to colonialism and the colonisers cannot be separated from the broader politics of economic inequality, challenges to white privilege and the (re)resurgence of right-wing politics and militant nationalism. This chapter reveals how the contemporary world order relies heavily on the racist cultural order constructed in a period of Empire and then provides a contemporary exposé of the ways that the efforts to challenge the racist cultural order by movements such as #RhodesMustFall are a threat to the prevailing and dominant political and economic system. The struggle to bring down monuments dedicated to colonialism and imperialism is intertwined with continuing unequal political and economic structures. It is in the recognition that racism and capitalism are inextricably connected (Williams, Capitalism and Slavery, The University of North Carolina Press, 1944) and that the capitalist system requires a racist (and misogynist) order for its survival that the full implications of the challenge to colonial memorialisation are located.


Abstract: Settler-colonies are places of tremendous inequality and violence. Yet, at the same time, settlercolonies are also places where elected institutions flourish. What explains the origin of institutions
seemingly founded on ideals of equality and liberty amidst systemic violence and hierarchy? This
dissertation examines the process of elected representative institutional formation in settlercolonies through comparative-historical analysis drawing on original archival research of three
case studies—the South African Cape Colony and Natal and French Algeria—and application of
the findings from these studies to a fourth case, Zionist settlement in early twentieth-century
Palestine. It identifies two necessary conditions for institutional formation: a shared ideological
background of Enlightenment thought and a pre-existing racial hierarchy. Given these necessary
conditions, high values on two causal factors—the relative unity of the settler population and
relative support from imperial authority—explain the timing of these institutions’ creation and
their design. Linking the necessary conditions and causal factors are settlers’ economic
motivations for the protection and accumulation of wealth, which catalyze the process of
institutional formation and influence these institutions’ exclusionary character. In elected
representative institutions, the purported bastions of equality and freedom, settlers built the
bulwarks of their own domination
.








Description: Over the past few centuries, vast areas of the world have been violently colonized by settlers. But why did states like Australia and the United States stop settling frontier lands during the twentieth century? At the same time, why did states loudly committed to decolonization like Indonesia and China start settling the lands of such minorities as the West Papuans and Uyghurs? Settling for Less traces this bewildering historical reversal, explaining when and why indigenous peoples suffer displacement at the hands of settlers. Lachlan McNamee challenges the notion that settler colonialism can be explained by economics or racial ideologies. He tells a more complex story about state building and the conflicts of interest between indigenous peoples, states, and settlers. Drawing from a rich array of historical evidence, McNamee shows that states generally colonize frontier areas in response to security concerns. Elite schemes to populate contested frontiers with loyal settlers, however, often fail. As societies grow wealthier and cities increasingly become magnets for migration, states ultimately lose the power to settle frontier lands. Settling for Less uncovers the internal dynamics of settler colonialism and the diminishing power of colonizers in a rapidly urbanizing world. Contrasting successful and failed colonization projects in Australia, Indonesia, China, and beyond, this book demonstrates that economic development—by thwarting colonization—has proven a powerful force for indigenous self-determination.