I always think the strongest slogans are the ones which become stronger when their opponents try to subvert them— to me, all the attempts to do that for Black Lives Matter just made its opponents look like shits.
I expect the people who “Make America Great Again” was for felt similar about me— either I might go “it wasn’t ever great” or “it’s very great now as you starve in poverty,” both of which are antagonistic in different ways.
I’ve been thinking about how some communications is designed to degrade over time, to become weaponised? Like often someone will say something horrible with a qualifier, and go “look at what I really said; I put a qualifier in!” But the qualifier is dropped in the version of the message that spreads, and that’s why it’s effective even if no one involved in the production of it realises. So I guess it’s about the decomposed slogan, for me? I keep thinking about how a cat’s piss is odourless when it’s released, but gets smellier and smellier as the chemicals in it degrades. “Communication is like a cat’s piss!” I shout, as people edge away from me frightened
You’re absolutely right that slogans like “rest is resistance” or “joy is resistance” can serve as entry points for people who are new to the ideas of liberation and resistance as we discussed before. However, as you elaborately pointed out: slogans are inherently limited. They are oversimplified and are co-opted or misinterpreted, especially when divorced from the deeper context of struggle. “Resist” is a more direct and unambiguous call to action, but it requires a collective understanding of what resistance entails. Whether that's through direct action, community building, or dismantling the system.
The danger, as you noted, lies in conflating resistance with passive acts of self-care or joy. While rest and joy are vital for sustaining the movement, they are not, in themselves, acts of resistance unless they are consciously tied to the broader struggle against oppression. This is where accountability and collective action come into play.
You wrote: "A call-to-action that calls for inaction is no call at all. Equating resistance with virtues like joy/rest/love do all of the concepts involved a painful disservice to each other.
The metaphorical equation of joy is resistance is conceptual displacement. Muddying and conflating the necessary act of resistance with other actions has set a precedent where any act of happiness can be reasoned as resisting."
This is where it got a little choppy for me. I don't think it's a call to action to those who know better. When bell hooks wrote about love as resistance it it didn't feel like conceptual displacement or conflating because hooks’ emphasis on love as a revolutionary act was never about passivity; it was about creating a foundation of care and humanity that sustains the movement. Rest and joy can be seen as sustaining forces, but they must be understood within the context of the larger struggle. Rest becomes an act of resistance when you are deliberate about the reclaiming of time and energy that oppressive systems seek to exploit—especially for Black and Indigenous people. Tricia Hersey highlights this in her book 'Rest is Resistance' in which she talks about her personal struggle with the "grind culture" and advocated for community care. Here I am reclaiming "rest and love is resistance" for hooks and Hersey.
I guess I say all this to say: objectively, at the end of the day slogans are limited. Words are spells, but, ACTIONS AND FEELINGS are the stronger spells. I think it really depends on what the collective is feeling, believing, and doing as whole that creates our collective reality. You can say "I am happy" but if you don't believe it or feel it, you can say it til you're blue and that word spell won't work. Right now, the collective is not unified in our feelings or actions - if we're going to speak metaphysically - that's going to be stronger than the word spells we're hearing or saying on any given day. So do they really actually matter that much *other than a point of entry* in the context of where we are in our current struggle? The revolution will definitely not be on the internet, I know that for sure (hello hyper surveillance).
Personally I think energy is better placed at discussing practical skills or actions on how to get over the hurdle of actually unifying our local communities to be more deeply engaged politically in direct actions (together) and raising political consciousness/literacy/education -- which I see you doing here. Well written piece.
"You’re absolutely right that slogans like “rest is resistance” or “joy is resistance” can serve as entry points for people who are new to the ideas of liberation and resistance as we discussed before. However, as you elaborately pointed out: slogans are inherently limited. They are oversimplified and are co-opted or misinterpreted, especially when divorced from the deeper context of struggle. “Resist” is a more direct and unambiguous call to action, but it requires a collective understanding of what resistance entails. Whether that's through direct action, community building, or dismantling the system."
I think this maybe misreads what I am saying, as I'm looking at why slogans from a core structure perspective, and how the wear and tear sets in. Yes, they are limited. And that should be all the more reason to not treat them as if they are infallible laws that need no refurbishment. If something doesn't work about them, you can point that out, try something new, you can look for something else and that sort of adaptation is going to be crucial in everything we do. I'm laying out the reasons why I think this thing is not working. What anyone does from there, is up to them. But you asked, "So do they really actually matter that much *other than a point of entry* in the context of where we are in our current struggle?"
My answer is, if they don't, we might as well just change them? (which is my usual response when someone asks why does it matter?)
But you also answer your own question, right? You say, in the paragraph before, that you "don't think it's a call to action to those who know better". Which is a large part of my point. There are lots of people who don't know better, and they are being called to action by the idea of "joy as resistance"--and that's how its co-opted, not in some insidious yank away from radical practice but through bitesizing and watering down the radical origins. Actions and feelings are definitely stronger, but words give outer life and allow us the connectivity of a deeper understanding of how those actions and feelings turn up. So I simply wanna get closer to the words we need so we can be more unified in our feelings.
Everything I say I do so with an awareness of surveillance, which is why I wouldn't discuss practical skills or actions here however, the energy it takes to open up an opportunity to rethink, to reflect on the efficacy or failure of something, to see what how to mov forward with it, is not something I'd say is misspent. If people decide no action needs to be taken on a semantic level, I understand, nothing i say is ever a gun to people's head. but I will not be using these terms as they create a lack of clarity in the epicentre of how I think and I write as an invitation to be joined.
When we were protesting against Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia in the ‘90s, many slogans came and went. Two were the big ones, though, and they both sort of stuck in my soul.
The first was just one word - ‘OTPOR’ - ‘resistance’. It became the name of the student movement that was at the core of the revolution, as they somehow always are.
The second one was barely longer - ‘Gotov je’. ‘He’s done.’ It was so declarative and definitive. It was undeniable. Like in the movies when you’re telling the bad guy ‘alright, it’s over.’ They don’t get a say in whether it’s over or not, it just is.
"We are transformed by words every single day"--Yes!! I wish I knew more people who really understand this about language: It speaks us as much as we speak it (figuratively speaking), so we'd best make good choices about both what we say and how we say it--which means we also have to know why we say what we say. Thank you for the ongoing thoughtful analysis.
So good! I often think about this in context of the slogan "Trans women are women". To me, it comes of as out of touch, and i think the contrapoint "Define a woman" is a direct consequence of this slogan. It does not serve call to action, unity nor clarity and is easily "debunked". It is static, not dynamic & not engaging. Often times, slogans can feel further alienating, and slogans as these does just that, imo. I think "Trans liberation now" or just "Liberation now" are so much more unifying, and calls for community and compassion.
Thanks for your text, your voice shines strong. <3
this is brilliant as per. I feel in a sense that Times Up is in a way the most insidious of all the limp 2010-20s slogans, given the way it was almost entirely co-opted and run into the ground by a group of wealthy white cis women celebrities, and the way the very temporally bounded nature of it implies a moment, caesura with the past, which obviously never truly occurred beyond aesthetic posturing.
I think this is perhaps an example where the demarcation of slogan as an action and slogan as an advertisement has, undoubtedly, muddied into one another, which is a dimension i didn't even think about until just now even though it was staring me in front of my face. co-option is almost exclusively relies on marketability and so perhpas, slogans that are truly important politically resist the ability to be capitalistically marketed but speak to a deep need or want of the people. Time's Up feels more in the realm of catchphrase.
I enjoy "stealing" back energy by co-opting the slogans that keep The Narcissistic Death Cult running its F.O.G machine (Fear, Obligation, Guilt). This is why, as a trauma Trickster, I am making healing from Intergenerational trauma fun again.
A thought (ie, a genuine question, not a rhetorical or rebukey one) about the value of joy and rest as matters of resistance, and about the difference between good slogans and potentially helpful correctives: These ideas have had power for me because I used to believe only the opposite, did not know to expect real joy (read: real community) anywhere, and found myself drowning in useless rage. Believing that I deserve wellbeing as much as the next person (not fancy bubblebaths, but eating enough and sleeping enough and doing what I have to build actual, lasting community), whatever I may have been told I deserve, has helped me find the energy to be less useless to the world. In a word, I think I share your skepticism about joy/rest/resistance as an example of bad sloganeering, but wonder if it might still be useful as a corrective against conditions of incapacitating despair and isolation (the kind you can't yell yourself out of, often as I've sometimes tried), bearing in mind that how one got into such a state often determines our best way out.
A bit like how the Bill Wilson generation of White male alcoholics needed to hear "Your life is unmanageable, you are tiny, guilty, and insignificant," as a corrective to the overweening learned arrogance that tanked so many of them in the first place, whereas most folks I know in recovery need to hear the opposite message, having already internalized enough guilt and diminution to last a lifetime--often the very thing that brought them to recovery in the first place. Hope this makes some sense!
i suppose my whole point is these things can be corrective without conflating them with resistance (hence the reclamation replacement offered) because resistance has a very specific function in the realm of political action and the reality is, not enough of that political action is being actioned. the integrity of meaningful resistance wanes every time we make these individualised actions synonymous with resistance and we should think about why we are saying these things and how we are truly standing up to power.
I can see where youre coming from, and I'm inclined to agree, but also dissent a bit. I think this essay has a great ideological core, but i think it fails to inquire why these slogans become so ubiquitous across our political landscape. Earlier within this essay you expressed the understanding that the US' boot upon liberatory movements was swift and incredibly powerful. This has VAST systemic impacts. Infrastructure does not allow people to organize, like, the very existence of suburbs and nuclear homes and the lack of 3rd spaces etc fosters an environment of distrust and disallows people to learn from and organize with each other. Im kind of in a rush rn so i cant describe everything i'm trying to say, but i think people (read: black people) generally understand why and how the black power movement was squashed the way it was. People dont want to die. Considering that surveillance is worsening and people have been murdered/disappeared/incarcerated for organizing in our current day like literally within the last 6 years, i cant look at the general black populace and say "these slogans are not enough." I understand the conditions under which they arise and i think these simple, yet highly commodifiable slogans hold a valuable place in our current cultural zeitgeist. Especially because, for many, "rest" isnt just sleeping lol. Its the deprioritization of work/working to live, and doing things that bring joy. I think its a necessary prerequisite to slowing down enough to recognize the importance of community building. Am i making sense?
I've noticed there's tendency to paint my disapproval of the "rest/joy is an act of resistance" style of slogans as an ignorance or disrespect of the importance of rest or joy. But what I've doesn't denigrates the necessity of these actions, I never said that rest is "just sleeping" but I also do not believe that "deprioritising work" is rest, rest is a passive action of relaxation and deprioritising work is an active political action. Here lies one of the problems--which I've said recently--it mistakes vagueness for metaphorical ambiguity. All the arguments against my POV have required an imprecise definition of both rest and resistance, their meanings change and grow and expand which ultimately end up relinquishing the original definition of what these things are--rest being relaxation and resistance being struggle against domination.
I've noticed there's tendency to paint my disapproval of the "rest/joy is an act of resistance" style of slogans as an ignorance or disrespect of the importance of rest or joy. I want to stress that my positin doesn't denigrate the necessity of either, I’ve never said that rest is "just sleeping" but I also do not believe that "deprioritising work" is rest as it is being suggested. Rest is an important act but a passive one of relaxation. To “deprioritise work” is an active political action—and in order for it be resistance, it would need to be an act that’s a structured way that doesn’t only liberate oneself individually but also one’s coworkers, too. But none of this clear in the verb “rest” and here lies my main problem—which I've said before—these slogans misrepresent vagueness for metaphorical ambiguity.
All the arguments against my POV have require imprecise definitions of both rest and resistance, their inferred meanings shapeshift depending on who I’m speaking to, and must relinquish the original definition of what these things are—rest being relaxation and resistance being struggle against domination.
Here, one might say that language evolves and can mean different things, one might even call me pedantic or enforcing an oppressive restriction of how to use language, which might be true, but language is also a communicative tool to convey specific things, to be understood precisely in some contexts and when it is open enough to mean many things, it is worth scrutinising the results.
You made a good point about my piece failing to inquire why these slogans have become so ubiquitous and it is probably something I withheld because I don't think people want to confront the answer which is: people are scared of the political system we live under—I am scared—but it doesn't necessarily stop me from seeing how these "simple yet highly commodifiable slogans" are coping mechanisms for defeatism. Their value has been built by their ability to placate the imagination of revolutionary struggle and resistance through subtle linguistic reframing of individualism, which is what has made it optimised for capitalistic marketability. I feel the unaddressed guilt dripping from each of these slogans, the lingering air of "I'm not doing enough and I can't do more but more needs to be done" and the thinly-veiled resignation that happens when one conflates resistance—a thing that has always been monstrously difficult—with joy or rest, things that are light and therapeutic. I don't think people like hearing that. I don't think people like hearing that these statements that are comforting are doing nothing. Because we want them to do something. But the only ones that can do something is us. These slogans are pacifying in a time that requires a greater coordination of mass friction. I understand intimately how we got here, the quashed movements, drug flooded into communities, gentrification, global colonialism, browbeat after browbeat, and arrived at a point where simply being joyful is a struggle. But it is not resistance. And every time we say it is, I fear what we're actually saying is "we cannot win this struggle so I might as well laugh."
Every word of this is brilliant. Oof. You have articulated so clearly my recurring unease with many Leftist slogans (and I do realise that your criticism here has to do specifically with Black resistance). Actually I often feel embarrassed for us and the incantatory power we lend to words like "empathy", "Interdependence" or "vulnerability". Like, remember the big "Make empathy great again" movement of 2016...? It's so easy and empty and devoid of actual power it's reached us across the Atlantic too, no problem.
As a disabled woman, I've come to feel very ambivalent about those last two, "interdependence" and "vulnerability" used as slogans/incantations. I spent years writing about those topics and brandishing these words as if they might, in and of themselves, solve the issue of the beast swallowing us whole. "They're trying to make us forget we're interdependent! Just remember this, herein lies the solution!" Yet when you live a crip life you quickly learn that interdependence is hard and messy and can actually break your heart (the crip writer Leah Lakshmi Piepzna Samarasinha taught me this). We like shouting "interdependence!" but not the actual work of it.
I like your distinction between reclamation and resistance, I'll let that sink in. Reclaiming interdependence and vulnerability does sound right to me.
Thank you so much, you've given me enough to feed on for a while!
i might paywall it after a week… i might have to start thinking about how i’m gonna navigate it in the future!! thank you for believing in my writing, my farling
I always think the strongest slogans are the ones which become stronger when their opponents try to subvert them— to me, all the attempts to do that for Black Lives Matter just made its opponents look like shits.
I expect the people who “Make America Great Again” was for felt similar about me— either I might go “it wasn’t ever great” or “it’s very great now as you starve in poverty,” both of which are antagonistic in different ways.
I’ve been thinking about how some communications is designed to degrade over time, to become weaponised? Like often someone will say something horrible with a qualifier, and go “look at what I really said; I put a qualifier in!” But the qualifier is dropped in the version of the message that spreads, and that’s why it’s effective even if no one involved in the production of it realises. So I guess it’s about the decomposed slogan, for me? I keep thinking about how a cat’s piss is odourless when it’s released, but gets smellier and smellier as the chemicals in it degrades. “Communication is like a cat’s piss!” I shout, as people edge away from me frightened
You’re absolutely right that slogans like “rest is resistance” or “joy is resistance” can serve as entry points for people who are new to the ideas of liberation and resistance as we discussed before. However, as you elaborately pointed out: slogans are inherently limited. They are oversimplified and are co-opted or misinterpreted, especially when divorced from the deeper context of struggle. “Resist” is a more direct and unambiguous call to action, but it requires a collective understanding of what resistance entails. Whether that's through direct action, community building, or dismantling the system.
The danger, as you noted, lies in conflating resistance with passive acts of self-care or joy. While rest and joy are vital for sustaining the movement, they are not, in themselves, acts of resistance unless they are consciously tied to the broader struggle against oppression. This is where accountability and collective action come into play.
You wrote: "A call-to-action that calls for inaction is no call at all. Equating resistance with virtues like joy/rest/love do all of the concepts involved a painful disservice to each other.
The metaphorical equation of joy is resistance is conceptual displacement. Muddying and conflating the necessary act of resistance with other actions has set a precedent where any act of happiness can be reasoned as resisting."
This is where it got a little choppy for me. I don't think it's a call to action to those who know better. When bell hooks wrote about love as resistance it it didn't feel like conceptual displacement or conflating because hooks’ emphasis on love as a revolutionary act was never about passivity; it was about creating a foundation of care and humanity that sustains the movement. Rest and joy can be seen as sustaining forces, but they must be understood within the context of the larger struggle. Rest becomes an act of resistance when you are deliberate about the reclaiming of time and energy that oppressive systems seek to exploit—especially for Black and Indigenous people. Tricia Hersey highlights this in her book 'Rest is Resistance' in which she talks about her personal struggle with the "grind culture" and advocated for community care. Here I am reclaiming "rest and love is resistance" for hooks and Hersey.
I guess I say all this to say: objectively, at the end of the day slogans are limited. Words are spells, but, ACTIONS AND FEELINGS are the stronger spells. I think it really depends on what the collective is feeling, believing, and doing as whole that creates our collective reality. You can say "I am happy" but if you don't believe it or feel it, you can say it til you're blue and that word spell won't work. Right now, the collective is not unified in our feelings or actions - if we're going to speak metaphysically - that's going to be stronger than the word spells we're hearing or saying on any given day. So do they really actually matter that much *other than a point of entry* in the context of where we are in our current struggle? The revolution will definitely not be on the internet, I know that for sure (hello hyper surveillance).
Personally I think energy is better placed at discussing practical skills or actions on how to get over the hurdle of actually unifying our local communities to be more deeply engaged politically in direct actions (together) and raising political consciousness/literacy/education -- which I see you doing here. Well written piece.
"You’re absolutely right that slogans like “rest is resistance” or “joy is resistance” can serve as entry points for people who are new to the ideas of liberation and resistance as we discussed before. However, as you elaborately pointed out: slogans are inherently limited. They are oversimplified and are co-opted or misinterpreted, especially when divorced from the deeper context of struggle. “Resist” is a more direct and unambiguous call to action, but it requires a collective understanding of what resistance entails. Whether that's through direct action, community building, or dismantling the system."
I think this maybe misreads what I am saying, as I'm looking at why slogans from a core structure perspective, and how the wear and tear sets in. Yes, they are limited. And that should be all the more reason to not treat them as if they are infallible laws that need no refurbishment. If something doesn't work about them, you can point that out, try something new, you can look for something else and that sort of adaptation is going to be crucial in everything we do. I'm laying out the reasons why I think this thing is not working. What anyone does from there, is up to them. But you asked, "So do they really actually matter that much *other than a point of entry* in the context of where we are in our current struggle?"
My answer is, if they don't, we might as well just change them? (which is my usual response when someone asks why does it matter?)
But you also answer your own question, right? You say, in the paragraph before, that you "don't think it's a call to action to those who know better". Which is a large part of my point. There are lots of people who don't know better, and they are being called to action by the idea of "joy as resistance"--and that's how its co-opted, not in some insidious yank away from radical practice but through bitesizing and watering down the radical origins. Actions and feelings are definitely stronger, but words give outer life and allow us the connectivity of a deeper understanding of how those actions and feelings turn up. So I simply wanna get closer to the words we need so we can be more unified in our feelings.
Everything I say I do so with an awareness of surveillance, which is why I wouldn't discuss practical skills or actions here however, the energy it takes to open up an opportunity to rethink, to reflect on the efficacy or failure of something, to see what how to mov forward with it, is not something I'd say is misspent. If people decide no action needs to be taken on a semantic level, I understand, nothing i say is ever a gun to people's head. but I will not be using these terms as they create a lack of clarity in the epicentre of how I think and I write as an invitation to be joined.
Slogans are definitely magic spells.
When we were protesting against Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia in the ‘90s, many slogans came and went. Two were the big ones, though, and they both sort of stuck in my soul.
The first was just one word - ‘OTPOR’ - ‘resistance’. It became the name of the student movement that was at the core of the revolution, as they somehow always are.
The second one was barely longer - ‘Gotov je’. ‘He’s done.’ It was so declarative and definitive. It was undeniable. Like in the movies when you’re telling the bad guy ‘alright, it’s over.’ They don’t get a say in whether it’s over or not, it just is.
👌🏾👌🏾
My God that was good.
"We are transformed by words every single day"--Yes!! I wish I knew more people who really understand this about language: It speaks us as much as we speak it (figuratively speaking), so we'd best make good choices about both what we say and how we say it--which means we also have to know why we say what we say. Thank you for the ongoing thoughtful analysis.
welcome, thanks for reading!
So good! I often think about this in context of the slogan "Trans women are women". To me, it comes of as out of touch, and i think the contrapoint "Define a woman" is a direct consequence of this slogan. It does not serve call to action, unity nor clarity and is easily "debunked". It is static, not dynamic & not engaging. Often times, slogans can feel further alienating, and slogans as these does just that, imo. I think "Trans liberation now" or just "Liberation now" are so much more unifying, and calls for community and compassion.
Thanks for your text, your voice shines strong. <3
As mostly always. Yeah, what you said.
Compelling analysis.
this is brilliant as per. I feel in a sense that Times Up is in a way the most insidious of all the limp 2010-20s slogans, given the way it was almost entirely co-opted and run into the ground by a group of wealthy white cis women celebrities, and the way the very temporally bounded nature of it implies a moment, caesura with the past, which obviously never truly occurred beyond aesthetic posturing.
I think this is perhaps an example where the demarcation of slogan as an action and slogan as an advertisement has, undoubtedly, muddied into one another, which is a dimension i didn't even think about until just now even though it was staring me in front of my face. co-option is almost exclusively relies on marketability and so perhpas, slogans that are truly important politically resist the ability to be capitalistically marketed but speak to a deep need or want of the people. Time's Up feels more in the realm of catchphrase.
Thank you for this great post.
I enjoy "stealing" back energy by co-opting the slogans that keep The Narcissistic Death Cult running its F.O.G machine (Fear, Obligation, Guilt). This is why, as a trauma Trickster, I am making healing from Intergenerational trauma fun again.
Play to Slay!
A thought (ie, a genuine question, not a rhetorical or rebukey one) about the value of joy and rest as matters of resistance, and about the difference between good slogans and potentially helpful correctives: These ideas have had power for me because I used to believe only the opposite, did not know to expect real joy (read: real community) anywhere, and found myself drowning in useless rage. Believing that I deserve wellbeing as much as the next person (not fancy bubblebaths, but eating enough and sleeping enough and doing what I have to build actual, lasting community), whatever I may have been told I deserve, has helped me find the energy to be less useless to the world. In a word, I think I share your skepticism about joy/rest/resistance as an example of bad sloganeering, but wonder if it might still be useful as a corrective against conditions of incapacitating despair and isolation (the kind you can't yell yourself out of, often as I've sometimes tried), bearing in mind that how one got into such a state often determines our best way out.
A bit like how the Bill Wilson generation of White male alcoholics needed to hear "Your life is unmanageable, you are tiny, guilty, and insignificant," as a corrective to the overweening learned arrogance that tanked so many of them in the first place, whereas most folks I know in recovery need to hear the opposite message, having already internalized enough guilt and diminution to last a lifetime--often the very thing that brought them to recovery in the first place. Hope this makes some sense!
i suppose my whole point is these things can be corrective without conflating them with resistance (hence the reclamation replacement offered) because resistance has a very specific function in the realm of political action and the reality is, not enough of that political action is being actioned. the integrity of meaningful resistance wanes every time we make these individualised actions synonymous with resistance and we should think about why we are saying these things and how we are truly standing up to power.
I can see where youre coming from, and I'm inclined to agree, but also dissent a bit. I think this essay has a great ideological core, but i think it fails to inquire why these slogans become so ubiquitous across our political landscape. Earlier within this essay you expressed the understanding that the US' boot upon liberatory movements was swift and incredibly powerful. This has VAST systemic impacts. Infrastructure does not allow people to organize, like, the very existence of suburbs and nuclear homes and the lack of 3rd spaces etc fosters an environment of distrust and disallows people to learn from and organize with each other. Im kind of in a rush rn so i cant describe everything i'm trying to say, but i think people (read: black people) generally understand why and how the black power movement was squashed the way it was. People dont want to die. Considering that surveillance is worsening and people have been murdered/disappeared/incarcerated for organizing in our current day like literally within the last 6 years, i cant look at the general black populace and say "these slogans are not enough." I understand the conditions under which they arise and i think these simple, yet highly commodifiable slogans hold a valuable place in our current cultural zeitgeist. Especially because, for many, "rest" isnt just sleeping lol. Its the deprioritization of work/working to live, and doing things that bring joy. I think its a necessary prerequisite to slowing down enough to recognize the importance of community building. Am i making sense?
I've noticed there's tendency to paint my disapproval of the "rest/joy is an act of resistance" style of slogans as an ignorance or disrespect of the importance of rest or joy. But what I've doesn't denigrates the necessity of these actions, I never said that rest is "just sleeping" but I also do not believe that "deprioritising work" is rest, rest is a passive action of relaxation and deprioritising work is an active political action. Here lies one of the problems--which I've said recently--it mistakes vagueness for metaphorical ambiguity. All the arguments against my POV have required an imprecise definition of both rest and resistance, their meanings change and grow and expand which ultimately end up relinquishing the original definition of what these things are--rest being relaxation and resistance being struggle against domination.
I've noticed there's tendency to paint my disapproval of the "rest/joy is an act of resistance" style of slogans as an ignorance or disrespect of the importance of rest or joy. I want to stress that my positin doesn't denigrate the necessity of either, I’ve never said that rest is "just sleeping" but I also do not believe that "deprioritising work" is rest as it is being suggested. Rest is an important act but a passive one of relaxation. To “deprioritise work” is an active political action—and in order for it be resistance, it would need to be an act that’s a structured way that doesn’t only liberate oneself individually but also one’s coworkers, too. But none of this clear in the verb “rest” and here lies my main problem—which I've said before—these slogans misrepresent vagueness for metaphorical ambiguity.
All the arguments against my POV have require imprecise definitions of both rest and resistance, their inferred meanings shapeshift depending on who I’m speaking to, and must relinquish the original definition of what these things are—rest being relaxation and resistance being struggle against domination.
Here, one might say that language evolves and can mean different things, one might even call me pedantic or enforcing an oppressive restriction of how to use language, which might be true, but language is also a communicative tool to convey specific things, to be understood precisely in some contexts and when it is open enough to mean many things, it is worth scrutinising the results.
You made a good point about my piece failing to inquire why these slogans have become so ubiquitous and it is probably something I withheld because I don't think people want to confront the answer which is: people are scared of the political system we live under—I am scared—but it doesn't necessarily stop me from seeing how these "simple yet highly commodifiable slogans" are coping mechanisms for defeatism. Their value has been built by their ability to placate the imagination of revolutionary struggle and resistance through subtle linguistic reframing of individualism, which is what has made it optimised for capitalistic marketability. I feel the unaddressed guilt dripping from each of these slogans, the lingering air of "I'm not doing enough and I can't do more but more needs to be done" and the thinly-veiled resignation that happens when one conflates resistance—a thing that has always been monstrously difficult—with joy or rest, things that are light and therapeutic. I don't think people like hearing that. I don't think people like hearing that these statements that are comforting are doing nothing. Because we want them to do something. But the only ones that can do something is us. These slogans are pacifying in a time that requires a greater coordination of mass friction. I understand intimately how we got here, the quashed movements, drug flooded into communities, gentrification, global colonialism, browbeat after browbeat, and arrived at a point where simply being joyful is a struggle. But it is not resistance. And every time we say it is, I fear what we're actually saying is "we cannot win this struggle so I might as well laugh."
Every word of this is brilliant. Oof. You have articulated so clearly my recurring unease with many Leftist slogans (and I do realise that your criticism here has to do specifically with Black resistance). Actually I often feel embarrassed for us and the incantatory power we lend to words like "empathy", "Interdependence" or "vulnerability". Like, remember the big "Make empathy great again" movement of 2016...? It's so easy and empty and devoid of actual power it's reached us across the Atlantic too, no problem.
As a disabled woman, I've come to feel very ambivalent about those last two, "interdependence" and "vulnerability" used as slogans/incantations. I spent years writing about those topics and brandishing these words as if they might, in and of themselves, solve the issue of the beast swallowing us whole. "They're trying to make us forget we're interdependent! Just remember this, herein lies the solution!" Yet when you live a crip life you quickly learn that interdependence is hard and messy and can actually break your heart (the crip writer Leah Lakshmi Piepzna Samarasinha taught me this). We like shouting "interdependence!" but not the actual work of it.
I like your distinction between reclamation and resistance, I'll let that sink in. Reclaiming interdependence and vulnerability does sound right to me.
Thank you so much, you've given me enough to feed on for a while!
(Is there a word missing in this sentence? "I hope resisting lets me reclaim the rest that has been existentially deprive me of.)
i might paywall it after a week… i might have to start thinking about how i’m gonna navigate it in the future!! thank you for believing in my writing, my farling
ahh thank you darling, thats all i ever want! thinking fuel.