this is really accurate, i think. it's a good summary of what i've been trying to say here for quite a while.

i picked most of this up not by reading but by experiencing protest movements first-hand. they erect their own hierarchy, which is pretty much a reflection of society's, and then they label the act of adhering to it as "intersectional anti-oppression". i mean, it took me months to really get my head around it. but, it kind of hit me like a sack of bricks when i did. and, all i got in return for pointing it out was this perception that i didn't understand it - that sitting around and living a burkean fantasy is actually deconstructing it, via foucault, and not just upholding it through construction - and if there was a deconstruction underlying the construction, it was something inverted that i maybe didn't understand, but i must object and claim it wasn't actually there!

there's an essay out there explaining how foucault was basically just restating burke. unfortunately, most foucaldians are just going to react by reading up on burke, right - it almost doesn't matter, because they don't have the slightest idea who he was, anyways. and, if they learn they're conservatives in the end, they're just going to change the letter on their lapel. but, it might do us a lot of good if they do.

he's right: the left neo-liberals just don't understand that they're neo-liberals.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2011/01/let-them-eat-diversity/