There are structures of oppression, but there are also structures of resistance. The term used in the title of two other paintings, “Scaffolding of resistance,” has stuck with me. It was a term that came to mind when I was thinking about how contemporary social movements are built on earlier resistance efforts and movements. When described as scaffolding, the historical lineage becomes so powerfully visual.
Reflecting my infatuation with this term, I searched the term in Google Scholar. It’s not a commonly used term. In fact, there were only four returns, but all of them rich:
The first article I read was a report on a conversation among philosophers about the current influence of major philosophical thinkers. The term is used by Andrew Kupar in defence of the continued importance of Marxism–that Marx’s ideas have provided the “intellectual scaffolding of resistance, shaping the popular understanding of the link between institutionalised racism and economic exploitation” (5).
Kupar goes on to point out how readily Marx’s ideas get absorbed by marginalized segments of societies, even when they are illiterate in “other manners.” He concludes that this is likely because where oppression is overt and extreme, political understanding is imperative, and Marxism provides the necessary intellectual scaffolding to challenge the oppressive systems and structures.
Another article was about women’s participation in violent non-state armed groups. The authors argue that women’s participation in conflict has often been obscured in non-state armed groups. There is, however, a strong body of literature about women’s participation (see this book by Erin Baines with my painting on the cover!).
Specifically, however, the authors of this article suggest that women’s contributions to conflict in non-violent roles is not well understood or quantified. Based on qualitative evidence from such women (ie. their perspectives and experiences), the authors argue that female participants “make critical contributions as the logistical and organizational scaffolding of resistance and rebellion efforts.”
A third article is about the 1848 Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Convention. The term’s use is slightly different here. On the table of this convention were women’s citizenship rights (suffrage) and property rights.
The rationale against both of these claims to rights was that if the laws changed for either issue (eg. only property rights by allowing women to own land in their name), “then the whole legal and philosophical scaffolding of resistance to women’s political power collapsed” (18). If women got property rights, then, as one man said, it would raise “the whole question of woman’s proper place in society, in the family and everywhere” (19). Or as the convention organizer called it:
“The greatest rebellion the world has ever seen“ (9).
In this case, the rebellion was to break down a scaffolding–scaffolding of patriarchal laws that forbid women the right to full human status..
