O/V

The ethic of coloniality makes serial policy failure and

error replication inevitable it biases research and skews
claims of development
Ibarra-Colado 7 (Eduardo, Professor of Management Studies at the
Department of Economic Production, Metropolitan Autonomous University,
Organization Studies and Epistemic Coloniality in Latin America: Thinking
Otherness from the Margins)

Since the abolition of slavery, this principle of

colonial humanitarianism has been making an
advance, but the imperial powers must now
realize that Europeans (and American
imperialists for that matter) are not the racial
superiors of any other race, and unless this
bugaboo of race superiority is renounced,
there can be no sincere progress or interracial and international peace and good
will.28 Dr. George Dorsey of the University of
Chicago, recently criticized this idea of race
superiority and inferiority, when in his famous
treatise he said that too many abstract
formulae about humanity and too little
common sense for solving concrete social
problems make human association and
fellowship increasingly tense; "But," he states,
"the 'racial purity' and 'racial inferiority'

behind such books as McDougall's Is America

Safe for Democracy? Chamberlain's
Foundations of Nineteenth Century
Civilization; Grant's The Passing of the Great
Race; Wiggam's The New Decalogue of
Science; Gould's America a Family Matter; and
East's Mankind at the Crossroads, are pure
bunk and simple. If the United States wish to
restrict immigration to 'Nordics' or to this or
that political group why not say so and be
done with it? To bolster up racial prejudice or
a Nordic or a Puritan complex by false and
misleading inferences drawn from
'intelligence tests' or from pseudo-biology and
ethnology is to throw away science and fall
back on the mentality of primitive savagery.
Evolution produced a human brain, our only
remarkable inheritance. Nothing else counts.
Body is simply brain's servant. Treat the body
right, of course; no brain can function well
without good service. But why worry more
about the looks, color, and clothes of the
servant than the service it performs? "2 Weyl
holds that the social goal of democracy is
advancement of the people through a

democratization of advantages and

opportunities of life.30 Even Edmund Burke,
the fore-sighted statesman of England,
warned the British regarding its policy under
the complex of race superiority in the colonies
thus: "Let the colonies always keep the idea of
their civil rights associated with your
government; they will cling and grapple to
you; and no force under heaven will be of
power to tear them from their allegiance. But
let it be once understood, that your
government may be one thing, and your
privileges another; that these two things may
exist without any mutual relation; the cement
is gone; the cohesion is loosened, and
everything hastens to decay and
dissolution .... Deny them this participation
of freedom, and you break that sole bond
which originally made, and must still preserve
the unity of the Empire."'" Thus the dual
mandate principle entails more than
trusteeship, it entails social progress and
social progress entails a liberality of attitude
and equal opportunities so that these
adolescents will reap the benefit of a realistic

and not a fictitious mandates principle. This is

a challenge to international morality and
particularly the League of Nations.

FW
FW whoever best solves colonialism
The alt is key to decolonizing the debate space
introducing radical thought in our community is a pre-rec
to dismantling power structures
Suarez 12 (Julia Suarez-Krabbe. Assistant professor at Roskilde University, The
Department of Culture and Identity Interkulturelle studier Universitetsvej 1, 3.1.5 DK-4000,
Roskilde Denmark Epistemic Coyotismo and Transnational Collaboration: Decolonizing the
Danish University Human Architecture: Journal of the Sociology of Self- Knowledge Volume
10 Issue 1 Decolonizing the University: Practicing Pluriversity 1-1-2012 Article 5)

One of the most effective ways to work against epistemic racism

is through what Nelson Maldonado-Torres has called epistemic
coyotismo. Epistemic coyotismo consists of introducing
theories and ideas that are banned or excluded from the
halls of academia into the universities and formal centers
of learning (2006:16). In my experience, the introduction of
theories and ideas otherwise banned is especially fruit- ful for
students who, at the same time, often take those theories beyond
the specific class or project in which they have learned about
them. This means that the theories and ideas can to some extent
infiltrate academia from below: the students will for example
present an essay on another issue, which brings to the fore some
of these otherwise excluded theories. In this manner other faculty
will start recognizing, if not neces- sarily acknowledging, them.
When introduc- ing such theories to students, I have found it
useful to add to the introduction a word of warning: they must
know what kind of invalidating strategies they will encounter
when using these other theories, such as the strategies of
epistemic racism that I listed previously. This helps to prepare the
students for countering these strategies by addressing them in
advance. In my experi- ence, the fact that the list of strategies of
invisibilization, or epistemic racism, presented in the previous
section, is not an expression of the teachers paranoia, but a
realistic description of some of the mecha- nisms at work today in

their own univer- sity, often surprises them. However, epistemic

coyotismo pursued only at this level does not suffice. There is a
need to promote destabilising spaces of debate that move beyond
the classroom level and are aimed at unsettling the mech- anisms
of epistemic racism. At the same time, there is a strong need to
address the ways in which the coloniality of knowledge manifests
itself. By mapping and address- ing the global articulations of
power, the dismantling of the same becomes a realistic
possibility. We know that there is a strong resistance towards
these hegemonic articu- lations of powermost powerfully among
social and ethnic movements in the South. To some extent, this
resistance is also at play within the university sector in the South.
In the North, it is still very weak.10 As mentioned, the university
in the North is strongly attached to the triangle of colo- niality
and, indeed, works as a powerful weapon of global apartheid. As
such, that is, as a weapon, it needs to be dismantled. Therefore,
epistemic coyotismo in the North must necessarily be articulated
with the epistemic resistance (and coyotismo) in the South. To
start dissolving the power of the transnational elites, they need to
be countered transnationally. Indeed, whether we like it or not,
epistemic coyotes are, leaving aside our very different geo-bodypolitics, very often members of the transna- tional elites. We
might find ourselves in precarious conditions and marginal positions within the university, and probably most of us embody that
incorporated dissent that is tolerated as long as it does not
constitute a serious threat. Neverthe- less, we are (peripherally)
part of the global elites. This means that however negative the
picture of coloniality is, and however persistent global apartheid
remains, we have some margin for maneuvre that must be
exploited to the greatest extent. As Castro-Gomez (2007:80) has
argued, ... even within the University new paradigms of thought
and organi- zation are being incorporated, [paradigms] that could
help break the trap of [the] modern/colonial triangle, though still
very precari- ously. I refer specifically to trans- disciplinarity and
complex thought as emerging models from which we could begin
to build bridges towards a transcultural di- alogue of knowledges

(my transla- tion). In this respect, strategic alliances between

epistemic coyotes and critical members of the transnational
elites (poten- tial epistemic coyotes) must not be discarded
insofar as they provide impor- tant fields of action and improve
the possi- bilities of achieving access to funding. In any case,
efforts at decolonizing the univer- sity in Denmark must
necessarily aim to foster encounters between different epistemologies. Furthermore, as we know, decolonization requires a
change in the subject (Maldonado-Torres, 2008; Gordon, 2004).
My bet is that, at this initial point, in Denmark this change must
be fomented through these encountershopefully direct ones, as
in seminars, courses, and other such forums.

Links
Strategies for curtailing/modifying surveillance fail to question the
state itself, this allows the state to continue violent surveillance
techniques that render certain populations manageable and
expendable
Smith 15 (Andrea Smith NOT-SEEING: State Surveillance, Settler Colonialism,
and Gender Violence, Dubrofsky, Rachel E. Feminist Surveillance Studies. N.p.:
Duke UP, 2015. Pgs 21-38. KLB)
The focus of surveillance studies has generally been on the modern, bureaucratic state. And yet, as David
Stannard's (1992) account of the sexual surveillance of indigenous peoples within the Spanish mission system in
the Americas demonstrates, the history of patriarchal and colonialist surveillance in this continent is much longer.

The traditional account of surveillance studies tends to occlude the

manner in which the settler state is foundationally built on surveillance.
Because surveillance studies focuses on the modern, bureaucratic state, it has
failed to account for the gendered colonial history of surveillance .
Consequently, the strategies for addressing surveillance do not question the
state itself, but rather seek to modify the extent to which and the manner
in which the state surveils. As Mark Rifkin (2011) and Scott Morgensen (2011) additionally
demonstrate, the sexual surveillance of native peoples was a key strategy by
which native peoples were rendered manageable populations within the
colonial state. One would think that an anticolonial feminist analysis would be central to the field of
surveillance studies. Yet, ironically, it is this focus on the modern state that often
obfuscates the settler colonialist underpinning of technologies of
surveillance. I explore how a feminist surveillance-studies focus on gendered colonial violence reshapes the
field by bringing into view that which cannot be seen: the surveillance strategies that have
effected indigenous disappearance in order to establish the settler state itself. In
particular, a focus on gendered settler colonialism foregrounds how
surveillance is not simply about "seeing" but about "not-seeing" the
settler state.

The affs call for action in the name of national security/terrorism is a

guise to continue unregulated surveillance tactics. The aff is a
distraction from the larger system of surveillance.
Zureik 13 (Elia Zureik, Colonial Oversight, Fall 2013, pg 49.
http://www.sscqueens.org/sites/default/files/Zureik%20Colonial%20oversight
%20essay%20Red%20Pepper%20octnov13-1-1.pdf. KLB)
In the 21st century, issues of state and corporate surveillance
have become paramount. Recent revelations have highlighted the use of snooping
tactics by the Obama administration. In search of terrorists, the US is prepared
to bypass warrants and court procedures, casting its surveillance web to
include people within the US and overseas. The collection of personal data by
the corporate sector and their willingness to share such data with the Obama
Surveillance expansion.

administration has added to the fears expressed by human rights groups. The past
two decades have seen an accelerated expansion of overt surveillance
practices in warfare. The use of drones in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other
parts of the Middle East such as Yemen is now acknowledged as a form of
targeted assassination through remote control. With the push of a button,
soldiers sitting behind desks thousands of miles away from the conflict zone can
wreak havoc on unsuspecting communities through so-called collateral damage. An
old hand in the business of surveillance, Israel uses its military power to market its military hardware, drones in
particular, as field-tested technology. Palestinians in the occupied territories constitute a laboratory for drone

Like the US, Israel is immune from international

legal sanctions against the use of such lethal weapons. Surveillance
technologies of one kind or another are a constant factor that highlights
the workings of colonialism, whether in the 16th or 21st century. Resistance to
surveillance is gaining ground. National security arguments are being subjected to
scrutiny, and there is more awareness of the role of surveillance in
violating human rights. It is accurate to say that such awareness is more evident in the so-called
testing that Israel touts in its sales pitch.

advanced countries, the originators of colonialism. Whether resistance to surveillance will be manifest in the third
world remains to be seen.

A2: Zuriek 13- We are not a call to action in the name of national
security, We reduce surveillance.
The right to privacy is not afforded to all people- the aff does not
prevent the surveillance of people of color but additionally ensures that
violence in the private sphere continues and absolves the government
of responsibility for private sphere violence
Smith 15 (Andrea Smith NOT-SEEING: State Surveillance, Settler Colonialism,
and Gender Violence, Dubrofsky, Rachel E. Feminist Surveillance Studies. N.p.:
Duke UP, 2015. Pgs 21-38. KLB)
One of the reasons for the antiviolence movement's investment in the state derives from its concerns with the

much of the focus of surveillance studies is on "privacy"-how

the state monitors the individual lives of peoples .3 Of course, as feminist scholars argue, the
assumption that the protection of privacy is an unmediated good is
problematic, since the private sphere is where women are generally
subjected to violence.4 And, as feminists of color in particular have noted,
not all women are equally entitled to privacy. Saidiya Hartman points out
that, on the one hand, the abuse and enslavement of African Americans
was often marked as taking place in the private sphere and hence beyond
the reach of the state to correct. And yet, paradoxically, the private space
of black families was seen as an extension of the workplace and hence
subject to police power (Hartman 1997, 160, 173). Anannya Bhattacharjee similarly recounts an
private sphere. As Lyon notes,

incident in which a domestic worker complained to her social-justice organization that she was being abused by her
white employer.5 When Bhattacharjee on behalf of the organization contacted the police to report the incident, she
was told that "if her organization tried to intervene by rescuing this person, that would be trespassing: In this case,
the privacy of these wealthy employers' home was held to be inviolate, while the plight of an immigrant worker
being held in a condition of involuntary servitude was not serious enough to merit police action ....

The

supposed privacy and sanctity of the home is a relative concept, whose application
is heavily conditioned by racial and economic status " (Bhattacharjee 2000, 29). As Patricia
Allard notes, women of color who receive public assistance are not generally
deemed worthy of privacy- they are subjected to the constant surveillance
of the state. Of course, all women seeking public services can be
surveilled, but welfare is generally racialized in the public imaginary
through the figure of the "welfare queen." Andrea Ritchie (2006), Anannya Bhattacharjee
(2001), and other scholars document how women of color, particularly those who are
non-gender conforming, who seek police intervention in cases of domestic violence
often find themselves subject to sexual assault, murder, and other forms of policeinflicted brutality.

The 1ACs desire for economic autonomy stimulates a colonial history of

economic and political assimilation of indigenous peoples within a
frame of sovereign citizenship.
Catellino 10. (Jessica R. Catellino, Professor of Anthropology, UCLA. The Double-Bind of American Indian Need-Based
Sovereignty. Cuan 16.4. March 5, 2010. http://evols.library.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/handle/10524/23603/cuan_1058.pdf?
sequence=1. MMG)

economic power undermined indigenous governance in the termination era

they understood wealth to be
the foundation of, and evidence for, individualized economic and political assimilation that
would reorient individuals relation to the settler state. Termination shifted the terrain from
sovereigntypolity to citizenshipindividual, with citizenship figured not in relation to
the indigenous nation but, rather, to the settler state . With passage of the Indian Citizenship Act
If collective

, it also was unrecognizable in many termination advocates eyes because

of 1924, all American Indians were granted nonexclusive U.S. citizenship, whether or not they wanted it, and

The termination of indigenous sovereignty via the

dismantling of tribal governments was inextricably intertwined with a focus on
economic contribution as the measure of individual (U.S.) citizenship. The citizenship
despite efforts by some to refuse it.17

status of indigenous individuals in liberal settler states poses a fundamental dilemma: how can nation-states that
commit to equality among the citizenry take account of the differential political status of indigenous peoples as
citizens both of indigenous polities (e.g., the Seminole Tribe of Florida) and of settler states (e.g., the United
States)? Scholars have examined this dilemma with regard to political rights and legal claims (Kymlicka 1995;
Maaka and Fleras 2005; Paine 1999; Peterson and Sanders 1998; Povinelli 2002), and Thomas Biolsi (2005), among

the economic
dimensions of citizenshipor what T. H. Marshall (1992) famously named social citizenship
for indigenous people. Those who have done so usually note that indigenous citizenship in
settler states often is organized by need. Jeremy Beckett (1988) and Robert Paine (1977, 1984),
among others, have developed the concept of welfare colonialism to characterize
the ways in which aboriginal citizens are addressed as needing service provision
and thereby occupy subordinate positions in settler states.18 Taken together, American Indians
others, has analyzed the hybrid political space of dual citizenship. Fewer have explored

remain the poorest ethnicracial group in the United States, despite recent gains from gaming profits (Taylor and
Kalt 2005), and the bureaucratic production, assessment, and meeting of need have been occasions for many

some termination supporters,

including a few Indian advocacy groups, took the governmental relationship to be
one not of sovereign recognition but, rather, of destructive paternalism (embodied by
supervisory reservation-based Indian agents).19 The absence of need, however, has the
potential to render indigenous polities unrecognizable to the state . One example of this
indigenous individuals to encounter the state. This helps to explain why

double bind was the federal determination of Indian eligibility for U.S. citizenship based on economic competence
(often but not only coded by categories like mixed blood) during the implementation of the General Allotment Act

(Dawes Act) of 1887. Tellingly, the Dawes Act stipulated that the acceptance of U.S. citizenship, with allegiance
sometimes ritually sworn on a plow handle, required severing political allegiance to tribal governments. Teddy
Roosevelt famously promoted allotment as a mighty pulverizing engine, to break up the tribal mass (Wilkinson
2005:43). Today, Seminoles live at civic boundaries when they decide whether or not to vote in tribal and extratribal
elections, when they cheer on Florida college football teams, and when they honor U.S. military veterans.20 Less
obviously, they also do so when they decide whether or not to hang Seminole Indian license plates on their
vehicles and risk them being keyed in parking lots, when Seminole women decide whether to take husbands
surnames, when non-Seminoles ask how they can sign up for tribal membership on learning of gaming-generated
benefits, when Seminole leaders serve on regional tourism boards and other governing bodies, and when all
Seminoles answer for the millionth time whether they pay taxes (yes) or just how much they receive in gamingbased per capita payments from the tribal government (the number is rarely disclosed).21 During the termination

evidence of Seminoles economic capacity and market integration coded

them as (productive) U.S. citizens, ready for termination and equal status with
non-Indians, while glaring economic need was cited by termination opponents as justification for ongoing tribal
governance. The focus on civic egalitarianism was not unique to the Seminole hearings;
indeed, the termination bills stated goal was: to make the Indians within the
territorial limits of the United States subject to the same laws and entitled to the
same privileges and responsibilities as are applicable to other citizens of the United
hearings,

States, to end their status as wards of the United States, and to grant them all of the rights and prerogatives
pertaining to American citizenship ([H. Con. Res. 108] 67 Stat. B122).22 Becoming full citizens (recall that
American Indians already were citizens under the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924) entailed no longer being wards,a
term that referred to the Marshall U.S. Supreme Court opinions of the 1830s categorizing Indian tribes as domestic
dependent nations, in a state of pupilage wherein their relation to the U.S. resembles that of a ward to his

Foremost among the

responsibilities that Indians would assume with termination was to contribute as
proper economic actors. American Indian individuals were encouraged to take up
new economic lives, and collective lands would convert to individual property ownership; some tribes were
guardian (Cherokee Nation v. Georgia 1831, 30 U.S. [5 Pet.], 1617).

targeted for relocation to join the urban industrial labor force. There was some ambiguity about Seminole
individualization when lawmakers suggested that Seminoles could create a posttermination private corporation to
hold their lands. Officials insisted, however, that Seminoles henceforth would be treated as individual citizens, not a
governmental entity, regardless of whether they formed a corporation, and they understood that collective assets
would be sold off (U.S. Congress 1954:1058).23 Questions and testimony on both sides were shot through with

modernist rhetoric of Indian progress that hinged economic participation to U.S.

citizenship. For example, a local non-Indian advocacy group, The Friends of the Seminoles (whose leadership
included prominent Fort Lauderdale store owners who traded with Seminoles), issued the following statement
endorsing Seminoles request to delay termination for 25 years: This time is necessary for the education and
experience of the youth of the Seminole Nation so that they may learn the English language and the white mans
ways, and be fitted to take their rightful place in our American way of life and as useful citizens of Florida (U.S.

citizenship entailed assimilation to the white mans ways,

implicitly through economic contributions (useful citizens), but this required interim federal
Congress 1955:12). Here,

support. A local Congressman, who supported Seminole resistance to termination, took the position that full U.S.
citizenship would have to be put on hold: I know that the Seminoles themselves do not want the responsibilities of
citizenship thrust upon them at this time (U.S. Congress 1954:1132). He worried that Seminoles were not ready to
manage property because of ignorance of ownership of real estate and taxes, because they were not equipped to

To be a fully progressed
U.S. citizen, agreed many termination advocates and opponents alike, required
entering the white economy. Indigenous economic success was a mode and sign
of whitening. One corollary was that citizenship in an indigenous polity was to be surpassed; another was that
take jobs in the white economy, and because they were not literate or educated.

real Indians remained poor.24

Impacts
Churchill 96
THE ALTERNATIVE IS NOT JUST ABOUT A SURVIVAL OF
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES ABOUT A WHOLE IT IS ABOUT THE
SURVIVAL ABOUT ALL HUMANS AND OUR PLANET
Churchill 96
[Ward, Codirector of the Colorado Chapter of the American Indian Movement. Prof.
of Ethnic Studies and American Indian Studies @ U. of Colorado, Boulder BA and MA
in Communications from Sangamon State, On a Native Son, Pg 31.//wyo-hdm]
Plainly,

all

official

polemics

to

the

contrary

notwithstanding,

the

agony

induced

by

500

years

of

For the
indigenous people of the continent it has become obvious that there are no real
alternatives but either to renew their commitment to struggle for survival or to
finally pass into the realm of extinction which has been relentlessly projected for
them since the predator's arrival on their shores . For everyone else, the situation is rapidly
becomingor in some cases has already becomemuch the same. The time has arrived when a
choice must be made: non-Indians, in both the New World and the Old, must decide whether
they wish to be a willing part of the final gnawing on the bones of their native
victims, or whether they are at last prepared to join hands with Native North
America, ending the wanton consumption of indigenous lands and lives which has
marked the nature of our relationship to date . The sort of alliance at issue no longer represents, as
it did in the past, an exercise in altruism for non-Indians. Antiimperialism, opposition to racism,
colonialism, and genocide, while worthy enough stances in and of themselves, are
no longer the fundamental issues at hand. Ultimately, the same system of predatory
goals and values which has so busily and mercilessly consumed the people of the
land these past five centuries has increasingly set about consuming the land itself.
European/Euroamerican predation in North America is anything but abated at this juncture.

Not only indigenous peoples, but also the land to which they are irrevocably linked, is now dying. When the land

The struggle which confronts usall of us

is thus a struggle to save our collective habitat, to maintain it as a "survivable"
environment, not only for ourselves, but also for the generations to come. Selfevidently, this cannot be approached either from the posture of the predator or from
any other position which allows the predator to continue with business as usual. At
itself dies, it is a certainty that no humans can survive.

long last, we have arrived at the point where there is a tangible, even overriding, confluence of interests between

the bodies of indigenous knowledge evidenced in the context

of Native North America at the point of the European invasion large-scale societies which
natives and non-natives. Here,

had perfected ways of organizing themselves into psychologically fulfilling wholes, experiencing very high
standards of material life, and still maintaining environmental harmonyshine like a beacon in the night. The

The liberation of
significant sectors of Native America stands to allow this knowledge to once again
be actualized in the "real world," not to recreate indigenous societies as they once
were, but to recreate themselves as they can be in the future. Therein lies the
information required to recreate this reality is still in place in many indigenous cultures.

modelthe laboratory, if you willfrom which a genuinely liberatory and sustainable alternative can be cast for
all humanity. In a very real sense, then, the fate of Native North America signifies the fate of the planet. The crux of
the matter rests, not merely in resistance to the predatory nature of the present Eurocentric status quo, but in

It follows that it is incumbent upon every conscious

humanred, white, black, brown, or yellow, old or young, male or femaleto do
whatever is within their power to ensure that the next halfmillennium heralds an
antithesis to the last.
conceiving viable sociocultural alternatives.

The desire for semiperipheral nations to reach core-nation

status spins the perpetual cycle of reliance on colonialism,
thus furthering the economic disparity and obscuring
answers to the problem
Santos 2 (Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Professor of Sociology at the School of
Economics, University of Coimbra. Winter 2002.Between Prospero and Caliban:
Colonialism, Postcolonialism, and Inter-identity
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3513784)
The third general hypothesis that has come to guide my research concerns these
two last questions, and particularly the analytical value of the theory of the world
system under the current conditions of globalization. I have dealt with this topic
elsewhere (Santos, 2001). Here, I will limit myself to enunciating the working
hypothesis I then developed. I believe that we find ourselves in an unstable phase
characterized by the overlapping of two forms of hierarchization: one, more rigid,
constitutes the world system from its beginning as center, semi-periphery, and
periphery; another, more flexible, distinguishes between what in the world system is
produced or defined as local and what is produced or defined as globa l.' Whereas
the former hierarchy continues to operate in relations among national societies or
economies, the second one occurs among domains of activities, practices,
knowledges, and narratives, be they economic, political or cultural. The overlapping
of these two forms of hierarchy and the reciprocal interferences they generate
explain the paradoxical situation we are in: inequalities inside the world
system (and inside each society that comprises it) get worse, while the factors
that cause them and the actions that might eventually reduce them are
increasingly difficult to identify. Finally, the fourth general working hypothesis is
that the Portuguese culture is a borderland culture. It has no content. It does have
form, however, and that form is the borderland zone. National cultures are a
creation of the nineteenth century, the historical product of a tension between
universalism and particularism as managed by the state. The state's role was
twofold: on the one had, it established the difference of the national culture as
opposed to the outside; on the other, it promoted cultural homogeneity inside the
national territory. My working hypothesis is that in Portugal the state never played
any of these roles satisfactorily; as a consequence, the Portuguese culture always
had a lot of trouble distinguishing itself from other national cultures, or if you wish it
always had great capacity not to distinguish itself from other national cultures; it
has, moreover, kept to this day a considerable internal heterogeneity. (Santos,
1994: 132- 133).

Alternative
Cross-apply Saurez 12 alt ke