They know its not love.

"To distance oneself professionally through critique, is this not the most active consent to privatize the social individual? The Undercommons might by contrast be understood as wary of critique, wary of it and at the same time dedicated to the collectivity of its future, the collectivity that may come to be its future. The Undercommons try to escape from critique and its degradation as university-conscious and self -consciousness about university consciousness, as Adrian Piper say, into the external world. [ ] The sovereign army of academic antihumanism will pursue this negative community, seeking to conscript it, needing to conscript it. But as seductive as this critique may be, in the Undercommons they know it is not love.

Between the fiat of the ends and the ethics of new beginnings, the Undercommons abide, and some find comfort in this. Comfort for the emigrants from conscription, not to be ready for humanity and who must endure the return of humanity nonetheless, as it may be endured by those who will or must endure it, as certainly those of the Undercommons endure it, always in the break, always the supplement of the general intellect and its source. When the critical academic who lives by fiat (of others) gets no answer, no commitment from the Undercommons, will then certainly the conclusion will come: they are not practical, not serious about change, not rigorous, not productive."

FRED MOTEN, THE UNDERCOMMONS: FUGITIVE PLANNING & BLACK STUDY