Skip to main content

Resistance and neoliberal cultural studies



It is increasingly fashionable for a certain brand of Cultural Studies to declare, "resistance is irrelevant."

This brand of cultural studies, I term as "neoliberal Cultural Studies," re-fashions cultural studies as superficial definition of cultural artefacts in the service of the global free market. Inherent here is the agenda of knowledge production to serve the neoliberal turn.

The surface-level description of cosmopolitanism, hybridity, and cultural heritages in global markets is re-worked into the ideology of the free market, depicting the collaborative possibilities that are opened up through the expansion of the free market. Culture, and the knowledge about culture, in this depiction is worked into the global logics of the free market. Depictions of contexts and objects immersed in these contexts uncritically reproduce market-driven logics describing global flows.

Depictions of consumption practices for instance offer celebratory narratives of the opportunities opened up by the market. Celebratory depictions of churches as sites for market expansion in culturalist terms are peddled as Cultural Studies. Branding campaigns for Asian authoritarian regimes in terms of cultural heritage promotion are depicted in the language of cultural studies.

This celebratory promotion of the market logic goes hand-in-hand with the declaration that resistance is dead. Pronouncements about the futility of resistance strategies are re-invented as the new radical position under "neoliberal Cultural Studies."

The sustained attack on resistance in cultural studies is aligned with the overarching agenda of this grant-oriented, pragmatic turn in cultural studies to appeal to the market and thus establish its hegemony in the contemporary environment of the neoliberal expansion of the University. To write the death of resistance is to make oneself appealing to funders, to increasingly market-serving authoritarian states, and to private foundations.

To write the death of resistance is to turn culture and its production as an uncritical collaborative tools that serve the market.

Culture, defined in the economic logics of the market, can then be reproduced in branding campaigns, heritage marketing, city promotion, promotion of the arts, as an instrument that enables the global diffusion of the free market logic.

in sum, the removal of resistance from cultural studies enables its hegemonic turn, gutted from the radical possibilities imagined through cultural sites of creation. 

Popular posts from this blog

The whiteness of binaries that erase the Global South: On Communicative Inversions and the invitation to Vijay Prashad in Aotearoa

When I learned through my activist networks that the public intellectual Vijay Prashad was coming to Aotearoa, I was filled with joy. In my early years in the U.S., when learning the basics of the struggle against the fascist forces of Hindutva, I came in conversation with Vijay's work. Two of his critical interventions, the book, The Karma of Brown Folk , and the journal article " The protean forms of Yankee Hindutva " co-authored with Biju Matthew and published in Ethnic and Racial Studies shaped my early activism. These pieces of work are core readings in understanding the workings of Hindutva fascism and how it mobilizes cultural tropes to serve fascist agendas. Much later, I felt overjoyed learning about his West Bengal roots and his actual commitment to the politics of the Left, reflected in the organising of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), a political register that shaped much of my earliest lessons around Global South resistance, collectivization, and orga...

Libertarianism, the Free Speech Union, and the Life of Disinformation

The rise of the far-right globally is intertwined with the globally networked power of libertarian think tanks, funded at the base by the global extractive industries . In this blog post, through an analysis of the disinformation-based campaign I have personally experienced since October 2023 mobilised by the communicative ecosystem of the Free Speech Union (FSU), I will attend to the lifecycle of disinformation in libertarian networks, arguing that the disinformation ecosystem is invested in upholding both white supremacy and extractive capital. The FSU’s investment in disinformation I argue that the FSU is invested in producing and circulating disinformation. In response to my analysis of the hypocrisy of the Free Speech Union (FSU) that positions itself as a champion of free speech in Aotearoa while one of its co-founders, council members and spokespersons David Cumin (who is also one of the key actors representing Israel Institute of New Zealand) actively targets the freedom of a...

Zionist hate mongering, the race/terror trope, and the Free Speech Union: Part 1

March 15, 2019. It was a day of terror. Unleashed by a white supremacist far-right terrorist. Driven by hate for brown people. Driven by Islamophobic hate. Earlier in the day, I had come across a hate-based hit piece targeting me, alongside other academics, the University of Auckland academic Professor Nicholas Rowe , Professor Richard Jackson at Otago University, Professor Kevin P Clements at Otago University, Dr. Rose Martin from University of Auckland and Dr. Nigel Parsons at Massey University.  Titled, "More extremists in New Zealand Universities," the article threw in the labels "terror sympathisers" and "extremist views." Written by one David Cumin and hosted on the website of the Israel Institute of New Zealand, the article sought to create outrage that academics critical of Israeli settler colonialism and apartheid are actually employed by universities in New Zealand. Figure 1: The web post written by David Cumin on the site of Israel Institute ...