{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020935960591133004, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0049261083743842365, 'mean_word_length': 5.609756097560975, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
On the politics of recognition in critical urban scholarship

ABSTRACT In this response to Ananya Roy’s plenary talk at the Association of American Geographers annual meeting in 2015, “What’s urban about critical urban theory,” I engage the work of Nancy Fraser and feminist epistemologists to argue for the necessity of a robust critical politics of recognition in knowledge projects with emancipatory aims. I question the political utility and empirical accuracy of the increasingly popular assertion that there is no analytical outside to the category “urban,” and argue, like many feminist, post-colonial, and anti-racist scholars before me, that attempts to construct a totalizing political subject have the effect of reproducing cultural misrecognition and are thus incompatible with emancipatory politics.