{"id":2318,"date":"2021-04-24T12:36:57","date_gmt":"2021-04-24T16:36:57","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/abolition1313\/?p=2318"},"modified":"2021-04-27T15:57:07","modified_gmt":"2021-04-27T19:57:07","slug":"gayatri-chakravorty-spivak-the-indefinite-future-of-abolition","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/abolition1313\/gayatri-chakravorty-spivak-the-indefinite-future-of-abolition\/","title":{"rendered":"Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak | The Indefinite Future of Abolition"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak<\/a><\/h2>\n

The collective project of the Columbia Center for Contemporary Critical Thought at Abolition Democracy 13\/13<\/a> was on a) capital reparations, b) Black Lives Matter, and c) the global future. My interest is in the fact that for all those projects, on anything, the \u201cfuture\u201d is the future anterior, in other words something will have happened which is not what we planned. It is in that conviction that I have written.<\/p>\n

It is also in that conviction that I addressed the powerful poet Ian Manuel<\/a> who began our evening\u2019s proceedings; gently reminding him that, whatever his plan, he cannot separate himself from \u201cacademic poetry,\u201d for he has put his poetry in a book \u2014 My Time Will Come<\/em><\/a> \u2014 and therefore, he has placed confidence in good teachers of poetry, almost always in the academy.[1]<\/a><\/p>\n

There is not much awareness of our concerns in the world. In February 2020, I was in the New York Grand Armory celebrating the 19th<\/sup> Amendment, women\u2019s suffrage. The participant on the stage beside me did not know what the 15th<\/sup> was. It is because of this that Du Bois writes: \u201c[t]he War Amendments [the 13th<\/sup>, 14th<\/sup>, and 15th<\/sup>] made the Negro problems of today:\u201d Black Lives Matter.[2]<\/a><\/p>\n

Something will have happened other than what we have planned. This future anterior will take care of the current Republican leader of the Senate and consign him to oblivion. But for the moment, his unfortunate removal of the Party from reparations requires a reminder to learn the distinction between historical responsibility and personal guilt. The white Christian male owner of property has received privileges historically that should weigh on the conscience of every responsible individual belonging to that race and gender, not just the country\u2019s lawmakers\u2019. Enough said.<\/p>\n

There is no future for abolition if all sectors of society do not wish to abolish injustice.\u00a0 How can this be brought about?\u00a0 By way of a sustained humanities-style old-fashioned teaching program from kindergarten to the post-tertiary, so that this wish is internalized.\u00a0 In other words, curricula and teacher training must be thoroughly changed worldwide.\u00a0 This is the deep background of abolition.\u00a0 Otherwise, abolition can mean working to have the laws changed to abolish inequality in income, in access to health, education, and welfare.\u00a0 This is also an excellent goal.\u00a0 But, even if the laws were entirely changed to our satisfaction, there is no certainty that having those rights of the underclasses restored means we produce a society where all classes want to bear responsibilities and demands that secured the rights of others.\u00a0 This complex attitude if it is to be taken as common sense, depends on education that begins with child-rearing.<\/p>\n

In contemporary culture, we connect abolition to political pressure on divestment or sanctions when it is international and developing profitable undertakings when it is domestic, this latter to persuade people interested fundamentally in something called “economic growth” (a complicated description of self-enrichment) to support the abolition of unjust practices such as voter suppression, or withholding education from female children.\u00a0 This is where I join forces with fellow-panelist Woods Ervin, telling us that ideology critique is necessary because of the \u201cpopularization\u201d (their word) of the idea of abolition.<\/p>\n

Some of us are proposing that this use of an already existing interest in self-enrichment be supplemented by a transformed interest in social justice for others which may not work best for all capitalization, which includes in its process a ceaseless subalternization that is often ignored. To subalternize in the current conjuncture is to take people away from access to the benefits of citizenship, and yet to negotiate for their votes and thus produce groups on the fringes of history, who cannot be taken into account when statistical summaries are produced to justify representations of economic growth.<\/p>\n

As I pointed out in my last session with the Columbia Center for Contemporary Critical Thought, Abolition Democracy 2\/13<\/a>, Du Bois commented on the connection of abolition and capitalism in a negative way: \u201cthe rank and file of the nation began to respond to\u201d the dictatorship of the rich.\u00a0 They \u201crespond[ed] to the combined argument of industrialists and Abolitionists, especially as their seeming unity of purpose increased.\u201d [3]<\/a><\/p>\n

He is referring to the specific movement associated with white leadership, and he is, of course, a Communist.\u00a0 But, for us it is to think to nurture, as teachers, a desire to use capital for social ends rather than the enrichment of a few, remembering to work at passing laws to regulate, and to enable redistribution.\u00a0 We cannot insist only on enforcement.\u00a0 Du Bois himself works at having his readers internalize the wish to imagine the other \u2013 the broad base which contains that kernel of socialism \u2013 use capital for others. He underwent a disciplinary change at the behest of a canny editor, moving from disciplinary history (The Suppression of the African Slave Trade<\/em>) and a work that may be described as creating the field of qualitative\/quantitative sociology (The Philadelphia Negro<\/em>). With his third book, The Souls of Black Folk<\/em>, Du Bois moved into the Humanities, so that Black folk, and indeed, white folk would listen; whereas they would not, to specialized books of history and sociology. \u00a0Indeed in this book he placed a line of a Negro spiritual, without words, only European notation, for the implied reader to perform. At our meeting, Katherine Franke mentioned the Homestead Act of 1862. Du Bois\u2019s anonymous Negro spiritual in European notation for \u201cOf the Laws of Freedom\u201d in Souls of Black Folk<\/em> is \u201cNobody Knows the Trouble I\u2019ve Seen.\u201d When in 1862 General Howard \u2013 the dedicated leader of the Freedmen\u2019s Bureau (and the subsequent founder of Howard University) \u2013 was obliged to tell freed men and women that they had to return their land to the plantation-owners, sometimes their own past masters, they broke out, in unison, to sing precisely this song.[4]<\/a> In Black Reconstruction<\/em>, Du Bois makes it clearer:\u00a0 \u201cnot . . . \u00a0much has been said of what freedom meant to the freed; of the sudden wave of glory that rose and burst above four million people, and of the echoing shout that brought joy to four hundred thousand fellows of African blood in the North. Can we imagine this spectacular revolution? Not, of course, unless we think of these people as human beings like ourselves.\u201d<\/p>\n

And then, the more difficult second step: for us to think we are like them \u2013 the real imaginative labor.\u00a0 \u201cNot unless,\u201d Du Bois continues, \u201cassuming this common humanity, we conceive\u00a0ourselves in a position where we are chattels and real estate, and then suddenly in a night become \u2018thenceforward and forever free.\u2019 Unless we can do this, there is, of course, no point\u00a0in thinking of this central figure in emancipation.\u201d[5]<\/a><\/p>\n

Abolition\/Annihilation<\/h1>\n

I had asked our group to read B. R. Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste<\/em>.\u00a0 This is a text first written around the time of the publication of Black Reconstruction <\/em>to the people involved in caste-oppression, namely Brahmans and upper caste Hindus, who want to get rid of the evils of the caste system.\u00a0 In other words, it\u2019s somewhat like a Black leader writing to white Abolitionists; one is reminded of Malcolm X\u2019s words to the white woman who asked what she could do to help: \u201cNothing.\u201d\u00a0 What we see in Annihilation<\/em> is a series of letters, but what it spells out for us is the story of its non-publication as a text for its implied readership.\u00a0 Ambedkar’s point is that as he speaks he is not acceptable to this group of reformers.<\/p>\n

Among the things to be abolished are of course transphobia, homophobia, and sexism in the broadest possible sense.\u00a0 What is interesting about Ambedkar’s position on caste is that it is at bottom about the management of surplus women, and, in a formulaic description it is the imposition of endogamy on exogamy.\u00a0 This is a position that he presented in 1916 in a seminar at Columbia and, at the end of his life, he was planning to include it in the collection of what he thought was his best writings.\u00a0 He did not live to fulfill this project.\u00a0 But in Annihilation of Caste<\/em>, he makes it quite clear that caste is not race:<\/p>\n

As a matter of fact [the] Caste system came into being long after the different races of India had commingled in blood and culture. To hold that distinctions of castes are really distinctions of race, and to treat different castes as though they were so many different races, is a gross perversion of facts. What racial affinity is there between the Brahmin of the Punjab and the Brahmin of Madras? What racial affinity is there between the untouchable of Bengal and the untouchable of Madras? What racial difference is there between the Brahmin of the Punjab and the Chamar of the Punjab? What racial difference is there between the Brahmin of Madras and the Pariah of Madras? The Brahmin of the Punjab is racially of the same stock as the Chamar of the Punjab, and the Brahmin of Madras is of the same race as the Punjab is racially of the same stock as the Chamar of the Punjab, and the Brahmin of Madras is of the same race as the Pariah of Madras.[6]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

As we read the Annihilation of Caste<\/em>, we must think this one through.\u00a0 I would simply insist that if caste is understood as primarily a management of sexual difference, we are dealing with something that precedes institutional legal structures.\u00a0 I direct this particularly to our panelist Woods Ervin, that has been involved with trans self-determination\u00a0for many decades.<\/p>\n

We are confronting the fact that sexual difference has been used in an originary fashion, in many different ways, to establish the socius.\u00a0 I have repeatedly insisted that gender is our first instrument of abstraction, as follows:<\/p>\n

If you are going to work out a system, you need a plus and a minus, you need a difference. And the primary difference that is accessible to human beings, is sexual difference. Not gender, sexual difference. Melanie Klein\u2019s idea, that birth is a kind of death, an exit from the world of uterine comfort, a life-death in which the child begins to build an ethical system with, at first, need, desire, want leads us also to her thought that all the child has in terms of the ingredients for that semiotic system is part objects. We feminists were nervous about biology in the early days. When we rediscovered Klein we began to see how sexual difference slowly moved into gendering \u2013 we began to conclude that gendering was our first instrument of abstraction \u2013 we saw this as the possibility of, the articulation of, sexual difference into \u201cculture.\u201d[7]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

To isolate and locate caste at this originary level is to make it impossible for us to think it.\u00a0 Also, it includes the dangerous incalculable supplement of the possibility of desiring violence.\u00a0 We must think beyond legal abolition here.\u00a0 Annihilation relates to the realm of justice \u2013 not just institutional law.\u00a0 Otherwise, we will think of the future in terms of making plans according to our presuppositions, which do not match the undecidability of the future as such. \u00a0Annihilation is a way of suggesting that something is removed from the possibility of becoming an object of the law, as a premise for planning.<\/p>\n

Abolition is the law; annihilation is justice.<\/h1>\n

What I am proposing, through the practice of literary reading, is a training of our students\u2019 habit of \u201cnormality,\u201d continuing through further teaching and rearing, developing a worldwide collectivity, generation by generation, rearranging the groundlevel affect of greed, and parochiality at all ends. Making ready for the annihilation of social injustice. The literary, teaching you to suspend yourself into an other\u2019s text, can help in the internalization of this mindset.\u00a0 This is because it can stage events that are unavailable in so-called real life.\u00a0 I will give you two examples.<\/p>\n

Remember this is not a disciplinary turf battle.\u00a0 All disciplines should be taught well to our students.\u00a0 This is about preparing the machine with which the students receive these disciplines.\u00a0 I am not speaking of the discipline of literature or literary criticism, which is fast being transformed into a knowledge management toolkit style operation; where statistics are gathered and we\u2019re told that somehow this is really useful for criticism.\u00a0 I am quite ready to let such teaching carry on.\u00a0 It is not a substitute for whatever is happening in disciplinary humanities.\u00a0 This is a bigger undertaking, upon which any future of abolition will depend.<\/p>\n

In 1997, I invoked something called planetarity when I was asked to celebrate the move of the Switzerland-based Stiftung-Dialogik from the rescue of the victims of the Third Reich into helping asylum seekers and refugees from generally besieged African countries.\u00a0 By planetarity I meant the intuition that the planet is in the species of alterity, belonging to another system; and yet we inhabit it, on loan.\u00a0 It is not really amenable to a neat contrast with the globe.\u00a0 I cannot say \u201cthe planet, on the other hand.\u201d\u00a0 If we think planet-thought in this mode, the thinking opens up to embrace the whole range of human universals from aboriginal animism to the spectral white mythology of post-rational science.<\/p>\n

In Mahasweta Devi\u2019s novella “Pterodactyl,\u201d the initialization \u2013 to take a digital metaphor \u2013 of a middle class journalist\u2019s imagination into tribality is staged through the organizing of narrative detail.\u00a0 We can teach our students how to pick up the text\u2019s signals without thinking it is the real account of some tribal culture.\u00a0 Fiction is unverifiable.\u00a0 After a good deal of encyclop\u00e6dic investigaton, the journalist in the story can suddenly suspend himself into imagining the space of a pterodactyl from the Mesozoic era \u2013 from two hundred and fifty to sixty-five million years ago.\u00a0 The staging of rhetoricity in any text, verbal or otherwise, is the staging of the rhetoricity of the world as we know it, played by a planetary world-machine we cannot \u201cknow.\u201d\u00a0 In this bit in \u201cPterodactyl,\u201d the first thing staged is the difference between a planetarity which extinguishes implacably and the anthropocene, human working behavior that destroys the planet:<\/p>\n

We are extinct by the inevitable natural geological evolution [says the pterodactyl in the journalist\u2019s imagination.\u00a0 That is planetarity]. You too are endangered. You too will become extinct in nuclear explosions, or in war, or in the aggressive advance of the strong obliterating the weak. . . Forests extinct, animal life obliterated outside of zoos and forest sanctuaries. What will you finally grow in the soil, having murdered nature in the application of man-imposed technology? [This is the anthropocene].<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Here now is the experience of the impossible: the map of the remote tribal area in Chhattisgarh which is the locale of the novella looks like an animal from the Mesozoic before the continental divide which created our map. In the novella, the map regenerates into the animal.\u00a0 When the imagined message quoted above is given to the reader the bird begins to die: \u201cThe body seemed slowly to sink down. A body crumbling on its four feet, the head on the floor, in front of their eyes the body suddenly begins to tremble steadily. It trembles and trembles, and suddenly the wings open, and they go back in repose, this pain is intolerable to the eye.\u201d\u00a0 It is as it was at the beginning of the story.\u00a0 The map looks like a pterodactyl.\u00a0 The planetary is restored to the worldly. This can be done in didactic literary space, but of course not in our practical everyday, where we can only go from local to local, attending to their contemporary globalized outlines and substance, without ecstatic tourism, as best as we can.<\/p>\n

My first example<\/h1>\n

Look now at Peter Dickinson\u2019s The Poison Oracle<\/em>. In the novel, a chimpanzee trained by the visiting British anthropologist on a whim solves the murder mystery, which is the ostensible subject of the novel. The potential object of his anthropological investigation, the \u201cnative\u201d girl, in a curious subplot that takes over, exits the book dancing on a slab that the marshmen (the \u201cnatives\u201d) called<\/p>\n

the House of Spirits. \u2026 She sang in English. She had insisted that Morris should teach her his own language, and what right had he to refuse? What property had he in her marsh mind? . . . \u2018You are fools,\u2019 she sang to the marshmen\u2026\u2019You do not know cause and effect. Cause and effect.\u2019 It was Morris\u2019s own voice, piping triumphant and scornful through the steamy air.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The fiction makes it deliberately uncertain as to who speaks the final lines, as follows, the shared voice of the rule of law: \u201cSoon all you fools will be dead. Cause and effect. Cause and effect. Cause and effect.\u201d[8]<\/a><\/p>\n

She has transformed the philosophy of the people who had come to her island to know her, into a repeatable formula, and here the writer paints in bold strokes the task of the imagination of the host.<\/p>\n

Peter Dickinson (1927-2015), a white Englishman educated at Eton and Oxford, worked in British counterintelligence, yet here shows us, as he dramatizes an anthropologist\u2019s experience, the possibility of the creative imagination grasping the peculiarities of the master-slave relationship with the other, whom we feel we are liberating by subjecting to the rule of law. \u00a0\u00a0Malcolm X\u2019s response, as hard as doing nothing, should have been, learn hard to imagine away from yourself; or nothing.<\/p>\n

Indeed, this fiction stages the experience that would be impossible for the subject proposing a universal rule of law.\u00a0 If you succeed in putting it in place, the underclass migrant gendered other would banalize that impossibility, slipping into your space, imitating reason.\u00a0 Accept the invitation to do likewise, and inhabit the banal impossibility together: turning the key that makes the cohabitation possible: redistribution rather than rejection, built by soul-making education, on both sides.<\/p>\n

I want to end with an invocation of the depth at which race and gender work with class.\u00a0 Capital is the abstract as such, class is an abstraction.\u00a0 To quote Marx\u2019s famous words:<\/p>\n

In so far as millions of families live under economic conditions of existence that separate their mode of life, their interests and their cultural formation from those of the other classes and bring them into conflict with those classes, they form a class<\/strong>. In so far as these small peasant proprietors are merely connected on a local basis, and the identity of their interests fails to produce a feeling of community, national links, or a political organization, they do not form a class<\/strong>. \u00a0They are therefore incapable of asserting their class interest in their own name, whether through a parliament or through a convention. They cannot represent themselves; they must be represented. Their representative must appear simultaneously as their master, as an authority over them, an unrestricted governmental power that protects them from the other classes and sends them rain and sunshine from above. The political influence of the small peasant proprietors is therefore ultimately expressed in the executive subordinating society to itself.[9]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Marx is writing about what we know as Trump-formation. Without a class-consciousness, there is infantile dependence upon \u201ca leader\u201d \u201csubordinating society to himself,\u201d a problem that still continues. Society in general must learn to use the abstract power of capital against capital. Class must know, then, to fight capitalism with abstraction rather than false electoral promises, but class in fact celebrates itself through racialization and gendering. And who can ignore the fantastic contributions of visual, aural, and verbal, as well as life-cultural of \u201cpopular\u201d art, as they come out of the global underclass when they\u2019re not completely silenced?<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

\u201cWhen the war ends, I\u2019ll finish my poem\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Yet, the world underclass must learn in their deep soul that that art only expresses<\/em> the problem. For the interminable solution effort, their resolving cannot be achieved once and for all by institutional law because, ideology uses race and gender as \u201cthe physical world\u2026simply thinking itself to itself, independently of [the human being] and all its systems\u2026[their] matter is [their] form, in a way [this is human and primate] hardware as software. The pure sensible.\u201d Race and gender are intuited as nature itself in action.\u00a0 First philosophies have known this since the ancient days.<\/p>\n

One of the lessons of the use of abstraction (gender always involved) is in handling the desire for the ownership of property. This is indeed a big desire. As I wrote in \u201cNationalism and the Imagination,\u201d I have often written that nationalism uses the most private comfort zone, even for pre-human primates, in a bit of space chosen as one\u2019s own.\u00a0 This “private” is not derived from the public-private polarization.\u00a0 Therefore, the desire to “own” property is somewhere in the middle of this chain of displacements and, if we deny it, it will come back to bite us.\u00a0 The point, as I keep repeating, is to regulate.\u00a0 The abstract argument is as follows: in the acquisition of property, an individual releases the largest amount of capital into the circuit of capital.\u00a0 This is therefore “productive consumption,” producing capital.\u00a0 The ideology that I have just mentioned \u2013 the pre-private affect of a comfort zone — is used to make the buyer confuse this with individual consumption, the fulfillment of our long-held desire \u2013 supported by sexist philosophers such as Levinas in his comments on the dwelling, for example. [10]<\/a><\/p>\n

When, at the end of the Reagan-Bush era, the Glass-Steagall act was annulled, and the separation between investment banks and commercial banks was removed, the possibility of the financialization of \u00a0unsecured debt increased exponentially, and it was through the so-called desire for a dwelling that the 2007 crisis came in precisely by way of property ownership.\u00a0 Therefore, educational interference is required here to control that confusion between productive and individual consumption on the abstract level of class \u2013 you can’t give up that inbuilt desire for your own place but do not be victimized while you actually help financial capitalism. You cannot fight racialized and gendered class politics merely by abolishing various inequities. \u00a0We need deep seated and sustained educational interference. The liberal binary opposition between, on the one hand, \u201cgood cops vs. bad cops,\u201d and \u201csystemic racism\u201d on the other, is an idle polarization. This ain\u2019t just any system.<\/p>\n

Harness the humanities (for want of a better word) \u2013 not what is happening to them under knowledge-management whiplash even at research universities, enthusiasm confined to allocation, but the world-changing collective effort that has run institutions, forever.<\/p>\n

Notes<\/h1>\n

[1]<\/a> Ian Manuel, My Time Will Come: A Memoir of Crime, Punishment, Hope, and Redemption<\/em> (New York: Pantheon, 2021).<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> A discussion of this is to be found in Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Talking to Du Bois<\/em> (Cambridge: Harvard Univ Press, forthcoming).<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> W.E.B. Du Bois, Black Reconstruction in America 1860-1880<\/em> (New York: Free Press, 1935), p.215.<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> Willie Lee Rose, Rehearsal for Reconstruction: The Port Royal Experiment<\/em> (London: Oxford Univ Press, 1964), p.353.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> Du Bois, Black Reconstruction<\/em>, p. 121.<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> Ambedkar, Annihilation of Caste<\/em>(New Delhi: Rupa [1936]2018), p. 44-5.<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a> Spivak, “More Thoughts on Cultural Translation,” in\u00a0Transversal 6<\/em>,\u00a0https:\/\/transversal.at\/transversal\/0608\/spivak\/en<\/a><\/p>\n

[8]<\/a> Peter Dickinson, The Poison Oracle<\/em> (New York: Pantheon, 1974), pp.190-1<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a> Karl Marx, \u201cThe Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte,\u201d Surveys from Exile<\/em>, David Fernbach, tr. (New York: Vintage [1852], 1974), p. 239; emphases mine.<\/p>\n

[10]<\/a> Emmanuel\u00a0L\u00e9vinas,\u00a0Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority<\/em>, tr. Alphonso Lingis (Pittsburgh: Duquesne Univ. Press, 1969), p.154-156.\u00a0 For the general argument see Spivak, “Nationalism and the Imagination,” Aesthetic Education in an Era of Globalization<\/em> (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 2012, p. 275-300<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak The collective project of the Columbia Center for Contemporary Critical Thought at Abolition Democracy 13\/13 was on a) capital reparations, b) Black Lives Matter, and c) the global future. My interest is in the fact that… Continue Reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2322,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[38978],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2318","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-posts-13-13"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/abolition1313\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2318","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/abolition1313\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/abolition1313\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/abolition1313\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2322"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/abolition1313\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2318"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/abolition1313\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2318\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/abolition1313\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2318"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/abolition1313\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2318"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/abolition1313\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2318"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}