i should logoff and read a book and should definitely not tweet about this but whatever: white marxism does not explain antiblack violence. antiblackness and ordinary capitalist exploitation do not differ by degree; they differ in kind.

this matters. it matters because, if this is all our fight (and it is) it is *not* on all of us (and certainly not on us non-blacks) to determine the terms of this fight.

we do not get to shout nonsense about how Blacks are "disproportionately" affected by violence, or how Blacks have it worse than the rest of us. it is not about proportion. there is no better or worse. there is antiblackness and there is everything else.

that's what, for me, was so powerful about the owner of gandhi mahal's statement: "let my building burn." not that it was about the ruse of private property (it was), but that it was about the willingness to resist the compulsion to legislate solidarity. https://twitter.com/profchander/status/1266401470267752454?s=20

"let my building burn"--it's not passive but it is about allowing to be led, solidarity on the terms of the other. that's the ethical moment i see there--the moment where he refuses to reduce black difference to a function of the non-black self. anything less is garbage.

(anyhow, shutting the fuck up now, logging off, picking up a book for a while. sorry for ranting and incoherence.)