 The first condition has to do with a version of what Elena Ruíz calls “epistemic imperialism.” This is her name for states of affairs in which hegemonic modes of epistemic practice “reproduce interpretive conditions favorable to the dominant assumptions.” Philosophical activity under these conditions “creates and maintains interpretive spaces in philosophy that are self-confirming rather than culturally open and plural,” and also “clears the way for the devaluation of non-dominant intellectual traditions through tacit methodological assumptions” (Ruíz 2018, 52–53). What this means is that oppressive conditions exclude their victims from knowledge production not simply by preventing people with certain bodies, backgrounds, beliefs, or other distinguishing features from entering the institutions charged with knowledge work, but also by engineering the conceptual and theoretical tools to promote epistemic numbness and turn exclusion into erasure.