|
GalacticAcid posted:Quinn Norton was forty years old in 2013. I swear I just did a spit take when I read this post.
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2018 02:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 13:03 |
|
|
Wraith of J.O.I. posted:the sucking, when will it end? Even with Steven Pinker's definition of id politics, this own still holds up.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2018 19:55
|
|
|
Tolls are good. Installing weird spy devices to your car, maybe not so much.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2018 02:05
|
|
|
Charitably, Quinn's like a lot of people in that she sees anger as a pathology, when in fact it's something inherent to the human condition and vital if you want to stay politically engaged. When she sees Nazis or MRAs not angry, she thinks she's solved something, but because anger isn't actually the specific problem with Nazis or MRAs she hasn't solved anything. It's why she thought she could get away with using racist and homophobic slurs on Twitter. She wasn't doing it in anger or hate, so obviously there's nothing wrong with her doing it at all! But that's not how it works, and the fact that she thinks it does shows just how vapid and self-absorbed her worldview really is. The uncharitable view is that Norton can't write for poo poo and she doesn't know how to properly convey her ideas at all, so who knows or cares what she thinks.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2018 22:05
|
|
|
Jeb! Repetition posted:Nowhere in the article does she say or imply she's solved the problem of bigotry and prejudice. She even specifically recognizes that she has a privilege in being able to talk to people that Jews or poc wouldn't. So what you're saying is that she's a complete gently caress up that hasn't achieved anything? Quite the defense.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
Can you point to Quinn's successes? Her article seems to only mention her failures.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
What a humanitarian!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2018 23:36
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:if climate change is real, how come the captains of industry haven't taken its impact into account when setting prices on the free market? owned, libs Maybe  , but that's not really Bret Stephens, it's Brett Stevens.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
Excuse me, this is taken out of context. The other class David Brooks suggests is a class on constitutionalism, which is (implicitly) what sets the American Revolution apart from all of those other ones. Crucially, post-revolutionary France, Russia, and China never had constitutions, which is why they failed. https://twitter.com/DavidKlion/status/972854594014457856 https://twitter.com/erinbiba/status/972859310505189377 https://twitter.com/aviselk/status/972865349128507394 lol
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2018 18:42
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:isn't he like an op/ed writer, and not a journalist No, he was one of the main reporters on the Tianmen Square protests along with his wife Sheryl WuDunn. They won a Pulitzer for it. Really though, WuDunn did most of the important work and Kristof was just along for the ride, as demonstrated by his lovely writing after WuDunn went into finance. Minecraft Holmes posted:https://twitter.com/AlexYablon/status/978661767692857344 The beautiful idelogy that binds all Americans together is...violent paranoia. Well, when he's right, he's right. pospysyl has issued a correction as of 23:36 on Mar 27, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:Let's check in with The Fact Checker Seperately indeed.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2018 19:21
|
|
|
The article reminded of the fact that months into Glenn Thrush's new beat in the Housing and Urban Development department he missed the scoop on the Carson's table story, the most notable story the department produced in decades.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2018 21:01
|
|
|
Today's David Brooks is mostly boring, one of his dumbass reviews of a dumbass book, but it does have this gem in it:quote:Goldberg points out that for eons human beings were semi-hairless upright apes clumped in tribes and fighting for food. But about 300 years ago something that he calls “the Miracle” happened. It was a shift in attitude. For thousands of years, societies divided people into permanent categories of race or caste. But, Goldberg writes, “the Miracle ushered in a philosophy that says each person is to be judged and respected on account of their own merits, not the class or caste of their ancestors.”
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2018 15:25
|
|
|
GalacticAcid posted:it rules that ross douthat is the Reasonable Conservative despite his full-blown 20th century-style Catholic Fascism Putting actual political positions aside, Douthat is far and away the best American conservative columnist because he actually displays some intellectual curiosity, does independent research without making fraudulent claims, and occasionally substantively engages with those who disagree with him. If you're the kind of person that engages with political thought purely for entertainment, Douthat's your guy. Naturally, if we do take actual political positions into account, Douthat's a creep who shouldn't be taken seriously. I mean, this column's basic thesis is "what if the incels are right in feeling marginalized by evil Chads, Tyrones, and Stacies?" accepting the fascistic subtext of the movement. Douthat's somewhat correct to argue that this is a political issue, but the political position the incels are arguing is completely unacceptable. pospysyl has issued a correction as of 17:09 on May 2, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 2, 2018 16:59
|
|
|
Wow this column is a mess! Let's look at the evidence Kamarck marshals to defend her position. First, she looks at the wave election of 2010. As we all know, that election was characterized by the Tea Party Movement. Kamarck cites their failure to take the Senate in 2010 and later in 2012 as evidence that the Republican Party establishment failed to prevent Tea Party candidates from winning the primaries, to their detriment. She specifically cites Christine O'Donnell getting picked as a candidate instead of former Delaware governor Mike Castle. Of course, this ignores the all the Tea Party Senate candidates who did win, often in very competitive elections, such as Ron Johnson of Wisconsin (defeating Russ Feingold). There's also never a single instance where Tea Party candidates who ousted their Republican incumbent opponent lost the Senate seat. She also ignores the most obvious point imaginable, never once mentioning the 2016 Republican presidential primary. Her next point is that the DCCC mainly intervenes in districts that vote Republican or vote Democratic unreliably. This isn't actually an argument in favor of her point, or an argument at all. She just cites the statistics. She writes, "The right candidate can make all the difference," (quality writing, btw), but that doesn't mean that the DCCC knows who that candidate is! All she's said is that it's important to pick the right candidate, which, I mean, duh. Finally, there's this paragraph: quote:Left-wing Democrats frequently argue about the need to mobilize the base as a reason to run progressive candidates. But the strongest part of the Democratic base consists of African-Americans, and among the districts the D.C.C.C. has intervened in, only two have African-American populations that are in the double digits, and the average African-American population in these swing districts is only about 7 percent. The Hispanic population in many of these swing districts is larger, ranging from 1 percent to 42 percent, and Democrats may be counting on them to vote Democratic in response to President Trump’s immigration policies. "The strongest part of the Democratic base consists of African-Americans" is both meaningless and unsupported. Does she mean that African Americans more consistently vote Democratic? If that's the case, it's not really relevant to the idea that the DCCC knows best, and works against the idea that only the correct candidate can bring these voters out. Does she mean that African-American voters have the numbers to decide elections? Her evidence suggests that's not the case. Based on previous elections, it doesn't seem like the DCCC has had a lot of success turning out minority voters anyway, so what's up with this? This final line of argument is a complete non-sequitur, and it's honestly kind of embarrassing to read. Here's a choice line right here. quote:The D.C.C.C. controversy erupted this week when the House Democratic whip, Steny Hoyer, was secretly taped by Levi Tillemann, a candidate in Colorado’s Sixth Congressional District primary. Asked by Mr. Tillemann if Mr. Hoyer would like him to clear the way for Jason Crow, an Army veteran who many people think is the stronger candidate, Mr. Hoyer agreed. Who are these many people? And exactly how many of these people believe Jason Crow's the superior candidate? If only there was some kind of referendum of likely voters that we could consult. quote:Elaine Kamarck is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and the author of “Primary Politics: Everything You Need to Know About How America Nominates Its Presidential Candidates.” Ding ding ding
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
What is the I.D.W. and who is a member of it? It's hard to explain, which is both its beauty...and its danger.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2018 14:02
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/thecitywanderer/status/994702581401378816 In summary, consent is a land of contrasts.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2018 23:40
|
|
|
100% Agree. I was just riffing on the idea that making that distinction is in any way "complicated". I think calling it complicated lets predators off the hook.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2018 00:54
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I listened to the dollop podcast and the Summer thing is true, senetors went on record complaining about Summer's lack of decorum Among my least favorite things about Brooks are these idiotic book reports that he turns in. He doesn't have the courtesy to label them as book reviews, so you read them trying to figure out if he's actually making an argument but no, he just read a book and wants to share. As we saw from his last column, about Jonah Goldberg's book where he said that Goldberg argued that all civilizations prior to the eighteenth century were tribal, he usually doesn't even describe the arguments of the book accurately.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
I'm obviously not surprised, but I think it's at least notable that the mainstream press is still extremely reluctant to criticize the IDF even after they killed a journalist.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2018 22:05
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/pattymo/status/997549535273672706 I can actually respect this, good job Barry. Nebakenezzer posted:PRESTON BOOKS - SPECIAL TO CSPAM - Now Wait for Last Year Getting massacred by the military is terrorism, got it. *sees people getting beaten to death at Selma* How theatrical. pospysyl has issued a correction as of 02:41 on May 19, 2018 |
|
#
¿
May 19, 2018 02:19
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:that's just "delegitimizing a protest 101" Right, and obviously most of the people marching knew that there was a strong possibility that they would be killed during the protest (because that's what the IDF does). Broadly, David Brooks is correct to say that this protest was meant to be a globally publicized display. The thing that's idiotic and horrible is to say that it's the Palestinians who are in the wrong for making that statement, rather than the IDF soldiers who are also making a statement by murdering them. Whether it's saying that the Palestinian protestors are morons who were tricked or hypnotized by Hamas or saying that it's foolish to protest Israeli imperialism because obviously Israel doesn't want and doesn't need to make concessions, the goal is to discredit any kind of protest as violence, even if it's the protestors who are obviously the victims of that violence.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2018 17:08
|
|
|
David Brooks has a column out today called One Reform to Save America". What that reform is... may surprise you. It's good!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2018 02:20
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:The amusing thing is that while his conclusion is something good, the problems he identifies are totally absurd (American politics becoming too "extreme," and there being four primary parties of liberal/conservative Republicans and Democrats respectively). Exactly. The symptoms he identifies are dumb, both in terms of what is actually a problem ("lost faith in norms" being one) and when they actually became problems (when exactly were we at peak democracy?) but he understands the underlying issue that he thinks causes those imaginary symptoms.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2018 03:22
|
|
|
Many of the same conclusions. Not that over 4,000 people died, but you know, other conclusions.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2018 18:42
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Misplaced faith in autonomy. The meritocracy is based on the metaphor that life is a journey. On graduation days, members for the educated class give their young Dr. Seuss’ “Oh, the Places You’ll Go!” which shows a main character, “you,” who goes on a solitary, unencumbered journey through life toward success. If you build a society upon this metaphor you will wind up with a society high in narcissism and low in social connection. Life is not really an individual journey. Life is more like settling a sequence of villages. You help build a community at home, at work, in your town and then you go off and settle more villages. 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:That’s what he’s done with the Mueller investigation. My instinct is that the Trump campaign never really colluded with the Russians because there never was an actual Trump campaign — at least not in any organized sense of that word. It was a bunch of relatives and hangers-on having random meetings with some vague hope of personal and professional enrichment. People say this kind of thing to try to be comforting, but if David Brooks is right it means that someone can become president and destabilize all of our precious democratic norms basically by accident.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
Today's David Brooks column has to set a new record for Capital Letter Neologisms. How much of this stuff can Brooks possibly retain? He's been doing this for twenty years now. If you asked him tomorrow about Illuminators, Walk Outs, or Elders, he won't have a clue what you're talking about, I guarantee it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2018 18:48
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/onekade/status/1023915329427304448 Here's some subtle editorializing from the editors' visit article. It is true that when Bush spoke to the New York Times regarding James Risen's article on the NSA's warrantless spying he was unsuccessful in preventing its publication. However, he was successful in getting its publication delayed until after the 2004 election, and he only failed to prevent its publication outright because Risen threatened to publish it as a book. But no, the NYT has always bravely resisted authoritarian pressure to bury stories.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
Why would you publish any white writers in Black Voices, much less twelve in a row.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2018 22:08
|
|
|
GoluboiOgon posted:he gets dangerously close to advocating for what he really wants. In what sense are lawsuits anti-democratic? And in what sense do consent decrees prevent abuses?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2018 18:57
|
|
|
And of course there's no reason anyone would wear a headscarf for non-religious reasons.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
Lol, the New York Time published a whole article about Ocasio Cruz not agreeing to debate Ben Shapiro for $10,000. The headline? "Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Likens $10,000 Debate Offer to Catcalling". pospysyl has issued a correction as of 20:42 on Aug 10, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2018 20:38
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2018/08/09/show-me-the-victims-of-insider-trading-ill-wait/?utm_term=.bc553b50419b What if we made all traders insiders? 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2018 22:50
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:eric levitz had Things™ to say about caitlin flanagan's love letter to jordan peterson My guess is that "poet laureate" is meant to dismiss Obama as a feelings-over-facts irrationalist, but it's written in defense of the most subjectivist guy in the world. Sure, monomyth and semiotic theory are empirically based, whatever. The "identity politics" thing is because he's black.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2018 17:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/KartoonistKelly/status/1028344125957926912
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2018 19:22
|
|
|
From today's Bret Stephens column: https://twitter.com/lmlauramarsh/status/1037100588901781504 https://twitter.com/lmlauramarsh/status/1037101779144638464
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
Sazabi posted:What did the NYT do to get so popular? In the early 2000s, the Times began to expand and more heavily market its out of city subscriptions. Prior to then, in the vast majority of the country you'd only really see the New York Times in libraries, and in remoter states like the Dakotas and Wyoming that's still true. Part of that marketing push involved poaching talented local journalists, setting up more local bureaus, and most relevantly to your question, selling themselves as the Paper of Record. Even if the New York Times was a perfectly adequate publication, its focus on centralizing news coverage under its umbrella has starved local newspapers, leading to actual democratic crises all across the country.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2018 17:25
|
|
|
How did she ever get hired by the NY Times anyway? Most of the other opinion columnists there are just stupid or incurious, but Weiss is actively deceitful.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 13:03 |
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:how will i stay abreast of the fame economy without this valuable style of journalism How am I supposed to direct my fame broker now? Duscat posted:lolling at the idea of a payment service that puts up an artificial month-long delay before paying someone, and offers them the option of forfeiting a big chunk of the payment to be paid quicker I hope Luke O' Neil continues his investigation and figures out why it takes so long for these companies to pay their writers in the first. I know on a macro level it's just because they don't want to pay for content, but how does it work on a processual level? My guess is that these companies issue checks from a particular account that receives a certain amount of money each month, and once the account's empty for the month they can't (rather, won't) pay any debts they owe.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2018 02:08
|
|