#The intersection of capitalism consumerism and colonialism

[chinesegal]

Western luxuries built over the mass graves of children, you heartless nitwit.

As Gazans are desperately trying to survive and cradling dead loved ones in their arms, this lady is envisioning amusement parks and consumerism goods built over homes and centuries of cultural heritage. Even the image of Marie Antoinette telling starving peasants to "eat cake" isnt this outrageous.

[hussyknee]

i mean the op of that video on plastic surgery being bad is quite literally a terf. that's. she's openly a terf. and a shitton of terfs DO talk about trans women using surgery for gender affirming care as proof that they're not only fake women but participating in the oppression of women by supporting plastic surgery.

I don't know whether you white people can understand this, but the very objective of bad faith actors is taking a legitimate issue and perverting it to their own ends. This is not restricted to TERFs. It's what all fundamentalists and radicals do. That does not make the actual issue any less real or legitimate. The fact that the beauty industry is toxic as shit and makes bank off pushing ridiculous body and gender ideals on people in the guise of "self-care" is a HUGE problem. Especially because these ideals are shaped by misogyny, racism, colourism, feauturism, anti-blackness, ableism, fatphobia, classism, endosexism and cissexism. It's every kind of fucked up.

Both trans exclusionary radical feminism and the standards of femininity and beauty created and pushed forward by colonial capitalism come from white supremacy. Radical feminism's transphobia is an outgrowth of white women weaponizing their fragility against Black women and women of colour. It's the white colonial anxiety about their subjugated underclasses that makes them out to be mutants and predators. This was formerly projected onto WoC, lesbians and working class women, and has now found a new target in trans people.

If you need makeup and plastic surgery to conform to society's notions of gender, that means society's idea of what women should look like is extremely narrow and exclusionary. It means that nobody who falls outside of it can affirm their own femininity without them. That people, especially trans, young, mentally unwell, vulnerable people, are made to buy into it by consumerism and social conditioning. That people without the money or access to conform will always be seen as lesser. Your choices and preferences are not created in a vacuum.

I am begging on my hands and knees for you to center women of colour, especially trans women of colour, in your intersectional feminism instead of blindly reacting to identity politics.

Read this last reblog.

[sustainabilityandthecity]

Sustainability, Indigenous Practices, Colonialism, and Capitalism in the Fashion Industry

The fashion industry is under increasing scrutiny for its environmental and social repercussions. In response to these challenges, it is essential to focus on integrating sustainability, honouring Indigenous and cultural practices, and addressing the historical impacts of colonialism and capitalism. In this blog post, I will examine how these factors intersect within the fashion industry and advocate for a shift towards a more just and sustainable future.

The Imperative of Sustainability in Fashion

Sustainability in fashion involves reducing environmental impacts, promoting ethical practices, and ensuring long-term viability. The industry contributes significantly to global carbon emissions, water pollution, and waste. Sustainable fashion seeks to mitigate these impacts through eco-friendly materials, waste reduction, and ethical production practices.

One approach to sustainability is the adoption of circular fashion models, which emphasise the reuse, repair, and recycling of garments. This model contrasts with the traditional linear fashion model, which often promotes a cycle of consumption and disposal. Circular fashion aims to extend the lifecycle of clothing, reduce waste, and minimise environmental impact (Fletcher, 2014).

Indigenous and Cultural Practices as Models for Sustainability

Indigenous and cultural practices offer valuable lessons in sustainability. Many Indigenous communities worldwide have long embraced sustainable practices, often rooted in a deep connection to the land and a holistic understanding of resource management. These practices include the use of natural dyes, the recycling and repurposing of textiles, and the creation of garments designed for longevity.

The Legacy of Colonialism in the Fashion Industry

Colonialism has had a profound impact on the fashion industry, shaping its practices and global trade dynamics. The legacy of colonialism is evident in the exploitation of resources and labour in formerly colonised regions, including many South Asian countries. The colonial era introduced global trade practices that prioritised profit over local well-being, leading to the exploitation of textile workers and resources (Harrison, 2013).

The imposition of Western fashion standards and mass production methods during the colonial period disrupted traditional textile practices and led to the prioritisation of cheap, synthetic materials over traditional, sustainable methods. This historical context has contributed to the current issues of environmental degradation and social injustice in the fashion industry (Bhaduri & Hill, 2022).

Capitalism and Its Impact on Fashion Sustainability

Capitalism, with its emphasis on profit maximisation and consumerism, has driven the growth of fast fashion. This model prioritises rapid production and low-cost goods, often at the expense of environmental and social considerations. The fast fashion industry relies on cheap labour and unsustainable practices to keep prices low and profit margins high (Claudio, 2007).

The capitalist drive for constant innovation and seasonal trends perpetuates a cycle of overconsumption and waste. Consumers are encouraged to buy more frequently, contributing to high levels of textile waste and environmental pollution. In contrast, sustainable fashion practices that focus on quality, longevity, and ethical production challenge the capitalist paradigm by prioritising the well-being of people and the planet over profit (Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2017).

Integrating Sustainability and Respecting Cultural Practices

To address the issues arising from colonialism and capitalism, the fashion industry must embrace sustainable practices and respect cultural heritage. This involves:

Supporting Indigenous and Traditional Methods: Integrating traditional practices, such as natural dyeing and custom tailoring, into mainstream fashion can reduce environmental impact and promote cultural preservation (Tucker, 2021).

Addressing Exploitation: Ensuring fair labour practices and ethical sourcing in the fashion supply chain can help rectify the injustices rooted in colonial exploitation (Harrison, 2013).

Promoting Circular Fashion: Adopting circular fashion models that emphasise the reuse, repair, and recycling of garments aligns with both sustainable and cultural values (Fletcher, 2014).

Challenging Capitalist Norms: Shifting away from the fast fashion model towards one that values quality and longevity can help mitigate the environmental and social impacts of capitalism (Claudio, 2007).

Conclusion

The intersection of sustainability, Indigenous and cultural practices, colonialism, and capitalism in the fashion industry presents both challenges and opportunities. By embracing sustainable practices and respecting cultural traditions, the fashion industry can move towards a more equitable and environmentally responsible future. Addressing the legacies of colonialism and capitalism is essential for creating a fashion industry that values people and the planet over profit.

Signing off for now,

Adam <3

References

Bhaduri, A., & Hill, M. (2022). Colonial Legacies in Global Fashion Supply Chains. Fashion Studies, 15(2), 134-150. https://doi.org/10.1080/17517466.2022.1985302

Claudio, L. (2007). Waste Couture: Environmental Impact of the Clothing Industry. Environmental Health Perspectives, 115(9), A449-A454. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.115-a449

Ellen MacArthur Foundation. (2017). A New Textiles Economy: Redesigning Fashion’s Future. https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/publications/a-new-textiles-economy-redesigning-fashions-future

Fletcher, K. (2014). Sustainable Fashion and Textiles: Design Journeys. Routledge.

Harrison, R. (2013). Indigenous Cultural Sustainability and the Role of Fashion. Journal of Fashion Theory, 17(4), 451-469. https://doi.org/10.2752/175174113X13637093901736

Tucker, D. (2021). Reimagining Fashion: Sustainable Practices and Cultural Heritage. Journal of Sustainable Fashion & Textiles, 5(2), 78-92. https://doi.org/10.1080/20506106.2021.1956047

[wovetherapy]

How do I know if I have a Mental disorder?

Have you ever noticed it often takes a diagnosis for yourself or anyone else take your symptoms seriously? Have you ever paused to question what a diagnosis even is, who defines it, or where it comes from? It’s not as objective as you may have thought. Race, class, sex, gender. It all matters.

Present day late stage capitalism (fueled by the legacy of colonialism and slavery) makes it all too easy to fall into the trap of consumerism, even when it comes to matters of health. The medical industrial complex convinces us that our symptoms are personal flaws and offers solutions with a hefty price tag.

Healthcare is not immune to socially constructed ills, and we need to acknowledge the intersectional impacts. Mental health is absolutely prone to racism, classism, and all the -isms that plague our society.

Recently, biological anthropologists have questioned the wisdom of modern medical models to address mental health. As intersectional therapists, we always ask our clients: What if it's not the person, but the system that's broken?

In an article for Forbes, Alison Escalante explores this question based on the published peer-reviewed journal article, “Mental health is biological health: Why tackling ‘diseases of the mind’ is an imperative for biological anthropology in the 21st century,” by researchers Kristen L. Syme and Edward H. Hagen.

Hagen & Syme say, "Mental disorders, by comparison, are still shrouded under a dark curtain, and there has been little, if any, improvement in public mental health. The worldwide prevalence of mental, neurological, and substance abuse disorders, heretofore mental disorders, remained steady between 1990 and 2010." Building on this, Esclante writes that "Labels are something we internalize to define who we are and what we are capable of. All too often, labels limit us. And that’s why reconsidering how we label anxiety, depression or ADHD is important. Does someone have depression, a medical disorder of their brain, or are they having a depressed adaptive response to adversity? Adversity is something we can overcome, whereas a mental disorder is something to be managed. The labels imply very different possibilities."

What are your thoughts? Are some disorders adaptive responses to adversity?

If you are dealing with a mental disorder, please let us know. Together with our team, we will come up with a plan that works for you. Click here to get started now.

[dearinglovebot]

i normally agree with criticisms of the jurassic world trilogy (they are bad movies but they are OUR bad movies!!) but one that always bothers me is the “empty character” criticism. because its like i think you’re just watching with your eyes closed. 

doctor wu, for instance. a man who’s entire world is the majesty of science. he’s not evil, he’s just in love with what he can create. and sometimes that has consequences. he was here from the inception and he’ll probably continue until he dies. he gravitates towards people who can help him test the boundaries of what can be done and sometimes that means seeing if he CAN make a super hybrid. doesnt matter if no ones asking if he SHOULD. clear goals, clear motivation, clear personality. to think of him as a mindless villain is to purify the people of science, a field that has committed atrocities with things like nuclear weapons and eugenics. he is as human as the people who created white phosphorus 

and claire dearing, our protagonist. starting of an anti hero as the capitalist entity, disillusioned by what was once amazing. that is what capitalism Does. it forces innovation, no matter how heartless and exploitative. but she is ultimately terrified by the consequences of such heartlessness and wants to redeem herself for what she’s caused. thus, she’ll protect the dinosaurs from the island SHE put them on. and when given the chance to cause a cataclysm once again, she chooses not to because, again, she’s terrified of what one decision can do to so many people. claire is a character who directly grapples with horrific mistakes and tries her best to solve them. her motivations are abundantly clear and easy to understand, as well as her personality. 

but besides characters with personal, i would like to ask: do jurassic villains need to be people or is it enough to use them to REPRESENT something? 

because hoskins is complex in the sense that he represents the intersection of colonialism, war-mongering, and capitalism. he has no problems exploiting living animals if it will further the US’s global empire. he is the colonizer mindset. more blood, more teeth, more dead global indigenous peoples. i don’t care about if he loves his wife or kid, frankly. not when people like him are killing my people. 

eli is complex in the sense that he is the anthesis of who claire is. formerly bright eyed working class people who’ve become disillusioned by the world. but where claire sees disaster as something to be avoided, eli has stopped caring at all. he sees the island’s disaster as a way to profit while claire sees it as an opportunity to preserve life. he is the side of consumerism that claire isn’t, ruthless, resource hoarding, selfish. does he NEED motivation beyond that? people like him exist. they are the kinds of people who seek out the global south’s barely livable salaries because it’s cheaper. 

disliking characters is very different to them being BAD or shallow. claire and wu aren’t shallow. you can dislike them, but they have substance. in fact, you probably dislike them BECAUSE of their substance aka the choices they make because of their motives and goals.  

do i think all of them are handled well? no. not at all. but i can understand what they are to the story. just because a plotline can’t express an idea well doesn’t mean the idea doesn’t matter or isn’t there. it just means you need an editor

[tredford01]

The End of a Long Chapter

The Queen died yesterday. Even though I have felt an increasing republican sentiment over the last few years, her death feels like the end of a very long chapter for Britain. Elizabeth became Queen of a Britain that most politicians for the last decade have held up as the ideal.

The Platonic Britain was draped in the glory of winning the War, perfumed with the 1950’s optimism imported from America, and nestled in a comfortable but dissipating cloud of global power and empire. The Queen embodied this, ascending to the throne in Kenya, televising all the pomp and circumstance of her coronation, and privately enjoying a thoroughly modern aesthetic.

But the Britain that actually existed in the 1950’s was quite a lot more nuanced than this ideal. Britain was on the ‘winning’ side of the War, but rationing was not a distant memory, cities were riddled with bomb sites, and the country faced massive social upheaval from factors including resettlement of bombed out communities in new towns and soldiers returning from the battlefields. Growing consumerism fuelled by new technologies, and an evolving media with the launch of ITV were changing people's ideas of how life could be lived. And the empire was slowly, and then quickly, collapsing, as people seized the opportunity to govern themselves.

I think the second Elizabethan age has been amongst the most transformative in British history. All of the seeds of change that were present at the Queen’s coronation grew over the 70 years of her reign. British society and social norms broadened to encompass the culture of all classes, doing away with a sense of deference in public life. I am not sure this deference was ever widespread, but the visibility of working class culture, and the culture of the many people who came to Britain in the 20th century, has undoubtedly grown during this time. Staid upper and middle class traditions, while still present, must now share the spotlight with Love Island, and long may it be so.

Less positively, an extreme form of consumerist capitalism took root through the ’80’s and onwards to today. I am always struck by this when I return to the UK. The ‘Lastminute.com London Eye’, the ‘Emirates Air Line’ cablecar, and most of all, the enormous ease of shopping. I think this particular form of capitalism, more than any other domestic factor, has changed the face of Britain in the last 70 years.

Besides the domestic, Britain’s place in the world has shifted beyond recognition. From a global power, forcibly holding countries in its grip, sustaining itself with imperial trade, Britain has become just another big country.

The domestic transformation of Britain was incomplete. Old elites, educated in private schools, studying at Oxbridge, have never been far from power. Even with the New Labour government from 1997, traditional upper class control of the country was never truly in danger. But there were major social advances in rights for women, LGBTQ+ people and more, with all the intersections possible. Legal protections have built up piecemeal, but present. There was a sense of a direction from the left and the right. It might not have been the same direction, but both could be said to know where they wanted to take the country.

I don’t think that can really be said for foreign affairs. There was no real desire to stop being an empire. The demand came from the people subjected to rule by a far away island. There was initial support for the European project, but no concept of Britain’s place within it. Membership, eventually in the 1970’s was pragmatic not part of a vision of a European Britain. The Korean War, Cold War and remnants of the imperial country, such as having one of the world’s few blue water navies, scattered colonial hangovers like the Falklands and Gibraltar, and nominal leadership of the Commonwealth further muddied the waters for any cohesive idea of Britain’s place internationally.

So this Elizabethan chapter of Britain has been 70 years of incomplete transformation. Politics is destabilised by repeated failures to address the needs of the whole population by both Conservative and Labour governments (albeit one more than the other). Economic development has been hoarded in the South East of England, while industrial decline and lack of investment in infrastructure has ruined lives in the North of England. English-centric politics has driven a wedge in the union with a very real possibility of Scottish independence in the coming years. Externally, Britain finally lurched towards a sense of its place in the world: as a gargantuan ‘European Singapore’, studded with freeports, low taxes and slashed-back regulation. Shrouded in the same cloud of imperial glamour that was present at the start of the Queen’s reign, this idea of Global Britain is just as much of a myth as the endurance of the British Empire.

Scotland, with its strong movement for independence is striking in how it has broken this pattern. Devolution gave people in Scotland a chance to come up with our own solutions for the similar problems of industrial decline, depopulating countryside, and shift to a services and knowledge economy. The independence debates in the run up to the last referendum and forced us to imagine what our future could be; what Scotland’s place in the world would be. How a country of 5 million people could sustain itself, and what it means to be Scottish. I don’t want to put on rose-tinted glasses, because, as with all nationalism, there is an ugly nativist side to Scottish nationalism, but the overwhelming sense of that debate was of a country that knew what it was, looking to venture out into the international community, find a place within that community, and try to create a better nation and an inclusive nation.

I remember sitting at the gate in Stornaway Airport waiting for a flight down to Edinburgh on the night of one of the big televised debates on independence before the referendum. Our flight was delayed because of bad weather, so we had time to catch the start of the debate. When the plane eventually came, it felt like the crew were pulling us all away from the debate on the little airport TV. A planeload of people glued to a constitutional debate. People engaged with the creation of a vision for Scotland in a way I haven’t seen with the UK as a whole. There is an idea for what Scotland could be. I wouldn’t be surprised if a similar thing could be said for Wales, though the debate is in a different context there. But it definitely could not be said for Britain.

The next chapter, with King Charles III is starting in the aftermath of the massive upheaval of Covid-19, with Britain facing economic and energy crises, the omnipresent climate emergency, and internal tensions that could go far beyond ripping up the 1707 Treaty of the Union. Will this new chapter finally bring the social transformation that the last couldn’t complete and the vision that has always been missing?

[all-things-are-nothing-to-me]

Straight Edge Anarchy: The Danger of a Sober Insurrection

Intoxication Culture

Intoxication: derived from the Latin word "intoxicatio," meaning "to poison one's self." Intoxication culture is a set of institutions, behaviors, and mindsets focused on the consumption of drugs, alcohol, and tobacco use. Intoxication culture facilitates the anesthesia promoted by those in power who seek to dis-empower and pacify the enslaved. As an antithesis of self-liberation, intoxication culture promotes defeatism through the internalization of self-hatred and pity.

On a global scale capitalism not only manifests its destruction environmentally but also in the form of self-destructive actions and behaviors which have become  normalized as a traditional development of civilization. As a coping mechanism, intoxication becomes an accepted part of daily life, whether it be as a reward for a long hard week of wage-slavery, or a self-prescribed sedative and so on. Intoxication culture is self-perpetuating and captures the idea of rebellion through self-destruction. Often an individual manifests depression and anger cultivated by pre-existing oppressive external forces, through a variety of self-destructive actions. Rebellion in this sense is internalized as self-hatred, apathy, and self- pity. As self-hatred, depression, and feelings of inferiority become exacerbated by addiction, profits soar for capitalists. Rather than directly confronting problems that exist in one's life, an individual becomes dependent on a source which provides temporary escape. Escapism becomes an alternative life of apathy through toxic consumerism. As nourishment for self-pity, hopelessness, and apathy intoxication acts as an agent of consolement.

The deprivation of self-respect coupled with feelings of inferiority has and continues to be an obstacle in the way of insurrectionary attack. This short pamphlet was written in hopes of presenting a critical view of toxic pacifism while highlighting the urgency for sober attack.

Chemical Warfare and Colonization

Alcohol was an integral part of the colonization process. Everything from creating alcoholic abusive behavior within what used to be peaceful Native groups and tribes to pacifying slave revolts. European Christian colonists used alcohol as a chemical weapon of warfare in their genocidal and ethnic cleansing, mistreatment, and exploitation of indigenous peoples. Alcohol and tobacco became tools of privilege creating hierarchy as those who had more access to these could sell them for the labor of others. Once tobacco became known for its  profit, indigenous people, slaves, and indentured servants were put to work on lands that were taken by brutal force from the Natives. Alcohol and drugs were used for their pacifying and numbing effects. As the wild and free became more intoxicated and distracted from the reality of their rapidly changing existence, they began to internalize the hatred imposed upon them. With the development of an identity crisis the process of assimilation took place as many indigenous and other people of color became a target for capitalists who profit from social intoxication. Distract and Pacify Capitalism relies heavily on distracting people from the reality of its oppressive control. As long as people are ignorant and docile, capitalism and its destruction can remain unchallenged and operational. Through toxic submission capitalism normalizes the monotony of social dis-empowerment. As long as the casual exchange of labor for capital, capital for inebriation takes place, there is no threat to the civilized order. While a local punk benefit show rages in clouds of cigarette smoke, Reynolds American (a $19.5 billion corporation) takes much of the profit. Empty beer cans and hung-over anarchist punks litter the floors of squats and rented spaces as the U.S casually continues its military domination of other countries abroad. In a system of psychological warfare, pacifism is defeat. It is the neglect of one's self as a result of the civilized disconnection from wild raw emotion. Emotional suppression induced by inebriation cultivates the pacifist role of allowing external forces of oppression to exist and dominate without confrontation and attack. Intoxication distracts an individual by complicating pre-existing stressful circumstances to the point of emotional exhaustion. During this time of anesthesia spaces of emotional and physical vulnerability are opened and exploited. These complications and distractions allow capitalism and those in power to oppress without conflict. By impairing and debilitating the emotional and physical arsenal foundational to self-liberation, intoxication culture is an obstacle in the way of revolutionary organizing and attack. The revolutionary act of overcoming these obstacles and addictions in pursuit of self-liberation is nothing less than an outspoken refusal to be tamed and pacified, It is a refusal to promote and participate in a culture which aids the destruction of others.  Why Straight-Edge? Straight-Edge is the politics of regaining control over one's self, and of taking back from those who wish to enslave and control. It is the politics of rejecting the "values" and toxic traditions that have been instilled in civilized society. In a system dependent on the intoxication and ignorance of people, the abstention from these tranquilizers is a refusal to comply with, and rebellion against the system. As people have been drowned and chained by capitalist traditions, Straight Edge is embraced by anarchists as a firm rejection of a culture promoted and perpetuated by a system seeking total physical and psychological control. As a rejection to the assumption that all will participate in the intoxicating consumerist routine of passive obedience, self-disrespect, and toxic submission, the Straight-Edge movement has increased. This has occurred as anarchists extend solidarity with freedom fighters globally, understanding that cognizance and sobriety are a combined expression of resistance to the self-indulgent, apathetic ethos that defines mainstream U.S. culture.  "War on drugs" = War on people of color  As a result of the state-operated "War on Drugs", communities of color are targeted for police harassment and mass incarceration. Crack and other drugs remain as large sources of profit for the white supremacist system. By keeping POC communities passive and politically indifferent, the state is able to warp public perception with the delusion of progress with incarcerations. Straight-Edge anarchists understand that the state is never an option for fighting intoxication culture. The state is not only the colonial, repressive apparatus protecting private- property ownership and the white supremacist order but also an accomplice of intoxication culture. One does not have to look far to see how the state uses intoxication culture to fuel the prison industrial complex. The state has used drugs to orchestrate the destruction of the Black Panther Party and has made multiple attempts to undermine the cohesion of the Zapatistas with alcohol. Due to their destructive counter-insurgent effects, there is a total absence of consumption or sale of drugs and alcohol in the Zapatista autonomous communities.  Alcohol manufacturers, coca and marijuana syndicates, and "chemists" have created a colossal destructive industry based on both "legal" and black market demand. Philip Morris and Anheuser-Busch, although both household names, are just as responsible for community destruction and murder as the Sinaloa Cartel (Mexico) or the Noorzai Organization (Afghanistan). From an economic standpoint radical sobriety reduces the demand for their "goods" and limits their power at an individual level. As a whole, the Straight Edge movement maintains not only a threat to these businesses by disrupting their flow of income, but also to the normalcy of emotional suppression, obedience, and apathy. In this sense sobriety is embraced not only as a rejection of submission, but also as a declaration of war.  Solidarity  Attacking intoxication culture means individual resistance and collective support. Civilization is a prison of misery, coercion, and oppressive inequality. Institutionalized racism, sexism, and other forms of oppression create feelings of severe depression and isolation. Intoxication culture thrives in areas dominated by poverty, depression, and isolation. This explains why communities of color are often affected by addiction and intoxication where the state takes advantage earring out murders and mass incarceration. Support and solidarity are important in helping to strengthen the struggle against addiction as well as developing an intersectional attack on all oppression. Radical sobriety support groups and spaces help replace religious groups that rather than addressing addiction as a natural response to an oppressive environment, seek to replace one form of co-dependency with an authoritarian one. Providing revolutionary sober-safe spaces that are open for recovering addicts, community discussions, and radical support help aid the struggle against intoxication culture. Being inclusive rather than rejecting those struggling with addiction is of utmost importance as well as encouraging self-empowerment in those who feel powerless against their addiction. Straight-Edge identifying anarchists stand against religion, homophobia, sexism, racism and all forms of oppressions and should not be confused with "hardline" ideology. Radical sobriety is not only a self-liberating act of re-wilding one's self, but also as a form of solidarity and support with those struggling against addiction. Embracing an intersectional struggle against all oppression and authority means solidarity with all who struggle for freedom-including freedom from addiction and the pacifying force of intoxication culture. Towards the destruction of civilization, all prisons, and the domesticating globalization of capitalism. For human/nonhuman animal and earth liberation. 

[cristinathoughts]

blog post 1 :)

Examining the intersection between colonialism, capitalism, and propaganda is imperative to understanding some of the darkest parts of American culture. Colonialism as I understand it is a means of imposing capitalism on a group of people for the sake of exploiting them for profit. Under capitalism, there are people that come out on top and then there is everyone else. Those who benefit most from capitalism are people that began with the most privilege, or rich, straight, able bodied, white men. These winners of capitalism have a strong incentive to justify why, out of everyone, they ought to be on top. This paves the way for harmful ideology to be spread by propaganda. The oppression of Black people was rationalized through harmful stereotypes. When Jim Crow laws were in place, blatantly racist cartoons filled American’s heads with poison to maintain the status quo. Today, shows like The Cleveland Show play into Black stereotypes to make jokes at Black people’s expense for a mostly white audience. Racist programs reinforce what the majority culture teaches. They tell people that racism is acceptable. In 2020, we are less generally less tolerant of blatant acts of racism. Racist propaganda in the form of “dark humor” sends the message that racism is okay if “it’s just a joke”. However, racism never has been or will be just a joke. The stereotypes played into by these programs have real life ramifications. Capitalism is also contingent on the oppression of women. Society places immense pressure on women to look and act a certain way. Women are consistently compared to one another very openly, causing them to compete with one another. Magazines marketed toward women reduce womanhood to being what men want you to be. Capitalism promoted by glorifying consumerism. They are filled with articles telling you which products to buy to stay young and sexy. The magazines and the people that own the products and brands all profit off of women’s insecurity and desire to be desirable to others. More progressive magazines support women in being desirable to themselves, but even those ones buy into the idea that you need stuff to be happy. It is profitable to make navigating womanhood more complicated and difficult because it makes women doubt themselves and search for external validation. They are easier to control if they are unsure of themselves and distracted by things like their weight. I love trashy magazines but I need to be careful not to internalize the messages in them. Capitalism is consistently supported by the idea of upward mobility or The American Dream. Films like The Pursuit of Happyness, The Social Network, and Forrest Gump all show young men working their tails off from humble or adverse circumstances to achieve their goals. These stories are beautiful, but at the end of the day they are only stories. In reality, the people with the most advantages from the start just get richer and richer. The United States is an increasingly unequal and segregated place. Promoting the American Dream is beneficial to capitalism because it tells the masses that capitalism is good for society. It also tells regular people that they have a chance of reaching the upper echelons of wealth and prosperity. As a result, working class people identify more with the uber rich because they think they have a chance. In reality, working people across the globe probably have more in common with each other than rich and poor people from the same country. This discourages a united movement against capitalism. An economic system which prioritizes profit over people will always be exploitative. Capitalism is built into the threads of our society and it will take a lot of work to undo. Our current economic model seems to be failing Americans more than ever. As difficult as these times may be, I am hopeful that we will eventually see a change in our economic system. I do not have all the answers but I am glad we are now able to name some of our problems. The fact that we are able to criticize capitalism so openly is a sign of tremendous social progress from 50 or so years ago. I hope that more people see that capitalism is the underlying issue to so many of our issues, instead of engaging in liberal identity politics. Unity of the people is critical to changing American society for the better.

[dagwolf]

What I like about the prison abolition movement is it’s a social movement that demands an intersectional class struggle and all sorts of coordinated direct action that moves us, little by little, towards a prison free world. It challenges the way we compose property, privacy, justice, gender, sex, racism, colonialism and colonization, employment, consumerism, business, profit, and cooperation. It’s a possibility through which class struggle organizes that has materiality more substantially visible than generalized protest against capitalism. Don’t appreciate the elitism in academic Marxism? Who does? Join the prison abolition movement. In the US, the movement has decades deep roots and organizational structure. You won’t get roped into electioneering. You won’t get bogged down in the past via the book. You will learn and grow.

[wovetherapy]

How do I know if I have a disorder?

Have you ever noticed it often takes a diagnosis for yourself or anyone else take your symptoms seriously? Have you ever paused to question what a diagnosis even is, who defines it, or where it comes from? It’s not as objective as you may have thought. Race, class, sex, gender. It all matters.

Present day late stage capitalism (fueled by the legacy of colonialism and slavery) makes it all too easy to fall into the trap of consumerism, even when it comes to matters of health. The medical industrial complex convinces us that our symptoms are personal flaws and offers solutions with a hefty price tag.

Healthcare is not immune to socially constructed ills, and we need to acknowledge the intersectional impacts. Mental health is absolutely prone to racism, classism, and all the -isms that plague our society.

Recently, biological anthropologists have questioned the wisdom of modern medical models to address mental health. As intersectional therapists, we always ask our clients: What if it's not the person, but the system that's broken?

In an article for Forbes, Alison Escalante explores this question based on the published peer-reviewed journal article, “Mental health is biological health: Why tackling ‘diseases of the mind’ is an imperative for biological anthropology in the 21st century,” by researchers Kristen L. Syme and Edward H. Hagen.

Hagen & Syme say, "Mental disorders, by comparison, are still shrouded under a dark curtain, and there has been little, if any, improvement in public mental health. The worldwide prevalence of mental, neurological, and substance abuse disorders, heretofore mental disorders, remained steady between 1990 and 2010." Building on this, Esclante writes that "Labels are something we internalize to define who we are and what we are capable of. All too often, labels limit us. And that’s why reconsidering how we label anxiety, depression or ADHD is important. Does someone have depression, a medical disorder of their brain, or are they having a depressed adaptive response to adversity? Adversity is something we can overcome, whereas a mental disorder is something to be managed. The labels imply very different possibilities."

What are your thoughts? Are some disorders adaptive responses to adversity?

If you are dealing with a mental disorder, please let us know. Together with our team, we will come up with a plan that works for you. Click here to get started now.