343 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 Y. G. Acar et al. (eds.), Researching Peace, Confict, and Power in the Field, Peace Psychology Book Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44113-5_18 Chapter 18 Recovering the Everyday Within and for Decolonial Peacebuilding Through Politico-Affective Space Shahnaaz Suffa, Nick Malherbe, and Mohamed Seedat To study the everyday is to wish to change it. To change the everyday is to bring its confu- sions into the light of day and into language; it is to make its latent conficts apparent, and thus to burst them asunder. It is therefore both theory and practice, critique and action. (Lefebvre, 2002, p. 226). Taken as ideology, as well as political, economic and moral philosophy, liberal- ism locates ‘the good life’ in individual freedoms (Richmond 2009a). Accordingly, liberals champion unregulated market forces, and the assumption that democratiza- tion always follows marketization (Paris 2010) as ideal in allowing for the fourish- ing of such freedoms (Brown 2006). Today, the hegemonic, most visible and best funded modes of peacebuilding rely signifcantly on the tenets of liberalism (Hudson 2016). In adhering to such liberal doctrine, the liberal peace is underpinned by the base assumption that democratic, capitalist societies are likely to engender the greatest levels of peace in local affairs and international relations (Rampton and Nadarajah 2017; Vásquez-Arenas 2018). From this perspective, “the liberal peace can be understood as a set of particular ideas and practices intended to reform and regulate polities in the global South” (Sabaratnam 2013, pp. 259–260). Richmond (2011) notes that resistance to colonial domination is often interpreted by liberal peace frameworks as wholly ‘violent’, and therefore denotes anathema to peace. It is in this sense that the liberal peace remains in large part indifferent to coloniality as an analytic in the conception of confict and violence prevention. This includes comprehension of the way violences reproduce and transmute in everyday lives, as well as the ontological (re)production of racial, gender and other differ- ences in the construction of relations of domination and subjugation. If we under- stand coloniality as a collection of systems that emerged out of Euro-North-American-centric modernity and are, today, observed in the colonial S. Suffa (*) · N. Malherbe · M. Seedat Institute for Social and Health Sciences, University of South Africa, Lenasia, South Africa South African Medical Research Council-University of South Africa Violence, Injury and Peace Research Unit, Tygerberg, South Africa e-mail: Shahnaaz.Suffa@mrc.ac.za; Nicholas.Malherbe@mrc.ac.za; Seedama@unisa.ac.za