Hey, I know Twitter is horrible at communicating tone, but I genuinely feel like you're not really engaging me because I've already said that I do not disagree with you that #LandBack would save the planet nor have I argued that you are centering Settlers.
https://twitter.com/MelaninMvskoke/status/1555020239120674816
I don't really know where the disconnect is happening.
My critique is two-fold: a) Survivability is NOT the Settler's highest interest and the assumption that survival "benefits them" assumes a specific ethical and political frame that is not historically adopted by Settlers.
My critique is two-fold: a) Survivability is NOT the Settler's highest interest and the assumption that survival "benefits them" assumes a specific ethical and political frame that is not historically adopted by Settlers.
b) The frame of interest convergence, which is not the same thing as centering them or claiming that Natives will save them, is not useful because Settlers care more about Native death than they care about Settler survival and because it limits the horizon of communal action.
A response which either a) reiterates that #LandBack is key to resolving climate change and therefore biological Settler life or b) clarifies that interest convergence still revolves around Indigenous peoples does not respond to either of those points.
To clarify, it doesn't respond because "survival highest good" is not a value Settlers or Settler states necessarily orient themselves around and because centering Native people doesn't change the frame that it still locates the call to empathy through self-interest.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
