There are footnotes and links in this post that I think are valuable. All of these things are extremely worth reading. This is long.
Forgive me (sike idc) for injecting my ancommie art brain but: I donāt know who needs to hear it but castigating Jack as some monster instead of a kid from the fucking slums who is āstuckā in some sort of (supposed nebulous referent-less) cycle that cannot be solved as opposed to purposefully kept there by imperial colonial [racial] capitalist exploitationā° with some pretty difficult but clear¹ possibilities for struggle and understood solutions is a limit on our imagining of a future and want for change as well as just sullying this story (outside of critiquing the work itself) for you. I don't know why we are glossing over the fact that you have to pay to live and also global determinants of health.
Why do the poor the world over have such low quality of health and life and therefore die first? Why are they overwhelmingly black and the darker peoples of the world? The colonized or subjugated? When did we move from the right to life and health to the right to coverage or being able to afford it?²
Is it not interesting that Joke's father is a doctor and his livelihood is linked with this system? Do you think that, maybe, how the father is and his job show a congruency? Why do individuals have to go above a system and yet are still invested in this system? And since Joke was a part of this nuclear family then ousted when he dared to transgress its ruleāthe unit based off of generating labor and necessary for one's survival since it is the only safe financial place to land and rely onāis it not significant that he isn't acknowledged by that father over things that could save someone? I'm super tired so I'm not making as much sense as I'd like. To quote from this comprehensive piece³ on Health Communism: A Surplus Manifesto by Beatrice Adler-Bolton and Artie Vierkant:
āIllnessāyou point outāis the only possible form of life in capitalism. In fact, the psychiatrist, who is wage dependent, is a sick person like each of us. The ruling classes merely give him the power to ācureā or to hospitalize. Cureāthis is self-evidentācanāt be understood in our system to mean the elimination of illness: it serves exclusively as the maintenance of the ability to go to work where one stays sick.ā
(Turn Illness into a Weapon: A Polemic Call to Action by the SPK, 1972)³
Joke comes from a family with money. They aren't super rich but they have what Jack (and now Joke!) doesn't. His father is in a position where he could throw rules out the window to help his son's friend even if that has consequences. Ostensibly had Joke not done what he did, Joke would always have access to decent healthcare or money. Or he would have gotten a job that would allow him to have it or afford it. He also would lead a life where his health is most likely going to be optimal. (A bit of a stretch since we are still in a pandemic and the globe is dying and they live in a place where people are affected by MAN MADE CAPITALIST climate disaster and racist ecocide that is going to primarily affect those in rural areas and people are fucking sick but I digressss) What kind of air are these people breathing? What's in these pills? Why is there no sustained contact with health professionals (that don't suckāalso a thing)? Why are we so okay with elderly alienation and their death? Poor death?
This captures several major themes of the book, namely, the impossibility of health under capitalism; the potential of solidarity between physicians and patients, despite the power dynamics that otherwise separate them; and the need to turn illness into a weapon to dismantle capitalism itself.
Adler-Bolton and Vierkant write: āHealth under capitalism is an impossibility. Under capitalism, to attain health you must work, you must be productive and normative, and only then are you entitled to the health you canĀ buy. This fantasy of individual health under the political-economic conditions of capitalism only ever exists as a state one cannot be, to which one must always strive.
[SPK] called this cultural imaginary of health a ābiological, fascist fantasyā because it obscures the true and violent architecture of economic systems of extraction underneath the shadow of a capitalist-realist depiction of the perfect worker.ā (pp. 10-11) ³ (x)
So with all this known why the fuck are people so goddamn angry at Jack? And for Tattoo too. I didn't really touch on this in all this text but my main point is that it's interesting that we don't know what we're mad at beyond a betrayal when for the both of these men they "betrayed" the rich boy. In Save's case he betrayed the poor ones, his comrades, the ones who are suffering like him. My anger towards him is much greater but I still get it. (To be clear: I am angry at him and it is even worse because it isn't directed at anyone but the poor. His friend's grandmother. And it's a tale as old as time. If he wasn't such a little bitch he would be able to withstand it but he isn't. If I think even harder I wonder if this signal's the closer one is to these types of people, the more they suture themselves to capital out of survival, the more they believe they will be protected by heinous acts but I am tired lol.)
They're all poor boys from the fucking slums but our main concern is Joke, the rich-ish boyāwho is right btw cos we love robbing the rich yet still his old class position and upbringing very clearly influences how we view him and his agency. It is done to him like with Arun and the necklaceāa gay boy with an abusive fatherāand RosĆ©āa woman with an abusive father(?)āand her life. They are entitled to these sympathies first!
The formatting bugs me so I'm gonna reblog the rest.
ā°This is "H.L.T. Quan on Cedric Robinson, Racial Capitalism, Black Internationalism, & Cultures of Resistance" on Millenials are Killing Capitalism. "Cedricās point is that Marx and Engels missed the significance of revolt in the rest of the world, specifically by non-Western peoples who made up the vast majority of the worldās unfree and nonindustrial labor force." (Essay from Robin D.G. Kelley's foreword to the third updated edition of Cedric Robinson's Black Marxism.) I haven't read BM yet BTW but I know a lot about it and it has influenced black anarcho-communism (black anarchism), our traditions, what revolt should require, INTERNATIONAL RADICAL SOLIDARITY, and our development. Robinson was also, like many radical intellectuals, an artist and art critic! I think it's important to put here particularly because Thailand wasn't colonized so the conception of the nation is different though not out of step with colonized history at all. Obviously. Which is answered to here and elucidated here as it seems Bangkok acts as an imperial core. Itās too easy to take them out of that history is what Iām garnering from this.
I don't know how much of this is enough and I can only go by the knowledge I have gained in reading and being in these spaces because to get information on radical left in Thailand (or many parts of asia) is fucking hard and even the man I'm referencing doesn't support armed struggle currently apparently! I'll continue to research. But we have been so cut off from each other and radical thought esp from an American standpoint it's fucking pathetic. This is why I say understanding art and being critical is important. In a better world this would be an OBVIOUS articulation and revealing where people wouldn't get upset over someone like Jack just because he isn't fucking a boy on our timeline.
¹ ā1968 and the āThai Seventies" ā 14thĀ October 1973 uprising, 6 October 1976 bloodbath and afterā by Giles Ji Ungpakorn who also wrote "Down with Thai Capitalism! The People Against the Military Dictatorship!" in Spectre as a response to Thiti Jamkajornkeiat
²"SPHC matched the general shift in high level development planning to technical solutions and privatisation of public services, and from the comprehensive vision of Health for All to survival rates. The health care reform that was then promoted by the evolving global health governance structure, as a subset of conservative neoliberal economic policies, gave rise to the privatisation and commercialisation of health careāfrom Health for All to health care that people could aford. There was a concomitant reduction in government health spending in many low-and middle-income countries with increasing dependence on multiple international donors and the reduced ability of countries to determine their own health agendas." Conclusion from Health Policies and Health Care in the Context of Neoliberal Globalisation.
³Health Communism ā All Care For All People (Part 1) also read alongside this "review byĀ Evan Sedgwick-Jell for Asylum magazineĀ and thisĀ Q&A of Beatrice Adler-Bolton and Artie Vierkant by the New Republic." You can find the HC book online (pirateflagemoji) and/or buy it.