the_dunk_tank
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
view the rest of the comments
I suppose, when I said institutional media I thought of Murdoch press and newspapers. Things like Facebook fall outside of that (think Arab spring, currently reading bevins book).
Including those changes things up, but compared to Vietnam or Iraq, I feel like seeing pro-palestine stuff is way more likely than pro-iraq stuff or pro-vietnam stuff at the outset of those two wars
Err, the Arab Spring was done by the West, wasn't it?
It was literally fomented by the Obama administration.
Bevin's book is incorrect and has some shoddy conclusions too.
Fair enough, should I stop reading it?
In the book, he claims that Arab spring was started by earnest people with legitimate grievances, but was rapidly coopted by the west as a useful tool for regime change.
But I could also believe that the Ned funds any antiCPC movements in China if it could be a little anti-government, even if it's 30 trots and a reading group
Yeah, the author asks valid questions, but I feel that the examples aren't that good, I feel. Just my thoughts. His previous book also had some liberal talking-points. But, like, I like him. He's a great author in spite of being a WaPo news reporter, I think.
It does, so far, focus on his personal relationship with the events that were happening around him. I think in the pod sphere it's sold as a polemic against structurelessness and decentralisation in a space where those are very popular concepts (western left).
Honestly, I just feel like I'm burning out and not having enough time/energy to read, let alone critically. Hopefully in a few weeks I'll be a little more free to engage with everything
"Honestly, I just feel like I'm burning out and not having enough time/energy to read, let alone critically. Hopefully in a few weeks I'll be a little more free to engage with everything"
Yeah, I feel that way. Same here. I read his previous book. And I see som of his other points repeated here. Definitely agree with the "structurelessness and decentralization" point.
No offense or anything.