Abstract: This article investigates the critical interplay between utopian collectivity and post-industrial ruins as “apocalyptic commons” in Derek Jarman’s film The Last of England. This film’s Thatcher-era critique reveals global capitalism’s repressed yet intensified settler-colonial dimensions, portraying abandoned manufacturing sites intercut with nonlinear evocation of Britain’s imperial past. I argue that this film’s post-apocalyptic ruins perform an allegorical critique of settler colonialism by linking economic histories of imperialism and the “closing of the commons” to the neoliberal present. In this film, Jarman extends the utopian promise of the commons toward an equally radical potential inhering in the dystopian commons. These dystopian commons work to reopen a futurity, staging the alleged aftermath of historic crisis as already present-tense. Jarman’s apocalyptic commons reflect unsolved legacies of neoliberal capital, liberal imperialism, early modern financialization, and post-Fordism. The Last of England navigates a global landscape where property-relations are liquefied, engendering ad hoc assemblages of survival. Centered in ruins of metropolitan industry, Jarman’s film widens the imagination of global annihilation –nuclear, epidemic, neoimperial – while raising specters of earlier, colonial annihilations. In The Last of England, pyrrhic potentials bind together a collectivity of aftermath within a dystopian commons uncannily recognizable as the horizon of the neoliberal present-day.




Abstract: OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to understand the role that traditional Indigenous health care practices can play in increasing individual-level self-determination over health care and improving health outcomes for urban Indigenous peoples in Canada.

METHODS: This project took place in Vancouver, British Columbia and included the creation and delivery of holistic workshops to engage community members (n = 35) in learning about aspects of traditional health care practices. Short-term and intermediate outcomes were discussed through two gatherings involving focus groups and surveys. Data were transcribed, reviewed, thematically analyzed, and presented to the working group for validation.

RESULTS: When participants compared their experiences with traditional health care to western health care, they described barriers to care that they had experienced in accessing medical doctors (e.g., racism, mistrust), as well as the benefits of traditional healing (e.g., based on relationships, holistic approach). All participants also noted that they had increased ownership over their choices around, and access to, health care, inclusive of both western and traditional options. They stressed that increased access to traditional health care is crucial within urban settings.

CONCLUSIONS: Self-determination within Indigenous urban communities, and on a smaller scale, ownership for individuals, is a key determinant of health for Indigenous individuals and communities; this was made clear through the analysis of the research findings and is also supported within the literature. This research also demonstrates that access to traditional healing can enhance ownership for community members. These findings emphasize that there is a continued and growing need for support to aid urban Indigenous peoples in accessing traditional health care supports.



Abstract: This doctoral project examines reconciliation and how Canada’s Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement (2005) was designed to provide reparations to former students who were harmed in residential schools. In the past three decades, many Indigenous leaders and organizations identified a need for public investment to address historical injustice. In response, settler governments reframe these demands as opportunities for economic investment that are guaranteed to produce self-esteem and social inclusion for Indigenous peoples. This dissertation documents and problematizes an ideological shift whereby demands for redress and restitution give way to an investment rationale that is used to bypass demands for self-determination (Green 2015). Therefore, in this study I ask: how do investment discourses structure Indigenous-settler relationships? What is specific about the application of investment rationale when deployed during redress and reconciliation processes? In order to answer these questions I use a multi-site methodology to examine material and symbolic reparations, such as the Independent Assessment Process, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and therapeutic health supports. I draw on governmentality literatures to argue that an investment rationale disciplines individual compensation claimants through categories of harm and legal accounting processes to construct Indigenous subjects as dysfunctional and wage employment as emancipatory. I then examine how Indigenous health supports are subject to disinvestment, which effectively marginalizes Indigenous conceptualizations of health that privilege self-determination. Finally, I explore how the Truth and Reconciliation Commission routinely valorizes “mutually beneficial partnerships” as a template for contemporary Indigenous-settler relationships. My analysis thus contributes to the field of settler colonial studies and reveals how investment rationale is deployed to contain the cost of reparations and to create a politics of exchange where a return can be recovered from monies allotted to reparative strategies. The expected return that is desired by the settler state is, ultimately, the assimilation of Indigenous peoples’ into neoliberal citizenship.