Short news cycles have become the norm in U.S. media production and consumption. These cycles have a way of dictating public discourse and shaping how formal political leaders frame or construct arguments for change. In this current political climate, critical scholars, activists, and organizers are left to navigate difficult terrain. It is particularly difficult when political systems of representation, interpersonal violence, material inequities, increased measures of surveillance, media bias, historical amnesia, and state-sanctioned violence and rhetoric are historically rooted in ideologies of white supremacy and heteropatriarchy. Such publicly-ingrained historicity begs the question: What bends political will toward transformative change? Over the summer of 2019, Democratic presidential candidates organized campaign rallies and public forums and participated in nationally televised debates. Among the various issues and policies that candidates addressed were questions about policing, reparations, and economic justice and restructuring. While the candidates’ responses and recommendations fell short of the necessary visioning andmeasures to generate paradigm shifts and alternatives to existing institutions and structures, the visible dialoguewas due, in large part, to ground-level organizing by Black Lives Matter activists and TheMovement for Black Lives policy platform (see www.policy.m4bl.org). The robust, multi-dimensional activism was cultivated during the start of the decade and has resulted in a political climate where formal political leaders and institutions are being pressured to reckon with the violence done to Black lives as well as the socioeconomic injustices that low-income and communities of color face (Garza & Perez, 2017). Consequently, national stages and media platforms are not immune to the subversive efforts of activists and community organizers. Chants of “Fire Pantaleo” at the Detroit Democratic Presidential Debate remind us that the officer responsible for the death of Eric Garner was on paid “desk duty” for five years, and annual remembrances of Black people murdered by way of state-sanctioned violence serve as counternarratives that defy mainstream discourse and neoliberal media production. In other recent news, the back-to-back mass shootings at El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, are a stark reminder of how gun violence breeds generational trauma and how the general public can often overlook what is at the root of such tragedies. Similar to public perceptions of gun violence in low-income communities of color, shootings are often depicted as individual heinous crimes, detaching it from rooted patterns of violence that can be traced back to systemic racism and pervasive toxic masculinity. To be clear, this point is not an attempt to directly link these mass shootings with the type of violence that sometimes happens in distressed communities and is put on display for deficit-based consumption. What we are highlighting is an approximation of root causes of violence that are often dismissed, contorted, or simply ignored. In the case of El Paso and Dayton, when political leaders contribute to harmful discourse that conflates people with disabilities with people who subscribe to explicit doctrines of white nationalism, their unwillingness to address how such ideology is preserved and integrated into our social order becomes evident. Despite mainstream conservative efforts to disassociate individual acts of violence from rhetoric and policies, a comprehensive understanding of white supremacy recognizes how it blurs notions of U.S. citizenship, border protections, American exceptionalism, American democracy, and gender norms (Cohen, 2011; Grande, 2004/2015; Melamed, 2011). It might not take the form of an individual mass shooting, but white supremacist ideology is at the core of many institutions that have accumulated power both domestically and globally. This gives credence to those willing to defend it. The most recent Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raid in Mississippi is another example of such blurred lines that works in tandem with a divisive model-minority narrative that is becoming normalized across various social institutions EQUITY & EXCELLENCE IN EDUCATION 2019, VOL. 52, NOS. 2–3, 145–150 https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2019.1688460

中文翻译：

---

超越包容的政治

短新闻周期已成为美国媒体制作和消费的常态。这些周期有一种方式来支配公共话语并塑造正式的政治领导人如何构建或构建变革论点。在当前的政治气候下，批判性学者、活动家和组织者不得不在艰难的地形中航行。当政治代表制度、人际暴力、物质不平等、监视措施增加、媒体偏见、历史健忘症以及国家批准的暴力和言论历来植根于白人至上和异族父权的意识形态时，这尤其困难。这种根深蒂固的历史性引出了一个问题：是什么使政治意愿转向变革？在 2019 年夏天，民主党总统候选人组织了竞选集会和公共论坛，并参加了全国电视辩论。在候选人解决​​的各种问题和政策中，有关于警务、赔偿、经济正义和重组的问题。虽然候选人的回应和建议没有达到必要的愿景和措施来产生范式转变和现有机构和结构的替代方案，但可见的对话在很大程度上归功于黑人生命问题活动家和黑人生命运动的基层组织政策平台（见 www.policy.m4bl.org）。健壮的，多维激进主义是在本十年开始时培养起来的，并导致了一种政治气候，正式的政治领导人和机构正被迫考虑对黑人生活施加的暴力以及低收入和社区所造成的社会经济不公正。彩色脸（Garza 和 Perez，2017 年）。因此，国家舞台和媒体平台也无法幸免于活动家和社区组织者的颠覆性努力。底特律民主党总统辩论中的“Fire Pantaleo”歌声提醒我们，对埃里克·加纳 (Eric Garner) 之死负有责任的官员担任了五年的有偿“办公室职责”，每年都会纪念因国家批准的暴力而被谋杀的黑人作为反驳主流话语和新自由主义媒体生产的反叙事。在最近的其他新闻中，德克萨斯州埃尔帕索和俄亥俄州代顿连续发生的大规模枪击事件清楚地提醒人们，枪支暴力如何滋生代际创伤，以及公众如何经常忽视此类悲剧的根源。与公众对低收入有色人种社区中枪支暴力的看法类似，枪击事件通常被描述为个人令人发指的罪行，将其与可追溯到系统性种族主义和普遍有毒男子气概的根深蒂固的暴力模式分离。需要明确的是，这一点并不是试图将这些大规模枪击事件与有时发生在陷入困境的社区的暴力类型直接联系起来，并被展示用于基于赤字的消费。我们强调的是暴力根源的近似，而这些根源往往被忽视、扭曲或简单地忽略。在埃尔帕索和代顿的情况下，当政治领导人助长有害言论，将残疾人与支持白人民族主义明确教义的人混为一谈时，他们不愿解决如何保留这种意识形态并将其融入我们的社会秩序的问题变得显而易见。尽管主流保守派努力将个人暴力行为与修辞和政策分开，但对白人至上的全面理解认识到它如何模糊美国公民、边境保护、美国例外主义、美国民主和性别规范的概念（Cohen，2011；Grande，2004 /2015 年；梅拉梅德，2011 年）。它可能不会采取个人大规模枪击的形式，但白人至上主义意识形态是许多在国内和全球积累权力的机构的核心。这让那些愿意捍卫它的人相信。最近在密西西比州的移民和海关执法局 (ICE) 突袭是这种模糊界限的另一个例子，它与分裂的模型少数族裔叙述相结合，这种叙述在各种社会机构 EQUITY & EXCELLENCE IN EDUCATION 2019, VOL 中正变得正常化。52，没有。2–3, 145–150 https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2019.1688460