I'm back in good health and should start posting serious theory discussions instead of talking about football all the time.
Post ideas here. Upbearing comments will be interprebeared as an expression of interest.
It would be good etiquette to mention the length of the book, as it's relevant to choosing.
It's such a shit "review." His critiques are almost entirely just whining about incivility or "ends justify the violent means" rhetoric (but I'm repeating myself). There's also a lot of just presenting stuff from the book and expecting the reader to share his sentiments instinctively, which many who bother reading NYT reviews probably do, to be fair.
Lmao yeah the lib reviews off Palo Alto are funny as fuck one was just a dude complaining that it spent too much time talking about settler colonialism.
what's this? I wanted a history of California, what the hell does settler colonialism have to do with it?
least blinkered yankee
worse still the person said they were interested in it because it was a marxist analysis of California history but they were mad it didn't spend more time on biotech, ai, and other bazinga brain shit.
Yeesh. For some reason, Americans have a really hard time with the idea that other perspectives are, like, genuinely different and not just the same thing but with the colours inverted
sort of like when christians try to write atheist characters, but the end result is Christian, but I'm mad at God
lmao yeah, like that awful but unintentionally hilarious God's Not Dead series.