Afro-Futurism runs congruent with Indigenous Futurism as the only paradigm to destroy anti-blackness and settler-colonialism. Solves better than the alternative and avoids the trapping of a reductive land paradigm that locks the native within settler modes of sovereignty and recognition.

The relationship between Native genocide and anti-Blackness has been articulated sometimes in terms of presumed solidarity or comparison, such as the notion that Native peoples harbored runaway slaves and that Black fugitives assisted Native peoples in armed struggle against settler encroachment. Sometimes it has been articulated in terms of antagonism, such as the focus on Native peoples who owned slaves and on enslaved or indentured Black people who participated in settler raids on Native nations. Nowadays, it seems to be in terms of incommensurability, which asserts a lack of commonality/relationality between Black and Native folks. This project emerges from us thinking that all of these modes are insufficient. While certainly solidarity, antagonism, and incommensurability are distinct and no one mode of relationality can be presumed, at the same time it is illogical to presume we can talk about any mode without doing it in relationship with one another. If we submit momentarily to the popular position that Black and Native peoples and, by extension, Black and Native politics are at an impasse represented by their incommensurability, then the flip side of being stuck together—or this stuckness—is already a form of relationality. As a result, we think Édouard Glissant’s “relation” seems to be a helpful starting point: Relation...does not act upon prime elements that are separable or re-ducible. If this were true, it would itself be reduced to some mechanics capable of being taken apart or reproduced. It does not precede itself in its action and presupposes no a priori. It is the boundless effort of the world, to become realized in its totality, that is to evade rest. One does not first enter Relation, as one might enter a religion. One does not first conceive of it the way we have expected to conceive of Being.1 2Tiffany Lethabo King, Jenell Navarro & Andrea SmithIt seems that much analysis of the relationship between Indigenous geno-cide/settler colonialism and anti-Blackness tends to be prescriptive in that the analysis presumes a certain prescribed politic—whether it be a call for solidarity in a certain way or a call to reject solidarity. But analysis of re-lationality suggests something otherwise—that the relationality between genocide and anti-Blackness is not fixed and easily knowable. In addition, to borrow from Antonio Viego’s Dead Subjects, t here is an imperative in the academy to make Native peoples knowable and to presume that Black peoples are already known.2 Thus, not surprisingly, the relationship between the two is presumed to be fully representable and it keeps Black and Indig-enous communities in isolation from one another, which is a settler desire/dream.