wrote a piece on the use of "agency" in justifying imperialism. it's a form of cheap moralism hiding behind a thin veil of profundity and clarity, and leads to absurd claims as it prevents any kind of serious and systemic analysis of power and its effects
zeisquirrel.substack.com/p/a-note-on-ag…
zeisquirrel.substack.com/p/a-note-on-ag…
ten people of about equal ability are able to do more than one person. even more so for a hundred. so they have more "agency". add factors to it like wealth, and the discrepancy in "agency", in power, becomes even more obvious. yet it is exactly this basic truism that's denied
instead you're supposed to adopt this comically absurd view that institutions with vast wealth and resources, advanced military technology, access to and control of mass media and propaganda tools, are all just totally irrelevant in the face of some ambiguous notion of "agency"
and this is selectively applied. "agency" is only employed to justify western imperialism and the actions of western states, as a rhetorical tool to deflect from it. when Official Enemies do something, suddenly they're all-powerful monolithic evil forces that trample any "agency"
most importantly is how the term not only prevents one from engaging in systemic analysis, as power imbalances are no longer deemed to be a relevant factor, but as an extension of this it also prevents any kind of politics which is aimed toward realizing systemic change
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
