Conscientious disengagement and whiteness as a condition of dialogue

Abstract

This commentary explores some of the threads developed by the editors of Dialogues in Human Geography in light of the recent publication and online conversation surrounding our article, ‘Citation Matters’. We examine the precariousness of academic speech, question when it’s necessary to conscientiously disengage from dialogue, and posit whiteness as a limit of and condition for dialogue. We frame this around the claim, building further on Mouffe’s concept of agonism, that different speech acts, in particular within spheres like the academy, and especially in the absence of a clear foundation for dialogue, can be viewed from a point of view of nonequivalence.

The uneven terrain of dialogical encounters and the spatial politics of listening

“…The decentering of Eurocentric structures of dialogue is easier said than done, given the extent to which ‘whiteness’ has long been viewed as a precondition for engaging in scholarly dialogue (Mott and Cockayne, 2018). As White supremacists, ethno-nationalists, and colonial apologists around the world have become increasingly emboldened in recent years, there has been a concerted effort to threaten, harass, and attempt to silence progressive scholars—especially feminists, anti-racist scholars, and postcolonial theorists—while simultaneously claiming victimhood under the banner of ‘free speech’ as a means of bolstering a racist and colonialist agenda within the academy (Cuevas, 2018; Kerr, 2018; Prashad, 2017).…”

“…In their commentary, Carrie Mott and Daniel Cockayne (2018) recount the harassment that they encountered in response to the publication of a journal article on the racialized and gendered politics of scholarly citation (Mott and Cockayne, 2017). Mott and Cockayne rightly maintain that ‘harassment should not be counted as a foundation for thoughtful agonistic dialogue’ (2018: 144), and they eventually chose to disengage from public discussions of their work after initial efforts resulted in an onslaught of targeted harassment.…”

“…Mott and Cockayne rightly maintain that ‘harassment should not be counted as a foundation for thoughtful agonistic dialogue’ (2018: 144), and they eventually chose to disengage from public discussions of their work after initial efforts resulted in an onslaught of targeted harassment. Under these circumstances, disengagement from public dialogue was a necessary form of self-care, although the ‘fear of further attention and harassment’ had the unfortunate effect of foreclosing potentially ‘legitimate opportunities for dialogue’ (Mott and Cockayne, 2018: 145–146). Mott and Cockayne argue that certain forms of speech—i.e., hate speech, harassment, intimidation, and so forth—are not equivalent to democratic modes of speech, especially when they ‘work against claims to democracy’ itself (2018: 144; also, see Springer, 2018).…”

How To Achieve Understanding In Non-Dialogue Context Of Communication?

“…In the development of the topic raised in the publication, scientists from different countries joined the discussion of the raised issue. For example, the diverse aspects of the "cosmopolitan dialogue" (Qian, 2018), the conditions for rejection a dialogue ("When dialogue means refusal") (Mott & Cockayne, 2018;Wright, 2018). These publications raise the question of the circumstances of communication and the reasons that impede constructive dialogue, explain the nature of communicative interaction disorders,…”

Citing you on behalf of an other digital geographical imagination

“…I concur while I also sympathize with Mott and Cockayne as they and their 2017 paper was viciously attacked in the alt-right press. The white authors endured a bevy of harassment, primarily against Mott as a woman, that was ‘often slanderous, racist, sexist, misogynist, and homophobic and included e-mails accusing us of being—somehow—both race traitors and Nazi sympathizers’ (2018: 145). These attacks repeat what many women and trans people of color, Indigenous trans, and Two-Spirit people, as well as women and trans people of the Global South, have told me they experience daily.…”