In Agonistics Chantal Mouffe claims “If artistic practices can play a decisive role in the construction of new forms of subjectivity, it is because in using resources which induce emotional responses, they are able to reach human beings at the affective level. This is where art’s great power lies–in its capacity to make us see things in a different way, to make us perceive new possibilities (97).” This statement is made after a thorough analysis of Alfredo Jaar’s work, which incites conscious transformation by intelligently affecting people’s sensations and emotions. Mouffe, Bailbar, Taylor, Boal, and Brecht all appeal to political and artistic platforms that activate the subject. The following words keep coming to mind: action, activation, activism. Positioning these authors together is a reminder that political performance, or political art forms, are necessary to highlight our obligations as citizens: as critical, active, political subjects. In insisting upon the role of the “spect-actor”, Boal and Brecht break theatrical and performative power structures located within the forms of the theatre and the rehearsal in a way that functions as a metonym for a larger social system. This action echoes Mouffe: “Envisaged as counter-hegemonic interventions, critical artistic practices can contribute to the creation of a multiplicity of sites where the dominant hegemony can be questioned.” I’d like to interpret those sites as slumbering bodies of subject-citizens and think of the creation of those sites more as an activation, an invitation, an awakening. Furthermore, I’d like to think through these ideas while centering not only artivism or artistic political practices that identify themselves as such, but also practices that may not be classified as political by their creators, or their spectators, but which are still political in nature. I am specifically thinking through movements such as the Colombia’s in Monterrey, Nuevo León. Better known by foreign entities and media as “Cholombianos” a term imposed on this local practice, Colombia’s are groups of marginalized youth who adopt aesthetic practices of Chicano/Cholo communities in Texas and California and marry them with a love for Colombian music and culture. Thus, creating a hybridization which pertains to the urban landscape of the Northern Mexican state of Nuevo León. How can a group of marginalized youth engaging in social dance practices be as powerful or even more powerful than art which is specifically created as political art forms. What changes in the way we receive, perceive, and absorb cultural political practices that are not created with the intention of being “political”? How does this self-awareness change the creation, reception, and perhaps the types of politics each cultural form activates?