The Temporal Power of Decolonialism

Decolonialism is commonly seen as grappling with the past and present. However, one temporal concept is missing within this perception: the elusive future. At first glance, it might seem puzzling how facing the past and shaping the present clearly shape our future. Still, I can assure you that such a connection is very concrete, further showcasing the power of decolonial practices in recreating our realities. In essence, the heart of this blog post rests on the idea of ‘re-futuring;’; however, to re-future something, it must mean that its current state is fundamentally flawed. 

To understand re-futuring, we must first understand what de-futuring is. In essence, as Britta Timm Knudsen et al. (1) explained, defuturing is the means by which indigenous, marginalised, and previously colonised peoples are put in a permanent state of exception, one in which their realities and experiences are sidelined in favour of dominant, colonial epistemologies. Effectively, the futures of such people get stolen, unable to escape the self-fulfilling colonial power structures that reproduce colonial understandings of our world. 

As such, re-futuring would be a means of deconstructing the colonial process of de-futuring by engaging in decolonial endeavours that hold on to the potential for the future to include the silenced voices of the past. (1). Such emerging realities via re-futuring can be seen in decolonial street performances, festivals, sculptures, documentaries, exhibitions, and much more: decolonising the past and present and thereby creating a decolonial future. One key example of re-futuring is the momentous return of the Yuquot Whalers’ Shrine to the Mowachaht/Muchalaht First Nation in 2025, after it had been stored at the American Museum of Natural History for nearly 120 years. Containing 88 carved wooden human figures, four wooden whales, and 16 human skulls, the Whaler’s Shrine is of deep importance to this nation, due to its association with purification rituals (2). As Mike Maquinna, the hereditary chief of this nation, said, ‘It’s not just an artefact, but it is part of our culture – a very important part of our culture that some of us are missing – the spirituality aspect’ (3). Jerry Jake, another hereditary leader of the First Nation, also says that the shrine’s removal ‘took away our spirituality’ (3).

This spiritual aspect, exclusive to the Mowachaht/Muchalaht First Nation in this context, is an epistemology they possess: one that the shrine’s removal has suppressed. This suppression has, in a sense, stolen the futures of this nation, as a key part of their past was taken away from them, and therefore couldn’t exist in their present. This defuturing has been a source of hurt for this nation, with Chief Maquinna saying that the community has ‘lots to heal’ due to its long disappearance (4). In fact, a 1994 documentary about the First Nation, The Washing of Tears,  discusses just that, showcasing how the repatriation of the shrine would be a source of spiritual healing for a people desperately trying to preserve and live their cultures through their knowledge systems. Indigenous knowledge systems are understandings of reality, exclusive to each indigenous group, developed over centuries by local communities and grounded in a deep-rooted understanding of local ecosystems (5). In essence, the return re-centres indigenous knowledge systems, creating a new, more promising future that allows the Mowachaht/Muchalaht First Nation’s secluded past to be brought to the forefront (6).

Moreover, another interesting aspect of this case is that, due to the shrine’s importance, the community leaders planned to reconnect it with cultural practices and community spaces rather than display it as an ethnographic artefact. As Maquinna said, ‘Although it has been housed in the museum for many years, it doesn’t belong in a sheltered environment. It needs to be in the elements and the environment from which it came, which is Yuquot’ (4). This is a fascinating point, as it directly opposes Western ideas about how to interact with heritage: whilst the consensus is to place them in museums where they can be cherished and preserved, others want to engage with such artefacts continuously. This mindset goes against Western forms of thinking, which centre museums as the ultimate locale for heritage items: in short, it is merely one epistemology that adopts this viewpoint, not something universal (7). In that sense, decolonial practices enable re-futuring by giving space for other epistemologies and worldviews to emerge and not be superseded by dominant perspectives.

This form of direct interaction with sacred objects of the past, especially in the case of the Whaler’s Shrine, perhaps ultimately encompasses the process of refuturing. The Mowachaht/Muchalaht First Nation, who were unable to practice their spiritual rites to the fullest due to the shrine’s removal, had their futures, built on their past experiences and own epistemology, stolen. However, the shrine’s repatriation is a first step towards a new future: the link between their past beliefs and the shrine’s presence in its original place in the present allows their futures to flourish under the First Nation’s fullest beliefs. It is as Britta Timm Knudsen et al. (1) have said in their theory: ‘Re-futuring happens in decolonial endeavours that are invested with the emotion and affect of hope, and it happens in the politicised heritage modality of removal and re-emergence.’ It is precisely through this emergence of erased pasts that new futures could emerge. Additionally, as we have noticed, the existence of this linkage almost serves as a healing tool of sorts: the First Nation at peace, knowing they can live their futures as their ancestors did. The First Nation’s epistemology is thus the opposite of the overarching Western one, in that sacred artefacts must not be put in museums but should instead be continually engaged with in the present and future, as they have been in the past. 

This is the power decolonial practices have had over the past, present, and future. People who were once neglected, pasts that were once overwritten, presents that were once oppressed, and futures that were once stolen can now all be changed. Through decolonialism, the once de-futured people can now truly interpret their own pasts, use them to shape their present, and create a future they choose for themselves. That is the temporal power of decolonialism.

About the Author

Abdelrahman Amir Abourida is pursuing a Master’s in Arts and Culture, specialising in Modern Political Culture at Maastricht University. My research explores the intersection of all temporal concepts with decolonialism. Effectively, this study aims to showcase how practices such as repatriation could re-future previously de-futured groups of people.

References

1. Britta Timm Knudsen, Oldfield, J. R., Buettner, E., & Elvan Zabunyan. (2022). Decolonizing colonial heritage: new agendas, actors and practices in and beyond Europe (pp. 1–22). Routledge.
2. Price, J. (2025, March 20). The Whalers Washing House is finally coming home. Rabble.ca. https://rabble.ca/indigenous/the-whalers-washing-house-finally-coming-home/
3. Jacobs, J. (2025, March 30). After 120 Years Stored in a Museum, an Indigenous Shrine Returns Home. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/30/arts/design/museum-of-natural-history-returns-shrine.html
4. Plummer, E. (2025, April 2). Whalers’ shrine returns home after 120 years in museum storage | Ha-Shilth-Sa Newspaper. Hashilthsa.com. https://hashilthsa.com/news/2025-04-02/whalers-shrine-returns-home-after-120-years-museum-storage
5. Ijatuyi, E. J., Lamm, A., Yessoufou, K., Suinyuy, T., & Patrick, H. O. (2025). Integration of indigenous knowledge with scientific knowledge: A systematic review. Environmental Science & Policy, 170(104119), 104119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104119
6. Gnecco, C., & Hernández, C. (2008). History and Its Discontents. Current Anthropology, 49(3), 439–466. https://doi.org/10.1086/588497
7. Mignolo, W. D. (2002). The Geopolitics of Knowledge and the Colonial Difference. South Atlantic Quarterly, 101(1), 57–96. https://doi.org/10.1215/00382876-101-1-57

Images

Cbone. “File:Yuquot National Historic Site pole figure.2.jpg.” Wikimedia Commons, September 30, 2005. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Yuquot_National_Historic_Site_pole_figure.2.jpg. (Cover Image)

Eisbaer44. “ File:Wal Schrein Insel Vancouver, Kanada.jpg.” Wikimedia Commons. February 28, 2018. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wal_Schrein_Insel_Vancouver,_Kanada.jpg. (Figure 1)

The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of EuroClio, the Contested Histories Initiative or any of its affiliates. Neither EuroClio nor the Contested Histories Initiative can be held responsible for them.