But for some time I have realised that my way of giving priority to the long-term, fundamental change and kind of macro-view on struggles are to simplified and biased. It is problematic because the more oppressed you are and the longer you have been oppressed, the more natural it feels and the more it becomes part of you. In that situation, in that context of naturalized oppression, even internalized oppression, revoluionary change, or just radical and fundamental change becomes utopian. In that situation, the most important step, the most valuable approach, is to expand the room for surviving, living, self-respect, community or need-satisfaction.
The seemingly “smaller” victory through a number of tactical moves, like e.g. self-defence, autonomous activity, self-sustainability, avoidance, silence, irony, playing dumb, theft or lies, becomes a much bigger victory. Bigger since it gives the space to do more resistance and sustains the life, needs and self-confidence (thus, empower) subordinates. Anything else is impossible and does not build on any social or material base. Any realistic strategy of resistance need to build on such a socio-material base (which is what Scott suggest with his theories on “everyday resistance”, I think).