This article critiques Homi Bhabha's proposal that mimicry, as a transgressive performance of ambivalence, disrupts the colonial violence of the stereotype, and as such, generates emancipatory conditions for postcolonial subjects. I am critical of this naming of mimicry as enabling a possible liberation from colonial violence not only because it fails to address the loss of belonging that significantly marks the experience of being so violated, but also because it seems to intensify this loss in the hybridity and fragmentation that it celebrates. Through the work of María Lugones and Mariana Ortega, I propose a reimagined sense of Sartrean bad faith as one that corrects for this failure. This account of bad faith—as subversive, anticolonial practice—legitimizes my longing for a stability made impossible by the violent ambivalence that pervades both the colonial and postcolonial condition. Lugones's accounts of multiplicity and ontological plurality, as well as Ortega's conception of hometactics, help me argue that this reimagined conception of bad faith ought to be considered productive when it comes to existential strategies that pursue the possibility of free black life.

中文翻译：

---

抵制矛盾的逻辑：作为颠覆性，反殖民行为的不良信念

本文对霍米·巴巴（Homi Bhabha）的建议进行了批评，即模仿作为一种超越性的矛盾行为，破坏了刻板印象的殖民暴力，因此为后殖民主体创造了解放的条件。我对模仿的这种命名方式持批评态度，因为它有可能摆脱殖民地暴力，这不仅是因为它无法解决明显标志着被侵犯的归属感的丧失，而且还因为它似乎加剧了这种混杂性的丧失。庆祝的碎片化。通过玛丽亚·卢戈涅斯（MaríaLugones）和玛丽安娜·奥尔特加（Mariana Ortega）的工作，我提出了一种重新构想的萨特（Sartrean）恶意意识，可以纠正这种失败。这种恶意的说法-具有颠覆性，反殖民地的做法-使我渴望获得一种稳定的愿望，这种渴望因遍布殖民和后殖民时期的暴力矛盾情绪而无法实现。Lugones对多重性和本体论多元性的论述，以及Ortega的“家庭策略”概念，帮助我指出，这种重新构想的恶意概念在追求存在自由黑人生活可能性的生存策略时，应被视为具有生产力。