John Locke's 17th century Classical Liberal work, the Two Treatises of Government sets out to create a theory of just government, grounded in property rights and individual liberty. Locke's writings greatly influenced the founding fathers of the U.S. Constitutional system. Chapter V of the Second Treatise of Government argues for the justifications for land theft of the Indigenous tribes of North America, in order for European settlers to establish colonial rule. The fundamental Indigenous concept that inhibited the spread of Liberal society was "ownership" of land in common. In this way, Liberal ideology sets out to justify individual property ownership, while undermining the Indigenous way of life. The focus of this study is the epistemological struggle between Liberal individualism and Indigenous community, which continues in America to the present. The intent of this study is to conduct a literary analysis of critical Indigenous and Classical Liberal scholarship in order to analyze how Classical Liberalism's epistemology of individualism subverts the Indigenous epistemology of community. Additionally, the study seeks to uncover the current practical implications of this subversion on the Indigenous peoples of North America. Specifically, how does this subversion impact current land and water struggles between the U.S. Government, their corporate allies and the Indigenous peoples? The findings of this study aim to expand the Indigenous critique of Liberal individualism. 

To many “he” or “she” is just a word, but for the transgender individual these words pose an emotionally charged socialization. An instance of misgendering, being a very common experience for transgender individuals, has an association with violence and ultimately a denial of self. While the trans community has recognized the significance of accurate language in including trans persons in social groups, the relationship between language and an individual’s identity has yet to be fully explored. This research seeks to define the role of pronouns as a connection to the trans individual’s personal identity. Specifically, how someone’s use of accurate pronouns may recognize who an individual is and the adverse impact of inaccurate language. My approach is contextual, contingent on the knowledge one has about the person they are speaking about, in hopes of reconciling the issue of privacy and potential harm of misgendering a person. Under an ethical framework, I assert that we have a positive duty to use the pronouns that a trans person prefers. However, one can only say someone’s pronouns if they are aware of the pronouns that person uses. So in order to maintain a protection of both one’s personal identity and privacy, I propose that one ought to use “they” in reference to another person until they are aware of that person’s pronouns with certainty.