Skip to main content

Getting Older

I've been thinking a lot about Angela Davis lately, specifically the Soledad incident.

I think revolutionary thinking is stronger than it has been in decades now, but I worry we've become too trapped in capital, in work, in systems to actually be willing to physically wage revolution.

And I think that's needed. I think violence has more of a place today in revolution than ever. That the reality of us staying in the streets will only lead to further fragmenting amongst the proletariat while the classes that own us retreat further into wealthy reclusion. We're tearing our own apart over non-allegiance to the form instead of caring for eachother in the face of these systems that oppress us.

I don't know. My father was attacked on election night. A bunch of men got in his cab and said "We voted n-----s out." Then they dragged him out of the cab and kicked the shit out of him. He drove himself home.

When does revolution call for violence? What's the line?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuBqyBE1Ppw

Comments

  1. I often wonder about that as well. Nasrin did a lot of her PhD work on violence and since then I've often thought we should spend more time with the concept. I am so sorry about your dad. In my work I've thought about the line between urgency and emergency. Perhaps that's a similar line.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is such a potent post. It's something I think about a lot, and it always brings me back to that Stokely Carmichael quote, "In order for nonviolence to work, your opponent must have a conscience".

    -joshua w

    ReplyDelete
  3. Zach, Denise (and Nasrin and Ronald) had a lot to say about this post on Friday when we met. In short, they brought us back to the fact that violence has always been at the heart of the state's encounter with the black body. There has been no nonviolent relationship, ever. So the question is: do we take up the tools of the state?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Criminalization is not only another form of racialization - and the prison complex is simply an incubator of democratic (penal) violence - but racialization and necessity are co-written as seminal texts of state (and state-sponsored) violence. In other words, violence is already given as THE answer to a question that was never asked. Refusal (given in, away and as blackness) cannot be taken for a response... but rather as a claim to nonseparability. Out of a concern for the earth, towards a world where bastards such as those who attacked your father are dead before they're born.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Edouard Glissant - Poetics of Relation (some concepts)

Errantry (errance) 18- errantry does not proceed from renunciation nor from frustration regarding a supposedly deteriorated (deterritorialized) situation of origin; it is not a resolute act of rejection or an uncontrolled impulse of abandonment. - The thought of errantry is a poetics, which always infers that at some moment it is told. The tale of errantry is the tale of Relation. 21- The thinking of errancy conceives of totality but willingly renounces any claims to sum it up or possess it. 20- The thought of errantry is not apolitical nor is it inconsistent with the will to identity, which is, after all, nothing other than the search for a freedom within particular surroundings. Rhizomatic thought / rhizome 18- the rhizome- prompting the knowledge that identity is no longer completely within the root but also in Relation. Poetics of Relation 11- each and every identity is extended through a relationship with the Other 20- in the poetics of Relation, one who is erra...

Denise Ferreira da Silva 1 (life) ÷ 0 (blackness) = ∞ − ∞ or ∞ / ∞: On Matter Beyond the Equation of Value

Here are some notes on Denise's text for those interested. Central question: What if blackness referred to rare and obsolete definitions of  matter : respectively, “substance … of which something consists” and “substance without form”? How would this affect the question of value? What would become of the economic value of  things  if they were read as expressions of our modern grammar and its defining logic of obliteration? Would this expose how the  object  (of exchange, appreciation, and knowledge)—that is, the economic, the artistic, and the scientific thing—cannot be imagined without presupposing an ethical (self-determining) thing, which is its very condition of existence and the determination of value in general. On Blackness as disruptive force: activate blackness’s disruptive force, that is, its capacity to tear the veil of transparency (even if briefly) and disclose what lies at the limits of justice. when deployed as method, blackness fractur...

Fred Moten: "Blackness and Nonperformance"