Newcomb and d'Errico examine stolen land, performative speech, legal precedent, and the right of domination.
This conversation does not reject the phrase stolen land. It asks what the phrase must require of us if it is to do more than perform recognition while leaving the legal structure of domination intact.
I am sharing this episode here because it belongs with my wider work on the language of domination, Christian discovery, federal Indian law, and the continuing reality of Original Nations' free existence. Each conversation in Domination Chronicles is another way into that inquiry.