# data[].attributes.body
"Thus the term “racial capitalism” requires its users to recognize that capitalism is racial capital- ism. Capital can only be capital when it is accumulating, and it can only accumulate by producing and moving through relations of severe inequality among human groups—capitalists with the means of production/workers without the means of subsistence, creditors/debtors, conquerors of land made property/the dispossessed and removed. These antinomies of accumulation require loss, disposability, and the unequal differentiation of human value, and racism enshrines the inequalities that capitalism requires." (Jodi Melamed)

# data[].attributes.body
all capitalism, which is "Not a thing, it's a relation" - and it's a relation which can be changed, through solidarity

# data[].attributes.body
global system of unequal wealth accumulation through the construction of "racial" difference making projects that hierarchically shape peoples' relation to one another. but robinson reminds us this is not totalizing...

q- critique of "divide and conquer" trope in Kelley's reading of Robinson, difference making not a project of elite... does this challenge state/capital nexus arguments of other scholars we've read? do we buy it?

# data[].attributes.body
I loved in the video how she explicitly states that all capitalism is racial capitalism and to end racism you have to end capitalism.

# data[].attributes.body
It is all capitalism. It is a way of analysing capitalism which is based on the knowledge that capitalism can only operate with huge inequality. This inequality is upheld by practices and processes of racism.

# data[].attributes.body
Extracting value from those of a different racial identity

# data[].attributes.body
Racial capitalism is capitalism. Like RWG mentioned, they are a relation, they are inextricably linked. Capitalism feeds off of inequality and racism provides that inequality. Given the societal standards that we live in, we inundated with ways of perpetuating racism and therefore allowing capitalism to thrive. Similar to the "foundation" of this country, racial capitalism allows for profit over humanity, financial gain at the expense of Black people, Indigenous people, and people of color.

# data[].attributes.body
“Capitalism requires inequality and racism enshrines it.” - RWG
Exploiting and extracting value of people from a different race.

# data[].attributes.body
an analytic for thinking about how capitalism produces or engages with racial differences, or the experience of living in a capitalist world with racial differences

# data[].attributes.body
"capitalism requires inequality and racism enshrines it"

# data[].attributes.headline
Racial capitalism is a contemporary social formation that organizes access to the relationships, resources, and lands needed to sustain and reproduce life according to socially constructed structures and discourses of human (racial) difference. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Racial capitalism is a contemporary social formation that organizes access to the relationships, resources, and lands needed to sustain and reproduce life according to socially constructed structures and discourses of human (racial) difference. 

# data[].attributes.body
Racial capitalism draws attention to that which is true of all capitalism, that it is a system of differentiated value which racializes those at the bottom of its castes or classes. "First, African workers gad been transmuted by the perverted canons of mercantile capitalism into property. Then, African labor power as slave labor was integrated into the organic composition of ninteenth-century manufacturing and industrial capitalism.." Robinson, pg. 113

# data[].attributes.body
The process by which capitalism - through power relations - constructs difference between peoples and creates hierarchies. These differential power relations both exploits people's labor for profit, and makes this practice more permissible by creating divisions between social groups.

# data[].attributes.body
In considering how community ownership versus individual state, we considered whether or not community ownership would really have a significant change, especially in considering Wilson's piece. Especially with the case of the privatization of water being one insidious aspect of the development and expansion of the cotton industry in this area of California, if these lands were community owned, could this have resulted in a change in the industry? Would other resources be planted, or other economies (ie subsistence) flourish?

When relating to our own work, we thought through one individual's experience with a local mine impacting the health and availability of clean water in a nearby community. There were some legal battles that went on during the original siting process, with the EPA loosening their grip on it throughout the struggle. There are ongoing relationships between the mine and the community, though; many community members work at the mine, and the mine company paid for a local school. There seem to be benefits, and mutually benefit relationships, but what does this mean when it's at risk of environmental health? What does it mean when the benefits are rationalized through the capitalist, economic lense?

# data[].attributes.body
Blocs and power
- Woods would not be surprised, and would argue that the US government is operating as intended - to support capitalism (whether that should be the  case is a different case entirely) - this is not exclusive to New Orleans.
- different scales of government (state, city but also regional power), there were places in which these scales were not working in tandem; created this complex burueaucracy that was not helpful for social relations
- ^ most noticeable in the context of schools; decision-makers in schools think they are doing right by their kids by focusing on securing funding, so you are operating in a system that facilitates really poor decisions

Enclosures
- Social-spatial enclosures - thinking of marine protected areas that are developed without coordination from people who live in those areas and are impacted by those decisions
- Enclosure of fishing areas for businesses - creation and determination of these areas; relation from the land has been stripped from these areas.
- Normative theory of planning - humans trying to create the conditions for continued social reproduction
- Alexandra's work - thinking of informal street trading; if you're working informally/peripherally, the city is stripping you of so many assets (fines), forcing you to input surveillance technologies etc.
- Can you dig this documentary - farming/growing food in cities and the complexities of that; in Seattle there is this permit process that turns it into a food production site, but the barriers in place would criminalize people for growing food on dead grass, or "contaminated" soil
- ^ all this surplus land, but capitalists are motivated to disrupt subsistence living to not disrupt formal capitalist production
- Dams as a form of enclosure against nature - prevent salmon from reentering their homelands.

# data[].attributes.body
Linking the book 'Floating Coast' - p. 6 " Economies are a set of material relations, and also imaginaries of what is possible, desirable and valuable." to Q2 of radical futures "the imaginative powers that I wish all people could tap into. Imaginings that reject pre-existing institutions and structures of pain. Imaginings that actively build a different world." What creative possibilities are opened up when think outside of capitalism?

care based economies - these would prevent the creation of prisons

Access as care

# data[].attributes.body
enclosures in our own work-

- asset stripping in universities. princeton increased grad stipends by 25%. underpaying/undervaluing staff, students, adjuncts, other people employed by unis. social coercion- as if this is not labor, but pleasure/privilege, myth devalues. Surplus value- through undervaluing of staff/students/workers/adjuncts - "reinvested in community" but just goes to endowment investment portfolios. structural function/coercive function.
- ocems(?) - enclosures as physical, dispossession of people. creating marine protective areas and blocking peoples rights to access. (take away local rights to fish, give to others- tourists, for cost $ selling off rights).

state responsibilities/failures
- what is the state's responsibility in capitalism?
- can the state be responsible?
- idea of a welfare state- "bad"
- Woods- state intervention, state restructured after Katrina- doesn't matter what the state says it's doing for welfare. state's promise of "public housing"- critique of structure of welfare state. Need more rights based understanding of community. See last part of argument, no state savior.
- Gilmore believes in organized planning, power of planner (even as community/collective). Redeeming state is possible.
- New Deal- rooted in Republican values and a mass welfare campaign, and racialized (exclusions).
- State as neoliberal- but the commons as antithesis of neoliberalism. Commons is not a state formation/way to understand states.
- But what about pan-Africanism, Black nationalism(?) commons and a state.

# data[].attributes.body
Is it possible on a more global scale for larger corporations to follow the lead shown in this article and essentially give back to local communities? How would this look for oligopolies, like the cotton corporation RWG mentions?

# data[].attributes.body
"The First Nations men who initially supplied all of the fish to the canneries were soon marginalized by discriminatory race-based rules that restricted their ability to obtain independent fishing licenses"

# data[].attributes.body
"the new ownership structure at St. Jean’s is already rewriting the historical narrative about the role of First Nations in British Columbia’s fishing industry"

# data[].attributes.body
changes in ownership as a means of redistributing wealth and rectifying historical relations, as well as tying with ideological conception of how the fishery should be run, but also shows difficulty in doing this in system of capitalism aka other barriers like fishing rights etc

# data[].attributes.headline
How does the sale of the cannery combat the neoplantation aspects of salmon canneries in BC? (sort of a response to this)

# data[].attributes.subject
How does the sale of the cannery combat the neoplantation aspects of salmon canneries in BC? (sort of a response to this)

# data[].attributes.body
I enjoy the part: "We saw it as a good investment and that it lined up with our traditional practices and principles."

I think it is interesting to think about the legacy you are leaving behind with your company and how that legacy is cared for, curated, maintained - rather than just prioritising the amount of profit you would receive from the sale. It is refreshing to see something other than money being the overriding logic for a business decision.

# data[].attributes.body
As we saw in the video, 'small' community-led resistance is crucial to breaking the existing relationship with capitalism

# data[].attributes.body
educate others and build community

# data[].attributes.body
abolish everything

# data[].attributes.body
Radical Dependency - as Gilmore described it. Reimagining social relations of care and wellbeing.
Rejecting the conditions that create racialized capitalism in every aspect of our lives.

# data[].attributes.body
We talked about this a bit in the breakout room, but the idea of resistance through local communities is vital, though it is difficult within a capitalist society. I come back to "do what you can, when you can" so this might be forms of mutual aid and community support, organizing, community education. I really appreciated in the video with RWG the "pop-up university" where people could socialize and discuss because at the end of the day learning and conversing about these topics is the key to resisting an oppressive system that feeds on the people maintaining the status quo.

# data[].attributes.body
importance of global nature of robinson, using solidarity and shared ideology of black radical tradition to combat the differentiation promoted by racial capitalism, bringing people across the globe back together and forming networks of solidarity based on shared experiences of organized abandonment, accumulation by dispossession, enclosure etc

# data[].attributes.body
Perhaps seizing the means of production as an element of land back campaigns.

# data[].attributes.body
general strike

# data[].attributes.body
what's exciting for me about the readings today is the relational understanding of racial capitalism to black radicalism, to abolition, to a "new commons" although through diff pathways (state, outside the state, through metaphysical shared consciousness...) so the framework isn't solely about seeing RC or naming the harm but we also don't lose sight of what's doing the harm, how rc creates hierarchies of difference, how these are reproduced to accumulate capital, and how to upend these... my q also aligns with lipsitz article- futures of black radicalism "what's black about the brt?" similar to kelley's intro how do we consider actors and struggles by groups not included in this shared consciousness through a metaphysical history but through maybe radical dependencies created in praxis...

# data[].attributes.body
Community scale action is contagious. As we're seeing with workers rights resurgence in the US now.

# data[].attributes.body
for one i think we need a rigorous racial capital oriented critique of neoliberal identity and cultural politics

# data[].attributes.body
Robinson pointed this out in chapter 7, but all the readings and this case study provide examples of the ways in which we can question the integrity of capitalism and expose it as a structure that is not impenetrable. It can be re-shaped and reformed, we just to to continue striving to make those positive changes

# data[].attributes.body
Being aware of and doing our best to fight against (racial) inequality wherever and however we can. Living in the world as well as possible. Being in community as much as possible.

I'm also thinking about a TikTok trend this week where a woman asks if anyone has subtle feminist power moves. Some of the responses have been that women don't move out of the way for men in instances where men almost walk into them (and also don't move out of the way), to wearing heels in board meetings so that they are the tallest person in the room. I wonder what kinds of responses there would be if the question was "how have you subtly subverted capitalism today?"

# data[].attributes.body
new conceptions of planning from community level- planning as "particular kinds of change to produce the conditions under which social and cultural reproduction might happen"