If you're born and bred in a Western liberal country, which benefits from historical colonialism and current trade exploitation ('unequal exchange'), you will act according to the hegemony's rules, and benefit from its spoils...
if i remember correctly he fired every that worked for him when they tried to unionize and I think had a bunch of other issues. He's also a total radlib on foreign policy
It wasn't that they tried to unionize, it was that they wanted to convert Current Affairs to a worker owned co-op. I'll still maintain that his writing was generally good, and the people he employed were excellent, but he was a rich kid who couldn't give up control of what he saw as "his" project. It's not even about money since I'm pretty sure the magazine lost money the entire time it was in print.
I feel kinda bad for andy warhol. Like, he was trying to make art and he did, with some interesting messages. If there was just someone to reel him in he would have probably lived longer. It's not entirely his fault the CIA made his art a weapon. It does also suck how obsessed with fame he was.
For clarity - That period in American art wasn't 100% a CIA op, but the CIA did contribute to some university art (and literature) programs and some specific individuals and publications to give it more social standing and legitimacy. It's also one of those "Yeah they admit to it on their website they're really proud of it" conspiracies.
deleted by creator
Russell Brand, Zizek, Vaush, Orwell, Nathan J Robinson, the list goes eternally of almost-left cringelord creeps
Notice more how they're western leftists...
It's so hard to find the Parentis in the rough
I mean, no shit, Sherlock.
If you're born and bred in a Western liberal country, which benefits from historical colonialism and current trade exploitation ('unequal exchange'), you will act according to the hegemony's rules, and benefit from its spoils...
Specifically Anglo-Western. It wouldn't be hard to find German or Swedish libs that would gladly join in too.
Zizek is Slovenian.
What did Nathan J Robinson do? I remember him having some of the best write-ups debunking Peterson.
if i remember correctly he fired every that worked for him when they tried to unionize and I think had a bunch of other issues. He's also a total radlib on foreign policy
It wasn't that they tried to unionize, it was that they wanted to convert Current Affairs to a worker owned co-op. I'll still maintain that his writing was generally good, and the people he employed were excellent, but he was a rich kid who couldn't give up control of what he saw as "his" project. It's not even about money since I'm pretty sure the magazine lost money the entire time it was in print.
Homie spent a lot of money on clothes too
I feel kinda bad for andy warhol. Like, he was trying to make art and he did, with some interesting messages. If there was just someone to reel him in he would have probably lived longer. It's not entirely his fault the CIA made his art a weapon. It does also suck how obsessed with fame he was.
Please tell me about that don't know much about him.
deleted by creator
For clarity - That period in American art wasn't 100% a CIA op, but the CIA did contribute to some university art (and literature) programs and some specific individuals and publications to give it more social standing and legitimacy. It's also one of those "Yeah they admit to it on their website they're really proud of it" conspiracies.
deleted by creator