National History and Legitimacy: Articulating Colonial Legacies.

Modern nation-states, especially those that are builtupon former white settler societies, share a legacy of violence against their indigenous populations, which both serve as the anchor for legitimating the state and justify contemporary political action. I argue that these states operate on a form of "barbaric sovereignty" that is premised on dismantling challenges to its authority, through Eradication and extermination campaigns against indigenous groups. Following a Hegelian conception of history, every historical moment, or moment of consciousness, includes all that precedes it. My claim is that white settler societies employ barbaric sovereignty as a means of Transforming themselves into nation-states, but because total destruction of the past is not possible, such sovereignty produces both the state and a continual anxiety that haunts the nation. Former white settler societies are persistently forced to legitimate their violent histories and reconcile their national anxieties, while disavowing any connections to a larger legacy of colonialism. This paper maps out the historical debates taking place in the United States and in Australia concerning how colonialism in their countries should be written. I use discourse and textual analysis of speeches from political leaders that address their nations’ indigenous populations and colonial past to demonstrate how historical accounts of violence tailor speeches for national leaders when they are responding to national emergencies in their time. I focus on political speeches from political heads of state: Andrew Jackson, Ulysses Grant, Bill Clinton, Paul Keating, and John Howard. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]