wemptronics
No bio...
User ID: 95
"Reform academia!" is back for another round, baby. Back in June it was kicked off again with a report titled "Report on the State of Scholarship in the Humanities and the Humanistic Social Sciences"PDF.
Before I start, I recently read a complaint that there's not enough explanatory meat to accusatory potatoes. I only have time to bring readers up to speed on the latest, but I can try to summarize the landscape in three relatively uncontroversial bullet points. Feel free to skip.
- Conservatives have left academia. Poof. Gone. The extent of their disappearance depends on the discipline and how their presence is measured. Scholars, research institutes, and at least one advocacy organization have used numerous methodologies to measure this over the years and decades. They all point the same direction. Conservatives have absconded or been eradicated from most of the social sciences and humanities. A conservative identifying professorate still exists as a solid minority in STEM and a few other disciplines.
- Critics of this trend, worry worts, and doomsayers tend to accept that political affiliation is a proxy, however imperfect, for what types of ideas one can expect to circulate around and exit the knowledge production machine. They fear edging ever closer towards total political homogeneity, at least with regards to one side of the left-right dichotomy, has negative effects on scholarship, the profession, and the institutions that make it all possible. These critics pull variations from one of two reasons-to-worry buckets, (1) the nature of a monoculture or something like it threatens to corrupt the truth seeking efforts behind the purpose of scholarship, as rigor is replaced is with conformity without exposure to competing ideas, and (2) scholars in a democracy face the potential threat of the public turning against them if they are seen as illegitimate, and they may do something like elect politicians that promise to pour kerosene on the ivory tower, set it alight, and bash any knowledge right out of the heads of those who attempt to flee.
- Critics of the criticism often assert this is a natural (let the chips fall where they may) or necessary (doing anything about it would impinge on academic freedom or how else do we fight fascism?) arrangement. They say conservatives do not want to do what they do because of a disinterest, can not do what they do usually because of of their conservatives values, or they accept conservatives could do what they do and want to do it but this itself would be a corrupting force.
Feel free to correct or enrich my 3 simple statements. If you'd like a more thorough overview of the lore behind the "Reform academia!" discourse I found this 2021 discussion contains many still relevant observations that border on identical to the ones in my post today.
My report will not focus on the content of Vanderbilt report too much. You can read it or the Yale report that preceded it earlier this year. Nonetheless, it's worth pasting the Vanderbilt report's preface:
As chancellors and presidents working to restore trust in higher education, we are concerned about the dramatic erosion of support for the humanities and humanistic social sciences amongst students, parents and government officials, as well as by the steady drumbeat of complaints about the deterioration of scholarly standards within those disciplines.
The complaints have been various in nature. Several scientists have alleged over the years that there is widespread misunderstanding and misuse of natural science in the work of prominent humanists. Philosophers have worried about the unquestioning embrace of problematic philosophical views, especially those concerning truth, evidence and knowledge. More recently, many different voices have suggested that humanistic disciplines have allowed background ideological values to distort the objective pursuit of knowledge in those fields.
Like the Yale report, and quite unlike angry rants from Bret Weinstein, this time the criticism comes not from any single dissident professor that discredits themselves with a pivot into punditry, nor is this a treatise posted by the Young Republicans of Oklahoma State stamped with Charlie Kirk's seal. This is serious. This is an interdisciplinary call out from the report's 10 authors: 4 philosophers, 2 historians, 2 linguists, an evolutionary biologist, and even a sole associate professor of sociology. They hail from Harvard, NYU, Princeton, and UofC. If credentials can move the "Reform Academia!" genre of discourse into action, here they lay.
The authors are careful, too. Effort is made in the report to distinguish the work from Trump, MAGA, and external efforts at reform like Civic Centerism. They do not condemn higher education, these people are invested in its success. They want to improve it. The authors don't judge entire fields* too harshly, they share a few examples of suspect scholarship and soften the edges. Almost 20% of the content is dedicated to the problem of relativism in the humanities, which I suspect provides an out -- something to blame -- in exchange for the support of more fence sitters. John Sailer thinks it avoids the problem, however the authors do write what has been written before by the Sailers of the world with credibility he will never obtain. There is no path available to navigate around the elephant. The authors state, in part, the "[political] skew in the professoriat may play an indirect role in undermining public support for universities, and also in discouraging full participation in academia on the part of students who find themselves culturally and politically alienated from their professors."
* With the exception of one.
Here's something else. The report is "addressed to university chancellors and presidents who are concerned about the state of academic scholarship in the humanities and the social sciences", which means it is decidedly not addressed to faculty. Scholars in the critics of criticism camp have responded anyway, and my read is that it is the same circle the wagons tactics as prior "Reform Academia!" cycles, only this time scholars online work a little harder to make sure the enemy is as visible as he needs to be.
The report isn't a massive data analysis and it doesn't claim to be, but it references "internal reports" each author used to contribute without publishing them. The authors answered why in a later interview:
The decision was made to allow the authors of those internal reports to decide whether or not to make them public. They were the basis of our deliberation. I will make mine, which is about literary criticism, public at some point, and I think others will. But on the whole, I think it was right to do it the way we have, because we need people to think about the main conclusions and the main arguments, which are in this document.
Personally, I'm of the belief that this is fine. The larger the evidence base, the easier it is to nitpick. Any method can be attacked and if the target audience is genuinely institutional heads why bother? I'd like to see these internal reports published, and I suspect if they are released they will make it seem as if the report's edges were softened too much.
Over a month later, and this discourse continues on the chatterbox sites. A big part of that is because of the asterisk above. The Vanderbilt report puts a few scholars on blast, quotes their work, and it grants the problem can be pretty bad in sociology and criminology. Really it only singles out one discipline, Anthropology. Writing in the section on the problems of relativism, take footnote 23:
For an exemplary expression of this odd combination of views, see Fernando Villanea writing in American Anthropologist:
"The core academic value of anthropology is not the pursuit of truth, because all truth is subjective. Conversely, there are millions of people who are adversely affected by the subjective version of truth we choose to tell. That is the objective reality, and so our core value should instead be to serve their interests" (Villanea 2023, 184; italics in original; boldface added).
Taken at face value, this is incoherent. Taken more charitably, it is the still bizarre claim that while there are no objective truths about the subtle descriptive matters with which anthropology is concerned, there are objective truths about values and morals — about who is adversely affected by a given position, and about what anthropologists should take as their core values.
Feathers were ruffled. So much so the president of the American Anthropological Association decided to do an interview with The Chronicle that you can read here. If you're only going to read one link here, that's probably the one. I don't want to oversell, because ultimately this was a political move-- consent to an interview to defend the discipline. Her not answering every question perfectly or some deflection is to be expected in these situations. Fellas, Dr. Crouse, a tenured professor at Princeton acting as the face of her entire discipline, failed to meet the moment in a big way. Now half of the internet has reason to believe her discipline is a joke. Can't say I disagree. I still think reform is unlikely.
finished Blood Meridian finally. Terrible book
You are not allowed to say this you... you... Whatever you are, I sentence you to be thrown into a pit. At the bottom, looking upwards to the sky, it will be your own tempest stirring. It will be your body thrashing against red clay walls. It will be your voice that lashes out against the inhumanity and indignity of your sentence as your voice booms in fury, hoping to reach the sky with your intentional heresies. Your mortal vessel may fail before this spirit is extinguished, but with the torture of time pressing on your voice will become detached from its defiance. You will find invectives no longer reach the heavens. Instead they swirl around your hole like a pride of Comanche riders set on scalping your soul.
Lashing out upwards no more the sky will become foreign to you. No longer appearing as an escape hatch or an object of desire, the passing clouds and lazy buzzards will only be seen as through a dull window to a queer place. A dream ready to be forgotten, a land you can never return to. Turned inward, the words will flow only as a meagre tool of weeping utterances. Your incoherent ramblings will no longer escape beyond the bounds of this Promethean existence, landing only as a feeble dribble that falls from chapped lips to bare feet, and you will be forced to look downward to find the pit is now your home. The pit is all you need. The pit is where you belong. You will converse with the dirt that surrounds you. You will say things like "Violence is the eternal dance," and as your only loyal friend the pit will eagerly listen to this newfound wisdom. You will speak to the walls and you will bury your hands into the dirt. You will whisper sweet nothings of despair directly into the ear of Gaia hoping to touch her cruel heart. Eventually, after your madness is cured, she will speak back and say, "Delete this. Delete this right now."
wemptronics
11d ago
Well then, I reckon it was smart to reject the plea deal she reportedly declined last year. There is no way it was better than the worst case scenario of guilty verdict and a $5000 fine. No statements of remorse, contrition, or public humiliation necessary. I hope she speaks to publishers sooner rather than later.
One thing I noticed browsing the mega AAQC round-up is how many old AAQCs were an exercise in synthesizing comments above. The big effort posts and link filled explainers are there, but many are a few paragraphs to frame a picture. As if they were a cherry on top award for providing wisdom not yet stated within the context of a comment chain.
I do not think that is an overly helpful observation, but it could be evidence of a community that valued understanding more. One idea is bussing to move the weekly threads into the CW thread as a pinned top-level comment for the day of the week. Bean culture war posts might sprout with more exposure.
For example, did you know there's a highly coveted waiting list for luxury beans?
I humbly request @fribble chooses one type of weekly thread for the Rancho Gordo saga so that I can more effectively monitor the bean situation.
wemptronics
20d ago
but if you actually want to live in an community then the American Dream dead
What is your urban community like in Argentina?
wemptronics
21d ago
Ah, my mistake. On reexamination this only strengthens your case. She is clearly responsible for door touching situation. Last in, large vehicle. You have a right to travel the king's road as any free man. What are you to do to avoid this contact? Announce your intent 3 times?
wemptronics
21d ago
I think she is a liar. I would go so far as to say I doubt not only does she not choose parking spots so carefully as to never touch another door but, also, in the event she has previously found herself in a tight spot, or been provided no other clear option such as a major event, that I also accuse this woman as having never once backed out of a spot upon identifying it as a door-touching parking spot. I dare say, based upon your account, I believe this woman likely to be a most mendacious fabricator on the nature of her past behavior.
Now, on to the general matter of door touching. Door touching is ideally carried out as a covert act done under the shroud of secrecy, such that no man may perceive the act to accuse another of significant harm to their property whether by fault or misunderstanding. In the circumstances you have laid out, were you to consider confrontation unfortunate, perhaps you may have waited to extract your child after the goblin had ambled off to carry out her fiendish acts of greed. This, however, I do not see as a just act. For if you were already in the process of removing said noble heir fit would be most proper for another to await the tying of their steed until the completion of your deed, prior to encroachment on your space.
wemptronics
22d ago
I don't know if Somalia does not want Somalians, but remigration generally agitates family who benefit from remittances sent to the homeland, the diaspora getting sent back, and nationalist or tribal offense to 'We don't want your kind.' All the same reasons Mexico's government has and will condemn mass deportation of its nationals working illegally in the US.
wemptronics
22d ago
Australia doesn't want second-hand Somalians. In the event Somalia doesn't want second-hand Somalians either (and somehow can prevent it) Somaliland is right there angling for brownie points. Land flights of Somalians in Hargeisa while it still technically counts as repatriation, bribe Somaliland with an economic deal, and recognize the nation of Somaliland down the line. Pressure should build for Somalia to allow all the Somali refugees, cared for by the gracious and functional protection of Somaliland, to allow the repatriation of these individuals.
нет! Comrade Sally wouldn't dare offend the People's Revolution with counter-revolutionary acts of adultery against a fine worker like you, Comrade Bob. I don't believe it, a treasonous crime in service of the imperialist dogs. It would spit on the glory of the Party. As a precautionary measure, we shall re-educate her in Montana-lag for a period of no less than 5 years to confirm her commitment to the workers of the world. In the mean time you may take your pick of the comfort stock, Comrade Bob.
"I couldn't get a woman of my own until it was literally starvation or marry me" is not a recipe for good marriages
I suppose AI could arrange marriages based on some measure of physical attractiveness and compatibility. Still, it's hard to see how many would win with super egalitarian pairing.
I'm not arguing that. I made a statement about what has happened and proposed a counter-factual I consider plausible with hindsight. Unfortunately for real trans people, if this is a meaningful category, there are no do overs in Discourse. The critics you hand wave away or condemn -- the TERFs and conservatives with all their vicious nasty political, legal, and cultural warfare -- you have them to to thank for pushing against the medical profession led around by so-called bodies of experts like WPATH. If you consider your position the popular one historically and currently, then all I can say is don't outsource your advocacy in the future.
I believe society can make more fascists, murderers, or homosexuals if a society chooses to do so. We know this, because different societies have had different rates of fascists, murderers, and homosexuals across time and place. There are limits to what a society can impose with propaganda, culture, circumstance, or leverage with individual genetic predisposition. But those limits include fascists who don't believe in fascism and homosexuals who like brunch but don't enjoy gay sex very much. Many raised murderers will be bad at murdering and some might not even enjoy it. Does a real murderer include murderers who feel shame and regret, or murderers who fail at murdering despite their best efforts?
What does belief have to do with this medical condition? I have a general idea of what it has to do with something like schizophrenia. We speak around a confused pit of philosophical, psychological, sociological, and medical concepts. Stick your hand in, pull out what you want. It's beyond me I'm afraid. I do strongly believe that the ideal treatment for someone with gender dysphoria is an antidote that cures them. Seems to me medical transition and social acceptance lands short of general miracle cure status, so yes it's probably best we don't experiment on children until results improve or alternatives are found. Are alternatives being researched?
wemptronics
27d ago
I don't know the context of this, not having read the manifesto myself, but since rap is considered a marker for celebrating black culture, could he be a fellow chud following all those KiA threads?
He didn't mention race beyond a reference to racial issues as a tool of the ruling class.
"Rap is literally the cultural quintessence of the hypergamy state, congealed into a musical form. It is vile, repulsive, foul, and hideous in every way. What does it preach? The worship of wealth and sensory pleasures. The flaunting of jewelry and clothes, insufferable bragging, and the pathetic ridicule of the weak, et cetera. How any of the dispossessed can listen to one second of that filth without instantly bristling with outrage and disgust, I have no idea. And yet, so many of them adore it, and find some kind of perverse enjoyment in listening to wealthy favoured males boast in rhyme about how many girls they have sodomized."
"But of course, all this is to say nothing of the stark fact that rap – in addition to being laughably worthless and disgusting – is also incredibly boring and dated now. It isn’t cutting edge, it isn’t fresh, and it isn’t revolutionary. This isn’t 1991 anymore, and rap has become a tired, corpulent, rotting old genre. It’s not even too much of an exaggeration to say that everyone and their mother now listens to it. One cannot step outside for more than five seconds without hearing someone blasting it from their car, and they literally play it at family diners now. All in all it simply isn’t the new and mysterious phenomenon that it once was, and it’s time for it to die forever."
"After we take power, the despicable ‘musicians’ and other people behind the propagation of rap should be some of the first ones that we liquidate, should any of them still be living by that point."
He felt very strongly about it to leave it in despite it being a personal tangent. I could understand why it irked him if rap was popular in his circles, though popular music in general is filled with similar messages if to lesser degrees.
Me? I'm not against rap. I'm not against rappers. But I am against those thugs.
wemptronics
28d ago
Not directly, that's just a meme. I don't see why he would have been opposed to state issued girlfriends. If his ideal totalitarian government replaces all the women in the workforce with robots to encourage monogamy it's not much of a step for the state to coerce any slow to pair with guns or assignments.
I was going to write a post about ripples in the pond of social sciences but plans are on hold due to a happening. Shooter kills one civilian and cop in Montreal outside a Hilton.
Officers were responding to a report at 11:35 a.m. of shots fired and a gun protruding from an upper-floor window at a hotel in the Côte-des-Neiges neighborhood when they encountered a gunman on the ground and exchanged fire, Montreal Police Chief Fady Dagher said at a news conference. Dagher said the shootout took place outside a Hilton. The video indicated that the location is the Hilton Garden Inn Montreal Midtown.
Robots Sources say that "the headquarters of Aylo (the parent company of Pornhub) is located in the Côte-des-Neiges neighborhood of Montreal, Quebec." That might place this shooter in the neighborhood of Aylo's headquarters to target Pornhub, which fits with the general anti-degeneracy notions in a 104 page manifesto that surfaced. It has been so long since we've gotten a proper manifesto, and this is a proper manifesto (PDF). Broadly, we are reading the thoughts of a man who wants to represent, organize, and better the lives of "dispossessed" men-- with many topics familiar to this forum about men and women in Western world touched upon in the first half. Moral decay, Chad-Stacy hypergamy, and unfair, undesirable, or dysfunctional dating/mating norms. He wants to do this by replacing the capitalist "neoliberal hypergamy state" with communism, won and run by those formerly dispossessed, which would not be quite as common here. Some highlights I saw while reading.
To fix modern gender relations and society he wants to place theories of class consciousness to one side (by no means out of the way) while introducing a new biological consciousness so that dispossessed men can organize and act upon. Put those men to work in a revolution.
So, it may be said that the insurgency process of the dispossessed class exists in two main stages. The first of them is the spreading of biological conciousness to the dispossessed on a massive scale. This must be done because, as we know, the vanguard cannot form effectively until the conciousness of the dispossessed reaches critical mass.
The second stage is the seizure of positions of power by the revolutionary vanguard, and the subsequent usage of their newfound power to carry out the liquidation of the hypergamy state. The revolutionary vanguard should operate in a clandestine manner throughout this process however, not presenting their core doctrine as being the elimination of systemic hypergamy. Instead, they should take on the visible forms of a variety of political movements (e.g. conservative socialism, Duginism, communism, Islamic theocracy) in accordance with the social conditions of their respective areas, while keeping their main intentions either hidden or ostensibly marginal.
It'd be difficult to organize the incel vanguard on a good day, it's hard enough to get men to queue up on video games. To do so covertly, under the auspices of established political movements, seems extra difficult. Our author partly recognizes this, so he offers a stage one insurgent phase. First, pay more attention to women who lie about dating preferences and ruminate on it. Second, self-improvement ("body purification") but no weight lifting, because it takes too much time, is a bourgeois scam, and sports are suspect as well. No distraction from the revolution. After self-improvement there are a few paragraphs reminding future revolutionaries to avoid rap music:
I will say that there is one form of music in particular which is and always shall be absolutely unacceptable for any self-respecting insurrectionary of our cause to listen to. This is so-called ‘rap’ music, which is unfortunately the most popular music in the west at the time of this writing.
Finally, become an insurgent, which means killing certain people identified later in the document. In short, he thinks the insurgents should kill pretty much everyone in a position of power or wealth including influencers of all stripes. That makes sense, reforming society and all. He also thinks all the drug dealers, gangsters, and so on should be liquidated. The author features many inspirational quotes by Bolsheviks, as well as other rabble-rousers such as Ulrike Meinhof and Robespierre. Following the insurgency comes the revolution.
The essential political conditions of a society in which capitalism/liberalism, and thereby, hypergamy itself, are not part of the established order of things, have mostly already been laid out by Marx, Engels, and others in works such as The Communist Manifesto. In my view, the most important of these basic conditions are:
The full abolition of private property,91 without compensation, and the subsequent nationalization of this property.
- Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, with the establishment of a central bank and a planned economy.
- The establishment of state control over the means of transport and communication
No mention of government issued gf's. I believe the hope it won't be necessary, though I don't think the author would be opposed.
To make monogamy prevalent again, one of the main factors will be to get the female out of the workplace, and to generally stop her from having her own income. One of the ways that this can be done 91 Private property as in bourgeois private property, and not personal property. 95 gradually, without using too much force, is to simply quietly start introducing robots into female workplaces, as robots will easily be able to perform the sedentary and easy jobs that females overwhelmingly prefer.
Without an income of her own, and without unlimited access to an unlimited number of potential mates, the female will simply need marriage in order to live, just as she once did; and thus she will engage in monogamy willingly. With the new order having introduced robots to replace the vast majority of female workers, the remainder of female workers may then be removed from their workplaces through some legislation that can be quietly passed and enforced on ostensibly mundane pretences, and this will serve to make the male-dominated fields free of what few females are in them or should wish to enter them.
Someone has probably made this argument on The Motte before. We aren't missing any communists from roll call, are we? This is boring social engineering in the context of the manifesto which drifts into more fantastical theory, like the cyborg-augmented "extraordinary branch" of the new state to "augment both the bodies and minds" as a kind of Stasi/special forces mixture. Did he forget to mention total war or eternal struggle? No, of course not.
Now, regarding the question of internationalism, it should be said that wherever capitalism survives, the hypergamy state survives, and wherever the hypergamy state survives, it can spread. Therefore we must not allow any liberal or capitalistic enclave, no matter how small, to remain in existence after we take power.
I rate the manifesto 6/10 with significant points given for effort in the context of modern manifestos. Points deducted for my personal revulsion to revolutionary Bolshevism, communism, tangents, and reddit posts. He shares a vision that I don't share with solutions I consider disastrous and/or unrealistic, so I could be unfair. Also, a neoliberal hypergamy state theory is not anywhere as novel or cool as the anarcho-primitivism based vision of Ted K. As an expression of deep frustrations in an atomized world I can understand, though I really think he should have made some money, bought some land, worked it, and entered the BAP-sphere with a Substack via Starlink.
EDIT: "I will go over this methodology briefly here, but for a more complete look at it, see my work The Smile of the Dispossessed; or, Further Instruction on the Implementation of Terror." All I can find by the first title is gay genre fiction, and I get no hits on the latter by a Seth Hatfield or anyone else. AI assisted hallucinations?
If people had just treated it as a curiosity and a medical condition
The implementation of the liberal affirmative model accompanying a medical model put this to bed. You can't have a medical condition and a socially affirmative model assisted by wide celebration of concepts of identity placed in proximity to the general population, including children. You can't do so and claim you are adhering to rigorous medical research which has a default answer of "We don't know" to many basic questions about the condition, causes, and populations effected. Not when advocates and experts in medicine insist dysphoria is not a prerequisite for transgenderism.
If the Dutch Protocols led to 20 years more rigorous study with small experimental cohorts that invited critical dissent and testing, trans people not only would be better off but we might have a more advanced understanding of the condition. Of course if you tolerate slow, plodding research that demands dissent to progress in experimental areas -- to question and define the nature of gender, sex, identity and dysphoria -- you will have condemned some small number of trans people to suffering. They would have suffered for a purpose, namely a greater understanding and a lower profile that provided more tolerance via obscurity. Maybe we could do brain scans by now to screen or something.
The ideal outcome was for trans research to go on as a medical venture without ideological or social interest. An interesting article in The Atlantic would have popped up every few years. By now trans people would know know about the trans-Mecca neighborhood in Seattle in the event they were born in Utah.
wemptronics
1mo ago
Outside I don't hear much enthusiasm to celebrate 250th because Trump, etc. I also don't hear a lot of "It's our country, too" verbalized, which was the ancient permissive signal to okay patriotism. Maybe there is silent consensus that it is okay. A nice change of pace.
wemptronics
1mo ago
Vibe check. In this residential neighborhood found inside a city's metro I am seeing more American flags on or around houses than I ever have. More than any 4th of July that I can remember. Not only has the American flag become much more popular, pride symbolism appears to have decreased substantially in a neighborhood where "In This House We Believe..." held the #1 title a few years ago. Character of the neighborhood hasn't drastically changed in this period. I intend to do a proper survey to see if newfound flag waving correlates to new houses or neighbors. At a glance this doesn't seem to be the case.
I've gotten into some light twitter drama around Vibecamp, specifically whether it's appropriate to have a midnight nude pool party and a designated sex tent at an event where children are allowed
The children are allowed in the designated sex tent or they are allowed at the event with a sex tent nearby? I hope it's the latter, because the former is more outlandish, foolish, and offensive than I would have thought these people were capable.
Second order moral impact aside, I suspect the risk of child abuse is low. Burning Man hosts debauchery at a scale orders of magnitude greater with few reported sexual assaults. A perceived sense of community, selection effects due to cost of entry, and lack of privacy contributes to this.
I've surmised Vibecamp is a Burner styled festival for nerds who like to post on X. Most of these people are not hippies, but they attend as aspirational-hippies. It is known that you can't take casual or performative nudity away from hippies with a moral or a rational argument, not even weekend warrior aspirational-hippies that are fine with nudist people contained to a pool at midnight but enjoy the no swinging dicks at breakfast rule. No, you can only dissuade hippies with force or distract them (with drugs) to point their uninhibited celebration elsewhere.
Do children of crunchy granola culture suffer higher rates of sexual abuse than the general population?
wemptronics
1mo ago
When he does attempt relationships, love, or lust I tend to speed through it on account of a particular prejudice against the traditional sci-fi author's approach to these topics. He fits the bill and that's a good thing. We aren't reading to explore conflicted passions of cowboys on the prairie even if he could do so with unusual sophistication. Sapphic demons, on the other hand, can be mentioned to raise the eyebrow, but only if we get back to the things he really wants to write about.
Progressive gestures do exist in his work but not in an exceptionally gay way. House of Open Wounds, second in a series and the only fantasy I've read outside of Tolkien in decades, has been my favorite book of his.
At one point the second section was the best written one. It all got crammed into the first paragraph after I decided nobody had asked me to write about the Vancouver Squamish. Only later did I remember no one asked me to write about anything else I learned.
Think of it like an episode Reading Rainbow. In place of the pizza, trains, and dolphins you're locked into a 25 minute program with an unsettling number of its segments focused on a puddle of vomit. This is no biological education, only my vomit you now unfortunately recognize. A grotesque producer keeps inserting clips of myself looking at the bits of bile, poking at it with a stick or half-heartedly mixing the chunky slurry with a broom. Certain this once great program must haven fallen prey to a perverted editor -- probably the guy putting sticks into fluids -- you send the kids away as you catch the end of the episode. It's that guy again, scooping his mess into a dustpan and a trashcan labeled The Motte. "You don't have to take my word for it..."
actually maybe 4th section just sums it up in general
Win some, lose some.
wemptronics
1mo ago
I think choosing what and which communication to complete a task is more useful than an academic understanding. As a basic concept for people who would have never considered it as such it's probably good to cram it into the heads of all undergrads.
Bay Area... they’ll then spend the next half an hour asking 45 follow up questions,
Follow-up questions as a KPI for active listening seems perfectly suited for the Bay Area. I wonder if this is an effect of moving away from lectures across education, or if it is more so an annoying compulsion because everyone asks AI or Google anything at any time. Who needs to listen to people with knowledge?
RE: Friday reference. I became concerned after learning they are making another. The new setting is in a gentrified neighborhood which could be funny, or it could be the old, out of touch leads are incapable of making a crass (B)lack comedy without the weight of heavy handed social commentary. One can hope it's only marketing.
In your experience what percentage of "[more/better] communication" as a diagnosis or remedy in a social context is an effective or appropriate one? I think it's uncommon these days.
- Perceived or real problem occurs
- Something Must Be Done
- That something, it is decided by problem seers, problem makers, or decision makers must be more communication. If we communicated more we'd be able to avoid perceived or real problems such as this.
One common example of this phenomena goes something like above. If you're still not picking up what I'm laying down consider the following:
- The powers that be fuck up, or an individual does, and the people below them are impacted and/or angry. An unstated social negotiation occurs where the people either realize there was a failure in communication, or they are manipulated into accepting more communication as a fix from the powers that be.
"Bob, next time we will communicate
fuck upschanges to you in advance which will prevent these types of futurefuck upsproblems that impact you."*
- Game developer/Coca-Cola releases unpopular patch/drink, gamers/consumers riot, demands are put forth, reversals are made, and the developer/Coca-Cola issues a press release agreeing that more communication should have been done.
More Communication the platitude, tool, and HR seminar is a lie. In contexts where More Communication is a social lubricant, language to demand conciliatory notions or more respect from the powers that be, why can't we just ask for that? Who decided we should wrap "communication" into such things? Stakes vary between context, but the mechanics of communication are important. Most people are shit at communicating, and even those who hold an unusually innovative communication super power are still shit at communicating with someone competent. We shouldn't be muddying that precise failure up with population level memes.
"Shut the hell up, Bob. We can circle back to this
fuck upproblem until the cows come home, but are you really going to disagree with moving forward with More Communication?"
Napoleon didn't deploy the More Communication meme after the Battle of Aspern-Essling, did he? Maybe he did. Even so, I maintain that More Communication is too overloaded and watered down. A meme that can mean an apology is in order, the radio failed and no one sent a runner, management sucks, or no one is going to be holding the bag for the latest fuck up-- this must be a warcrime against autists. Whoever made the Communications B.A. what it is has a lot to answer for at the Hague.
Virginia's gone, man. For Virginians, all that's left to do is to vote, pray, and fund the grand ballroom for their newest litigation-legislation waltz. I took a peek at /r/VAguns not long ago and they're well into non-compliance bravado. I can't say I'd be any better in their situation, but the reality of becoming a criminal is less than romantic.
I've been meaning to ask, did you read friend of The Motte BJ Campbell's "After Action Report: Bridging the Divide"? He participated in an experimental parley with firearms, firearms policy, and gun violence experts, and they created a document which I read at the time but do not recall liking very much. From his summary:
The only three laws that do anything significant are universal background checks (14.9% reduction), violent misdemeanor prohibitions (18.1% reduction), and adopting constitutional carry (9.0% reduction).
It's not the first time he's written about this, but universal background checks are one of the "common sense" solutions that could work to target violent criminals.
The “Background Checks” policy adds a state background check system that runs in parallel with the federal one, and can be used for peer to peer transfers or FFL transfers. It’s a state database and a smartphone app or website where you put a buyer’s information in, and it instantly returns a green flag or red flag on the prospective sale, without an owner registry. The state uses this for all peer to peer transfers which wouldn’t require a NICS check, and requests that the ATF allow it for FFL transfers as well. The policy also gets rid of state bans on SBRs and suppressors. This is the cornerstone, because it closes the supposed “gun show loophole” but does so in a way that is a convenient win for gun owners without a registry.
That all sounds fine to me. Could work. Could. Unfortunately, this is will be too juicy of a weapon to go to waste, which means I can't trust the terms and conditions will change, and this makes it as good as any other fantasy solution. We could place the UBC servers in Próspera, Honduras, or carve out another semi-sovereign microstate that only ceremonially answers to the US government . A start-up is chartered there with a sole purpose of running each US state's UBC system uniformly and acceptably. From there, a council of a dozen AI agents could respond to and consider any changes future USG law or decree creates with a heavy weights towards saying, "No, 100 years has not passed."
Other than the whole rights being rights issue, the trust problem is tricky.
I think gun friendly states could use this as a guideline to deflect antigun forces from ramming far more restrictive rules down their throats after a mass shooting.
What better way to rebuild trust than limit one's own policy in one's own states to only the most effective bits? As a pragmatic framework for antigun states this could be net positive for gun rights. The major caveat is that it doesn't change the incentives that push politicians to chase the dragon on this issue, disband Brady, or have a chance in hell.
wemptronics
1mo ago
The Mottetariat seems to have swung so far against Vonnegut that now I have to reread his work to come in here with a sharpened memory and rant against the slander. I greatly enjoyed Vonnegut as a 19 year old. That might be the prime time to enjoy Vonnegut's satire.
They don't see it that way, of course. They are going down with a ship with a few compartments flooding, and they are only in this position because those specific crews failed to maintain the hull there. Maybe there's still time to close them off. My thing is, if you want to sacrifice those poor souls for the good of the ship you have to give the order, and someone has to do it. This report is nearer to that order than anything put out 5 years ago, but I agree it reads like those on watch are still loftily debating ideas amongst themselves while the ship heels over.
There is something to be said that about the fact they commissioned a report not meant to persuade academics and still spent significant time soothing the usual academic insecurities in apprehension of their predictable responses. If the Academic Dark Web has accepted that lectures about the importance of internal reform to avoid external pressure is proven to be a fruitless task, and now it is time to switch from persuasion to diplomatic letters to the chancelleries, why not go full bore? They are, supposedly, convinced about failures which have been ignored for a long time. People like Jonathan Haidt have gone on the record that he no longer believes internal reform is a realistic possibility.
An idea between "just give up your life and quit, it's what you deserve" and more of the same tired dance is, if the situation is truly dire a crisis past a point of no return, to beg. Beg chancellors and presidents to do something. Create a journal titled Treasons Weekly and publish nothing but taunting insults aimed at the White House until they do so. That wouldn't even require quitting and these are mostly tenured faculty, anyway. I suppose it's unfortunate most of the professional organizations are captured entities, because that'd be a good way to coordinate.
I agree that it's likely we're going to continue on watching a slow suicide rather than any mass demonstration of self-immolation with all the status, money, and pride thrown out for something greater. It's a lot to lose when the study of society and study of humanity can instead just be built again from the ground up in the future, and after the robots take over the role of policy only as a nerdy hobby.
More options
Context Copy link