Negative perceptions of being Aboriginal persist and policies such as self-determination are generally perceived to have failed despite many texts to the contrary. This thesis examines assumptions and presuppositions within contemporary writings and practices, determining in the process, conditions seeming necessary for decolonising ways of living and research. Much closer attention is required not only to developing better understandings, but especially to articulating explanations via the reality of deep structures, their powers and causal mechanisms underpinning social life generally and in particular, the lived experience of oppressed communities. Neo-Nietzscheanism and post-structuralism tend to see reality as merely constructed. Maximising movements of solidarity with the oppressed must express the freedom of everyone in any particular place. The thesis begins by exploring the nature and significance of philosophical underlabouring (clearing the ground) for decolonisation as self-emancipation. It then engages with issues of value, truth and power by means of establishing a critical realist dialogue between two sets of writings. Key works by Australian (Japanangka West, Yolnju) Maori (Tuhiwai Smith) and American (Moonhawk Alford, Taiaiake Alfred) First Nations thinkers in modernity's colonial context are retroductively analysed in order to suggest what must be the case (in terms of being and becoming) for decolonisation to be possible. Works by philosophers currently establishing and applying Bhaskarian transcendental dialectical critical realist and/or meta-Realist principles of self-emancipation are critiqued in relation to their compatibility with decolonisation. Terms of reference within this dialogue are then supplemented from within writings by a range of others (Fanon, Said, Otto and Levinas), selected for their perceived significance in developing a dialectical praxis of personal and social transformation through spirit within the domain of strengthening community and protecting children.