Your concept of subjectivity is wrong; it is possible to challenge the inheritance of settler power

My project shifts questions of status—such as “Who is the settler?”—to ask instead how subjects are produced by social processes: “Who, under what conditions, inherits the power to represent or enact settler colonialism?” It thus responds to political demands that subjects who inherit the power of settler colonialism challenge their inheritance, which I do by investigating and clarifying the genealogies through which such subjects might arise. For instance, white-supremacist settler colonialism distinguishes “Native” from “settler” so as to naturalize whiteness in teleologies of modernity, civilization, and citizenship that predict Indigenous elimination and settler replacement. White subjects may appear—if their locations by nation, class, gender, sexuality, and disability can be made to match—as the settlers differentiated from the Natives whose lands and histories they inherit. Yet this definition is troubled immediately by the logic of elimination’s having operated precisely via amalgamation. Lawrence and Malinda Maynor Lowery explain that the Native identities of mixed-blood Native people are invalidated by their racialization as white or black through the policing of Native status and the redrawing of the color line. Maria Saldana-Portillo further explains how mixed Indigenous ancestry is produced by national projects of mestizaje to replace specific Indigenous identifications or land claims, and that whether conforming to white supremacy or indigenizing mestizos/as such projects can remain in tension with Native communities that retain a traditional collective identity. In light of these complexities, we cannot assume that all who are forcibly aligned with whiteness, blackness, or mestizaje are “non-Native,” even though their lives may be meaningfully defined by a lived difference from Native nationality and collectivity.