LaVar Hosting Jeopardy July 26-30 Stan Account 👁

Surely ppl with an analysis of global capital know that a Marvel movie will never be a film about global black liberation through the violent overthrow of colonizers and their oppressive regimes, beginning with the United States?

So then give Ryan Coogler credit for exploiting the logic of liberalism to give the "other side" its fair hearing, even if the scales are "always already" tilted against that side.

And the other thing the movie brings up is: what about the structures of hierarchy that don't reduce to colonialism/imperialism/anti-blackness?

That human trafficking scene at the beginning may indeed exist due to colonial oppression, but do we really think those put on top due to colonial oppression will willingly relinquish their place above on the hierarchy just bc the whites no longer bankroll that place?

(Really really this is another version of the "does the end of scarcity end racism" convo, and the answer is no, obviously, depravity is real, sorry).

And so Killmonger, if he was truly devoted to ending global black oppression, would have ended up in the same position as the US' (nominal) position: how to arm the "good" rebels who will relinquish the power he gives to make an equitable society?

And of course that always collapses into the actual US position, which is: how do we install leadership that will swear fealty (explicitly or implicitly) to the imperial ruler.

And yet! Even while leaving this question open and specifically arming the viewer with grounds to reject Killmonger (Miltonic!!), the movie insists, as Darwin said, there is grandeur in Killmonger's view of life.