Journal Entry "Weapons of the Weak" and "Race Rebels"

“Weapons of the Weak” 

The article talks about the idea of peasant “revolutions” in Malaysia. There are few and rare usually because when they do develop, it is quickly ended by the higher beings. However, even when resistance from peasants succeed in taking power, results are beneficial but also not at the same time. This is because the success to a resistance almost always “creates a more coercive and hegemonic state apparatus-one that is often able to batten itself on the rural population like no other…” (p 89). Therefore, despite their success, peasants may struggle even more with coercion and consensus from the higher people.

An interesting concept from the article was how peasant rebellions are misplaced. The author places emphasis on the importance of understanding what “everyday forms” of peasant resistance are. The everyday resistance occurs when there is a conflict between peasants and the higher groups who are extracting taxes, food, rents, and other things from them. On page 92, the author contrasts the “everyday resistance with the open resistance- a form of resistance that is more common when thinking about the term “resistance. I thought it was interesting to see the contrasts and see a different form of resistance (everyday resistance) because I normally associate revolutions with loud groups. I associate this type of resistance with violence and loud protests. Both forms intend to go against or change claims made my a superior group. However, everyday resistance deviates from other forms as it is informal, less obvious and concerned with immediate gains. Therefore, the everyday resistances are less recognized and less documented.

“Race Rebels"

            Kelly takes it farther and claims that forms of resistance does not only exist in Malaysia but is also found among black and Chicano youths that work in McDonald’s in Los Angeles. Kelley starts the article with a very descriptive explanation of what a day looked like while working at McDonalds. He included details of how the employees would “accidentally” make extra fries or burgers especially near closing so they could take them home. Because the workers were underpaid and overworked, they accepted consumption as compensation through actions such as these (Kelley 97). I thought this was pretty funny and respectable because even after a tiring day, the workers tried to make the most of it. Kelley even includes that even though they were part of the working class, the struggles and traditional “labor” disputes that normally occur never crossed their minds (Kelley 97).  I thought this was interesting because I believed that it would be very common for employers to dispute about wages and working conditions especially at fast food chains. It was shocking when the author says that the employees were never total victims of exploitation, sexism, and racism. Rather than focusing on the issues stemming from political institutions and social movements, we need to be concerned with what goes on in daily lives, experiences, cultures and communities of the working class. Kelley argues that we need to redefine what is political and authentic. I thought Kelley’s arguments were interesting. It introduced a new perspective of looking at forms of resistance. Rather than looking at the mainstream institutions and political organizations, which do not represent the majority of people such as those not directly related to the organization, we need to look deeper than the surface to truly know the whole story and struggles.