Our seminar this year aims to examine conventional liberal narratives of freedom and progress through intersecting frames mainly of race and colonial subject hood, and with an accent on slavery and emancipation. Neither slavery nor colonialism commands ethical legitimacy among historians, yet they still cast a long shadow on how we think about the past. Have dominant white/settler/colonizer subjectivities been more enduring in the historiography than our assumptions about diversity and inclusion allow? If yes, how can we explain their dominance? What might it mean to hear other voices and subjectivities on their own terms? How may this be possible within the discipline of history?