Abstract: This paper utilizes marxist psychoanalysis to provide a diagnosis for the pathology of settler colonialism such that treatment options can be derived for settlers who wish to engage in the process of decolonization. The diagnosis identifies two mechanisms through which settler colonialism produces itself: the catastrophic violence of conquest, and the fantasy of white supremacy. It discusses their operation in settlers and the states they create to demonstrate the ways in which the fantasy causes violence that serves to maintain it. A special focus is given to the relation of capitalism to dispossession as I contend that attending to this injustice will give treatment the greatest chance of success. Building from this I argue that the only way to stop being a settler is to let go of the land, and that this will require nothing less than a mass movement against global capital. From this the discussion of treatment holds that settlers must learn how to engage in radical action without reproducing the violences of the system they seek to oppose and that this depends on their ability to confront the operation of fantasy within themselves. It is hoped this can be accomplished through the development of settler grounded normativity, a process which above all requires taking heed from indigenous nations already engaged in the struggle. The paper closes with a discussion of the parade and the blockade as two distinct methods for articulating grounded norms in the face of catastrophe.



Description: There many threats facing the Earth that could put humanity (and indeed the entire terrestrial ecosystem) at existential risk. This is a brute fact we must face head on. And we should also be clear that this risk imposes a clear prima facie moral duty to establish successful settlements on other worlds sooner rather than later in order to ensure our survival. That will be no easy task, but one promising approach that could make it considerably easier is the use of genetic enhancement to give off-world settlers much the biological adaptations they need to thrive in the harsh conditions they will encounter. Of course, there are many ethical concerns here that also should not be taken lightly, though it’s our view that, in general, they can be handled if we approach them with care. We thus begin this chapter by responding to several of the more common objections to genetic enhancement. Some of these are well taken in general but don’t pose an insurmountable obstacle to using this technology for settlements, while others are based on unexamined terrestrial assumptions that do not apply in off-world contexts. Next, we discuss how this debate, as with so many debates about the future, tracks an unacknowledged fault line between idealists and pragmatists. Idealists tend to see an off-world settlement as an opportunity to start afresh and create a better world than we have ever experienced on Earth while pragmatists tend to argue that tough choices will inevitably have to be made and, in the final analysis, it’s better to have an acceptable settlement now than hope for a perfect one in the distant future. To illustrate our approach, we critique Schwartz’s (2020) recent argument for the creation of an off-world settlement accessible to all who wish to go. While this is certainly a laudable vision, for practical reasons it is simply not a feasible demand, at least initially. Finally, we offer a vision for a realistic use of genetic enhancement that might make settlements easier to establish and then discuss what sorts of unique problems these could create. In the final analysis, we believe it’s possible to create a morally acceptable off-world settlement in the near future, though doing so may well involve controversial technologies like genetic enhancement. But given the stakes we face, we have a moral duty to forge ahead, though this does not absolve us of the responsibility to listen carefully to critics who seek to restrain some of our less thoughtful impulses. What we decide to do has to strike a complex balance, but it is ultimately not morally defensible to substitute our dreams of an ideal settlement for the possibility of a real one.






Abstract: Narratives about queer Canada, or queering Canada, continue to normalize the nation-state and its settler-colonial roots. During the summer of 2019, the release of the Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls made it impossible to ignore settler colonialism in the Canadian context, and yet celebrations of 1969’s Criminal Codechanges attempted to frame the country as a safe haven for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and queer + (LGBTQ+) rights. This article will explore rhetoric surrounding Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau’s era including the Just Society, the criminal reforms of 1969, as well as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s moment as celebrations of the 1969 reforms unfurl. In particular, this article will look at the contrast in rhetoric between the Just Society and protests by Indigenous peoples for whom 1969 nearly ended with the passing of the white paper and subsequent extinguishment of Indigenous rights. Assimilation, and, therefore, disappearance, frames Indigenous experiences of the Just Society, while settler-colonial aspirations frame mainstream understandings of 1969’s LGBTQ+ Criminal Code reforms. At the same time, as Indigenous peoples reframe this moment, and as Canadians prepare to celebrate its meanings, a surging Far Right has announced itself across the country. In response to this problem and to the liberal problem of doublespeak and Just Society rhetoric, this article will centre the aspirations and voices of Indigenous women and Two-Spirit folks as temporal and spatial alter-Natives to the rise of homonationalism rooted in ongoing settler colonialism.