Tonkinwise’s response Dunne and Raby’s “Speculative Everything” was really fun to read. I really enjoyed the section where Tonkinwise analyzes the use of the word “we” in “Speculative Everything”. His describes and questions how Dunne and Raby use the word “we” and even points to the very dismissive undertone that the word has embodied in their text “Speculative Everything.” Who is this “we” referring to? I think this analysis of the use of the word could be applied to almost any text, and it really made me think about how important it is to understand the implications of what you are saying especially when it relates to ones opinion about what should be done in the world (to put it colloquially). The very fact that it doesn’t include much of diversity and race is disheartening because Dunne and Raby, notable designers of critical design, who make things to propel against futures we are unwilling to drift toward, their very vision is narrowed by the non-admittance of so many other “we”s. Sadly, it has been like this for many years, that the inclusiveness of the word “we” is not that inclusive at all. How do we get more unlike minded individuals to come together to form a “we”?