the cultural appropriation discourse would make more sense if it were understood under the terrain of cultural annihilation innate to the ongoing project of colonialism. and not just hyperfocused on individual actions but grounded in an understanding of ownership/power/capital
what if our understanding was grounded in an understanding that the culture of colonial peoples who do not own anything—namely the means of production—cannot be meekly “appropriated,” only annihilated. i’m thinking of cabral here:
the struggle is against colonial-capital toward self-determination & a collective ownership of cultural/material production—& i’m sorry, but yelling at the kardashian’s, whatever corporation, or individual’s latest marketing scheme, isn’t challenging or leading to that. idk, tho!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with read ‘one dimensional queer’ x roderick ferguson

read ‘one dimensional queer’ x roderick ferguson Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @queersocialism

4 Sep
with the rise of the celebrity activist, there’s an increasing demand for every celebrity to be more “outspoken” and i just don’t think people realize just how terrible of an idea that is as most celebrities are… not v smart. and that’s okay.
i just think… instead of demanding celebrities “speak out,” we demand (or rather seize) their 12 bedroom homes they aren’t using & house the houseless, demand (or rather seize) their wealth & fund radical organizations, media, and survival programs, lol.
Read 6 tweets
16 Apr
and this is where the discourse has been stagnant for a few years now. first of all, this analysis is categorically insufficient/incorrect/anti-black.

but, this is where “privilege” & “intersectionality” (devoid of an ideology, as joy james talks about) discourse has led us, lol
you have people claiming (x) group has “privilege” & “benefits” from (x) structural oppression, and what happens is instead of interrogating the fact these colonial structures of power exist & how to eradicate them; you’re having endless insufficient debates about the semantics.
these liberal analyses of “privilege” have been trying to force people who are allegedly in-proximity to power to “acknowledge their privilege” and it has failed!

it has not challenged power, saved a life, fed any empty stomach’s—but the language is in everyone’s lexicon!
Read 8 tweets
15 Apr
this narrative of ‘cops as workers’ would cease, if we had a marxian analysis of class &broke away from traditional modalities of bourgeois economics which classifies people on the basis of arbitrary income & material possessions as opposed to proximity to the means of production
a lot of cops—especially those in big cities—are making BANK. so even if we’re to use the whole income thing, a lot of them aren’t in the same economic strata as an average worker.
but, either way, cops serve the rule of capital & private property; they are agents of the ruling class, which inherently makes them enemy of workers. so here we can’t even just mention proximity to means of production, but also their class/political character, how do they serve?
Read 4 tweets
10 Apr
first, if we are to take cedric robinson’s work serious: there were examples of racial regimes prior to the slave trade as evident by europe’s antagonistic relationship with many, at the time seemingly “racialized” groups, who would later “become” white (irish/jews/etc).
even beyond that: race was created in europe & the contemporary racial order cannot merely be belittled to being an invented tool of the ruling class to prevent “solidarity.” race was politically mobilized to justify the dehumanization/trafficking/enslavement of black africans.
how can “race” be belittled to being a “tool to divide the working class”—when it is the foundation upon which capitalism was originally formed?
Read 7 tweets
10 Apr
“race was invented to keep working class people divided,” in discussions about the antagonisms between black/white people is reductionist, and i think it would be more fruitful to name ideological whiteness as said tool that does ultimately negates solidarity & community building
the incredibly vague rhetoric of “race [dividing] working class people” implies race and its inherent constant terror & violence, is a two-way street—when it is, in fact, something that has been overwhelmingly enacted on wc/poor black people by white people of every class strata
yet, this is where the loudest & most dominant sectors of marxist discourse (that privileges a universalized + reductionist analysis of proximity/relationship to capital), particularly in the US/west, has historically failed, on the question of (particularly anti-black) racism!
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!