Opening "Imaginative Geographies" and then its subtag "Sites of Conflict or Coercion" reveals a number of pages from various modules, a starting point for investigating how these "sites of conflict or coercion" are constituted and what shared or distinctive aspects they reveal.
Opening "Figures" and its subtag "Native" reveals a set of overlaps with the "Sites of Conflict or Coercion" results. One can now consider how the figure of the native constitutes a critical element in different spatializations of conflict, and compare findings across these cases/modules.
Again, let's start by opening "Imaginative Geographies" and its subtag "Sites of Conflict or Coercion."
This time, opening "Flows" and its subtag "Information/Knowledge" reveals a somewhat different set of overlaps, also from multiple modules. Note that "information/Knowledge" is a dense node, and in itself provides ample opportunities to investigate how flows of information or knowledge structure space and movements through it, or are structured by spatial factors.
To add a layer to the exploration, let's identify "The Science of Empire" as a page tagged by "Information/Knowledge," and see if it produces any interesting connections to the current set of results.
Clicking on "The Science of Empire" reveals, among other items, a subtag titled "Discourses of Development."
"Discourses of Development" intersects with "Sites of Conflict or Coercion" and "Information/Knowledge" at one page: "Modernizing Mongolians." One can focus in on that page to query its characteristics.
But one can also look at the set of pages tagged by "Discourses of Development" that does not overlap with the other tags, and consider what might distinguish them from those that have been tagged with "Sites of Conflict or Coercion" and "Information/Knowledge." One might also find that some of those pages do in fact reveal aspects of conflict or coercion, and develop a spatial historical narrative and argument based on the available evidence. (Similarly, one can examine the other pages tagged "Sites of Conflict or Coercion" to see whether they are not informed by discourses of development.) One can also suggest that the pages be re-tagged accordingly -- in fact, this process permits the user to interrogate the thinking of the Bodies and Structures authors and editors, and thus both reflect on how scholarly claims are constituted and contribute to the broad conversation that we are promoting through this platform.