This manuscript from Hollinshead and Vellah calls for researchers in Tourism Studies and Related Fields to reflect upon their own role in refreshing the social imaginaries of 'after-colonialism' under the nomadisms of our time. Deleuzian in outlook, it positions the ‘post’ of postcolonialism not as an end to colonialism’s imperatives but as a generative-portal through which new-seeds-of-‘becoming’ are discernable as the postidentities (rather than the ‘identities’) of populations are interpretable in multidirectional, non-hierarchical, and not easily-predictable ways. In provoking (after Deleuze) thought per rhizomatic processes (rather than via fixed concepts), the manuscript — critiquing these dynamic matters of 'postidentity' — then harnesses the insights of (Leela) Ghandi’s on hybrid-nomadic-subjects, and of Venn on alternative-(com)possible-futures. Thereafter, these concerns of and about 'after-colonialism' are critically contextualised within Aboriginal ‘Australia’, via the views of a pool of Indigenous intellectuals there, who synthesise the disruptive dialectics of belonging-cum-aspiration which they maintain that they and fellow Aboriginal people (of many sorts) face today. Throughout this manuscript, the agency and authority of tourism hovers in its sometimes-manifest / sometimes-latent generative power to project empowering postidentities for the world's 'host' or 'visited' populations today.

In this second of three related papers on the adoption of disruptive qualitative cum interpretive research approaches, further coverage is given to the contexts and issues that ‘soft science’ social scientists (and humanists, and posthumanists) face today. While the first paper (by Hollinshead, Suleman, and Nair here in Tourism, Culture and Communication*) made the case for the potential of disruptive qualitative research and subtle science outlooks in Tourism Studies — to help compensate for the domain’s perduring calibrative, managerialist and fast-capitalist perspectives — this follow-up manuscript (by Hollinshead, Suleman, and Vellah) is a consolidation of the advanced social justice material being covered overall. In this second of the three companion papers, the authors provide a further insight on the soft science concepts and constructions that have been aired in the important watershed book on ‘subtle science methodology’ by Brown, Carducci, and Kuby (entitled Disrupting Qualitative Inquiry). In this second of the three cousin manuscripts, the need for such research-as-resistance insights within Tourism Studies is expressed per medium of the complex ways in which tourism is imbricated with a sometimes bewildering litany of ongoing cultural, political, economic, environmental, psychic, and other matters, something that regularly renders the ontologies of tourism and travel/Tourism Studies difficult to profile and fathom on account of the fluid acumen (or plural knowability/critical multilogicality) required. At the end of this second manuscript, a further seven terms are explicated for the cumulative glossary being developed across the three companion manuscripts. These terms include ‘methodological freedom’ and ‘guided wandering’ (vis-avis the discursive cartography of tourism). The third paper (by Hollinshead, Suleman, and Lo **) completes the additive glossary by explain terms and concepts that pertain to (1) the revised cognitive practices of tourism, and (2) the rhetorics of futurity of tourism.* The Unsettlement of Tourism Studies: Positive Decolonisation, Deep Listening, and Dethinking today (Hollinshead, Suleman, and Nair, Tourism, Culture and Communication, 21 (2). ** The Evocative Power of Tourism Studies: Positive Interruption, Interdependence, and Imagining Forward Today (Hollinshead, Suleman, and Lo [In Press: TCC])