First of all, then, the question of critique itself - of the possibility of critique.
We who “hack” the academy - and in participating, even to critique, I can hardly exclude myself - where do we think we stand?
I’m not trying to point to any hard or fast rule, since rules always have exceptions. I’m just asking - how many of us do not have at least a BA from ‘the academy’? How many of us have never taken something that might be called a ‘theory’ course? And is there anyone more invested in “hacking the academy” than graduate students, the very cogs whose underpaid labor turns the wheels of the machine and whose bodies provide its fodder? And even those who have never formally been a part of the machine, who have never participated in the institution - how many of you have never been influenced by a book written by a tenured professor or published through a university press?
In other words, we can’t afford to resist or even begin thinking without first remembering that we are hacking (away at) the very flesh that birthed us, in one way or another. That doesn’t make this project any less important or useful. But this basic question of origin cannot be disavowed, and surely we must allow it to limit our expectations.
Have you ever tried to fundamentally change the behavior of one of your parents?
Exactly. As Ziggy Stardust once said, “It ain’t easy.”