refuse the assumption that risk & harm associated w data practices can be bounded to mean same thing for everyone, everywhere, at every time; acknowledge how historical & systemic patterns of violence & exploitation produce differential vulnerabilities

refuse to be disciplined by data, devices & practices that seek to shape & normalize racialized, gendered & differently-abled bodies that track, monitor & surveil; commit to taking back control over the ways we behave, live, and engage with data and its technologies.
3. We refuse the use of data about people in perpetuity. We commit to embracing agency and working with intentionality, preparing bodies or corpuses of data to be laid to rest when they are not being used in service to the people about whom they were created.
refuse to understand data as disembodied & thereby dehumanized & departicularized; commit to understanding data as always & variously attached to bodies; vow to interrogate biopolitical implications of data w keen eye to all forms of embodied difference
Data can - and should always - resist reduction. Data is a thing, a process, and a relationship we make and put to use. We can make it and use it differently.

You May Also Like

I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x


The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x