One. All power is power to mediate. Power always mediates between factions. The factions that power mediates between may or may not precede the formation of power. In other words, power is either formed in response to the existence of contending factions or power creates contending factions in order to form itself. With regard to racism, the different factions that we call âracesâ did not precede the power formations that mediate between them: âracesâ are constructs of power. To simply take the presence of races for granted is to simply take power for granted, but to simply deny the presence of races is to simply deny the workings of power. Instead of simply taking the presence of races for granted or simply denying the presence races, we must deconstruct the presence of races if we are to fight the power, for to deconstruct the presence of races is to deconstruct the workings of power.
Two. Power, in order to perpetuate itself, must make âimmediate relations" amongst factions intolerable. The power to mediate between factions becomes null and void if immediate relations between factions are tolerable and there is no call for there to be a mediator between factions. Either (i) power is formed by existing factions when immediate relations between them become intolerable, or (ii) power forms itself by making immediate relations between existing factions intolerable, or (iii) power forms itself by creating factions that are intolerant of one another. Whichever the case may be, power functions by seizing upon intolerance between factions and mediating between them in the name of tolerance. Racism is the third sort of power, it is a power that formed itself by creating factions called âracesâ that were intolerant of one another. A racist power might preach tolerance, yes, but it does so in order to make itself the medium and guarantor of tolerance: power must perpetuate immediate relations of intolerance if it is to serve as the medium and guarantor of tolerance.
Three. To fight the power and win is to make âimmediate relations" between factions tolerable and, thus, to obviate the desire for a medium and guarantor of tolerance. In the context of the present moment, one must be wary of attempts to create new commissions, offices, and task forces that will mediate between black communities and the police in order to guarantee that relations between black communities and police powers become tolerable: this approach would redouble power instead of obviating power. Ask yourself the question: how does one obviate the need for the police to serve as a medium and guarantor of tolerance? What immediate relations of intolerance do the police foment and feed off, and how can we make these immediate relations tolerable so that the police can no longer feed off them? The key thing is, of course, to strive to make immediate relations tolerable and not to ditch police powers for kinder and friendlier powers (so-called âsocial servicesâ) that perpetuate racism in order to act as mediums and guarantors of tolerance in a much less conspicuous and much more insidious manner.
Four. Ruling powers, a.k.a. sovereign powers, create means for one faction to rule other factions. A ruling or sovereign power is constituted by ritualized spectacles that organize subjugated factions according to a rule, the result being that the ruling or sovereign faction stands out as an exception to the rule. The king stands, everybody else kneels: thus, the king, as he who stands while others kneel, appears as the exception to the rule. The king boldly demands taxes and tribute from his subjects, but everybody else receives the kingâs beneficence: thus, the king, as he who boldly demands while others humbly receive, appears as the exception to the rule. The racism of the white supremacist invokes ruling powers. To put it in crude but accurate terms, the white supremacist wants all other races to kneel and pay tribute to the white race as a rule so that the white race as the exception to the rule stands out and gives beneficence to other races.
Five. Disciplinary powers create means for one faction to determine the norms that other factions are supposed to conform to. A faction wielding disciplinary power seeks to determine what is typical and atypical about each and every faction, including its own faction. Disciplinary powers are constituted by routine examinations that organize the atypical individuals of each faction according to the manner and extent of their deviations from the typical individuals of each faction. The racism of the white meritocrat invokes disciplinary powers. The white meritocrat will make the untested anecdotal observation that the typical black man has athletic ability but no mind for mathematics. As such, the white meritocrat, seeking to develop and exploit the ânaturalâ talents of the typical black man, will routinely send talent scouts and coaches to predominantly black high schools in order to examine for, discover, and develop those ânaturalâ athletic talents typically found in young black men. This same white meritocrat wouldnât bother sending talent scouts and coaches to examine for, discover, and develop talents for mathematics that are considered âunnaturalâ amongst black men: it is assumed that, because mathematical talents are not typically found in black men, examining for mathematical talents in predominantly black schools is a waste of resources. The white meritocrat finds that it is prudent to examine black students for the bare minimum of mathematical skill that is needed to âget byâ in the modern workplace and then to leave it up to the discretion of individual parents and teachers to bring black men with âunnaturalâ mathematical talents to the attention of the right people.
Six. Normalizing powers create means for one faction to receive more chances in and through making other factions receive less chances. Normalizing powers are constituted by biased measurement practices that introduce systematic errors, thereby biasing statistics so as to favor the privileged faction. The racism of the white technocrat invokes normalizing powers. The white technocrat substantiates the untested and anecdotal observations of the white meritocrat by designing and implementing biased measurement practices that statistically verify the white meritocratâs untested and anecdotal observations. Put more radically, the work of the white technocrat either ignores or installs environmental factors that interfere with measurement processes in ways that statistically verify the white meritocratâs untested and anecdotal observations. Thanks to the white technocrats ignorance of and/or installation of environmental factors that bias measurment processes in favor of white schools, it becomes a technical fact that predominantly black schools have a greater chance of producing successful athletes and a lesser chance of producing successful mathematicians relative to predominantly white schools.
Seven. Ruling powers, disciplinary powers, and normalizing powers may work with one another or against one another. The normalizing white technocrat, the disciplining white meritocrat, and the ruling white supremacist do not always see eye to eye with one another and, more importantly, their respective power formations are often at odds with one another. The white technocrat, for instance, is dismissive of the white meritocrats untested and anecdotal observations when there is no possible way for the white technocrat to statistically verify them and transform them into âtechnical factsâ, and, whatâs more, the white technocrat tends to turn up their nose at claims that the white supremacist will make that cannot be said to have any observable basis at all. Indeed, the white technocrat is very often heard disparaging white meritocracy and white supremacy in the name of white technocracy. That being said, those who would fight racism must be careful not to rely on white technocracy in their fight against white meritocracy and white supremacy: the white technocrat is a racist and can never be an affirmative ally in the fight against racism.
Eight. Fighting the power is one thing, fighting those who would wield power is another thing. The fight against racism is not a fight against individual racists: it is one thing to fight against individual white supremacists, individual white meritocrats, and individual white technocrats, but it is another thing to fight against ritualized spectacles that enable white supremacy, against routine examinations that enable white meritocracy, and against biased measurement practices that enable white technocracy. Naming, shaming, and maiming individual racists, however satisfying that may be, doesnât necessarily contribute in any direct or indirect way to the fight against racism. Fighting racism is about sabotaging the means that enable racists.
Nine. âImmediate relationsâ amongst factions are made possible and become tolerable when we cease taking the presence and opposition of factions for granted. Philosophers who fight the power, who would expend their will to power, are those who try to conceive of ways to make âimmediate relationsâ between factions both possible and tolerable, and, as such, these philosophers never take the presence and opposition of factions for granted. The crude philosophers of power, who would conserve their will to power, aim to prove that there can be no such thing as an âimmediate relationâ between factions and they do so by arguing that we must take the presence and opposition of factions for granted. The more cunning philosophers of power, by contrast, will recognize that âimmediate relationsâ between factions are possible if we do not take these factionsâ presence and opposition for granted, but these more cunning philosophers would have us believe that âimmediate relationsâ amongst factions whose presence and opposition cannot be taken for granted are destined to generate âintolerable frictionsâ.
