that knowledge is always and everywhere a function of the epistemic will-to-power,and that history is nothing but a fictive construct out of the various 'discourses' that jostle for supremacy from one period to the next. And so it has come about that a thinker like Baudrillard can proffer his ridiculous 'theses'
Change Possible New movements are reforming racially unjust laws in a meaningful manner using intersectional approaches between white black and red bodies – all of their evidence indicts the ‘legal-equality’ reforms of the civil rights era – this directly disproves their accumulation arguments Spade 13– associate professor of law @ Seattle University Dean, “Intersectional Resistance and Law Reform” SignsVol. 38, No. 4, Summer //These critical perspectives suggest a very different method for analyzing American law, one that departs from the questions that lawyers and legal scholars, who are often engaged in single-axis thinking about systems of subjection, might ask. Those inquiries often identify the realm of “equality law” as centered in antidiscrimination and hate crime laws. They often look for places in law where particular groups are named for exclusion or could be named as protected and assume that achieving justice means focusing on reforming those laws. The critical scholars and movements I have beendescribinginstead examine not what the law says about itself but how its operations distributelife chances. They are suspicious of formal declarations of equality and of the idea that legal governmental protections are remedies for violence rather than sources of it. They are vigilant about co-optation, asking whethersuch declarations have had the material impact promised.Administrative operations occurring in welfare departments, immigration agencies, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, bodies overseeing environmental regulations, departments of corrections, child protective services, and education and taxation systems have been the focus of those who refuse to accept formal legal equality or facial neutrality as the resolution of their claims. Theirinterventionshave asked howthese systems are experienced from the perspective of marginalized populations rather than from the perspective of white lawmakers who declare legal systems to be neutralor natural while in reality they center a white propertied male subject. Narrow interventions that purportedly deliver equality have not passed the test when measured against the experiences of people living on the losing end of the distribution of life chances administered by these systems. These critics reject the focus on declarations of equality that often turnout to be mere window dressing for perpetual violence.