This article engages in an experiment that aims to push critical/post-structuralist thought beyond its comfort zone. Despite its commitment to critiquing modern, liberal ontologies, the article claims that these same ontologies are often tacitly reproduced, resulting in a failure to grasp contemporary structures and histories of violence and domination. The article brings into conversation five selected critical scholars from a range of theoretical approaches and disciplines who explore the potential of the notion of “fracture” for that purpose. The conversation revolves around political struggles at various sites—migrant struggles in Europe, decolonial struggles in Mexico, workers and peasant struggles in Colombia—in order to pinpoint how these struggles “fracture” or “crack” modern political frames in ways that neither reproduce them, nor lead to mere moments of disruption in otherwise smoothly functioning governmental regimes. Nor does such “fracturing” entail the constructing of a “complete” or “coherent” vision of a politics to come. Instead, we detail the incoherent, tentative, and multiple character of frames and practices of thought in struggle that nevertheless produce an (albeit open and contested) “whole.”

中文翻译：

---

集体讨论：分裂政治（或者，如何避免批判性思维中现代/殖民本体论的默示再现）

本文正在进行一项旨在将批判/后结构主义思想超越其舒适范围的实验。尽管它致力于批判现代的自由本体论，但该文章声称，这些相同本体论通常是默认生成的，从而导致无法掌握暴力和统治的当代结构和历史。这篇文章与来自一系列理论方法和学科的五位精选批评学者进行了对话，他们探索了“断裂”这一概念的潜力。讨论围绕不同地点的政治斗争-欧洲的移民斗争，墨西哥的殖民主义斗争，哥伦比亚的工人和农民斗争-以指出这些斗争如何以“破裂”或“破裂”的现代政治框架以既不重现它们的方式。 ，也不会在原本运转良好的政府体制中造成片刻破坏。这样的“分裂”也不会构成对即将到来的政治的“完整”或“连贯”的构想。取而代之的是，我们详细说明了斗争中的框架和思想实践的不连贯，尝试性和多重性，尽管如此，它们仍会产生（尽管是开放的和有争议的）“整体”。