Attending to the many faces of coloniality: Setting the stakes on when ‘the digital’ matters for theories of empire

Coloniality has and continues to have many faces. Due to the multifaceted and shapeshifting nature of these violent processes, frictions inevitably emerge when the many forked road of colonialism unravels on multiple scales and timelines. As such, to interrogate coloniality means contending with numerous sets of tensions. The timely piece, Uneven Datafication, by Akbari (2026) , is situated in these tensions where this important work carefully pulls out overarching processes of oppression born from colonialism while contending with the historic specificities of particular localities. This intervention builds on Akbari's contribution through three reflections on the theory as well as the meta-theoretical and epistemological landscape in which the conversation on coloniality is embedded in, namely: (i) the search for colonial canons, (ii) the plural temporalities of coloniality and (iii) the stakes of theories on empire. These reflections respond to the arguments Uneven Datafication thoughtfully articulates. However, they are also for the broader community seeking to attend to the insidious developments of colonialism more deeply; a community of scholars who are, ourselves, also differentially affected by various regimes of empire, and located in a set of scholarly practices that, too, are shaped by oppressive legacies.