Abstract
The discursive and material tensions between words and ideas within geography have real impacts on the lives of peoples and the places we describe and study, and thus we should not take such tasks lightly. Political geography is limited by relying on existing genealogies and the limits of Anglo-based language. Silences and gaps can be better addressed by engaging with scholarship and ways of being from ‘other’ places as well as enriching genealogies to include postcolonial and feminist scholarship. While we can argue over the tracing of keywords or problematic interpretations in genealogical interventions, we should also at the same time be accountable to what has been and is continued to be overlooked, ignored, erased, or captured.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.