{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.032716927453769556, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008534850640113799, 'mean_word_length': 5.492307692307692, '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}}
Radical moves: Caribbean migrants and the politics of race in the jazz age

attitudes toward difference’ (15); this statement conveys an idea of race as a sort of transhistorical notion that describes the always exclusionary and violent foundations/effects of social formations based on ‘similarity and resemblance’ that we are ‘unable’ to abandon. In brief, we believe in race because we base our sense of belonging in kinship. The consequence of this approach is to conflate a description of ‘the discrimination that marks all social relations’ (19) that it is already a narrative produced from a privileged position, with a general, neutral description of the nature of social formations based on kinship. This approach neutralizes power via the production of symmetries that conceals specific histories embedded in asymmetrical relations of power. For instance, in the analysis of Coetzee’s Disgrace, the animalization of David Lurie’s sexuality and his ‘affaire’ with a student, is considered ‘similar to the bestialization of Bigger Thomas in Native Son’ (123); in the section focused on Roth’s The Human Stain, the ‘Francophobic’ portray of one the characters (Delphine) is read as ‘the racialization of her Frenchness’, a ‘“racial” otherness’ that can be traced in her handwriting (103). These examples show the depoliticization effects of a deshistoricized notion of race that subverts the understanding of its emergence and current logics, undermining the potential of the author’s discussion of democracy, inclusivity and postracialism. Instead of a critique of the politics of inclusivity that considers its relation to the coloniality of contemporary liberal democracies, the discussion becomes a declaration of a foundationalist theory of social formations: ‘an originary violence’ (100) that pervades ‘any mode of belonging whose intelligibility as such requires the exclusion of some other(s)’ (175, note 60). Overall, this is an interesting study that needed more engagement with the historical and geopolitical conditions of possibility of the dialectics and issues it proposes to dismantle.