My point is that "speaking out" or "having an impact" may be a serious political trap unless we qualify these statements. I think the U.S. in particular has an ingenious political field which can create a powerful illusion of change and radical reform, while remaining perfectly within the confines of the status quo. This is another important point for Foucault, the productive element of power. — Giorgi

Precisely my thinking about #MeToo (and #TimesUp), which was largely a Hollywood thing. Surface changes made, but nothing structural. The victims remained victims, nothing much changed. — Kenosha Kid

:up:

Perhaps controversial, but the confinement of mass politics to discourse; politics as mass shitposting; isn't isolated to the US, UK, or even the political North. You can read the failure of the Arab spring uprisings and global climate strikes in the same context. Non-coordinated spontaneous disruption by an actor network is antithetical to any new institutionalisation of power by that network - the revolution's come to look like a corporate teambuilding event.

Even if it breaks shit, there's little to no plan. What comes in the space cleared by that breaking?

But I think no less than cultural trappings we should address explicit institutional trappings (perhaps this still falls within your definition of culture) — Giorgi

Absolutely.

I think the U.S. in particular has an ingenious political field which can create a powerful illusion of change and radical reform, while remaining perfectly within the confines of the status quo. — Giorgi

Precisely my thinking about #MeToo (and #TimesUp), which was largely a Hollywood thing. Surface changes made, but nothing structural. The victims remained victims, nothing much changed.