Topic: Reading List (Read 2441 times)

Royal☭ · « **on:** September 26, 2012, 07:31:17 AM »

Every day I read a variety of fascinating articles on a wide-range of subjects, and many I found thought-provoking for one reason or another. But often I don't feel they warrant a huge discussion or any fit with the general conversations going on in other threads. So this thread will be a Food-For-Thought thread, just posting articles you've read that are interesting but don't necessarily need more than maybe a short paragraph of summary.

How a broker spent $520m in a drunken stupor and moved the global oil price

A Comment on Soros - Anti-capitalist blog The Current Moment discussions the political and economic ramifications of George Soros's comments on Germany and the Euro.

Boycotting Apple Won’t Help the Rioting Foxconn Workers Who Built Your iPhone - Gawker interview with Eli Friedman, who also wrote China in Revolt for Jacobin Magazine

So what are you guys reading?

Ted Belmont · « **Reply #1 on:** September 26, 2012, 10:49:28 AM »

The science of cyclist hate.

Thad · « **Reply #2 on:** September 27, 2012, 11:23:34 AM »

Village Voice interviews Lewis Black.

Quote

A black man is elected, so Republicans have to respond with the whitest man ever. I thought George Bush Jr. was the whitest man ever and one of the most uncomfortable people I've ever seen inside their own skin, but compared to Romney, Bush looks Jamaican.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #3 on:** October 06, 2012, 06:24:25 AM »

Foxconn workers on iPhone 5 line strike in China, rights group says

Sally Mann in the Age of Instagram

Maine GOP Attacks Democratic Candidate Over Her Record... In 'World Of Warcraft'

Miss Cat Ears · « **Reply #4 on:** October 07, 2012, 06:43:50 AM »

books

Royal☭ · « **Reply #5 on:** October 08, 2012, 05:49:07 PM »

How People Profit from Your Online Mug Shot and Ruin Your Life Forever

China in Revolt

Mongrel · « **Reply #6 on:** October 08, 2012, 08:12:19 PM »

Quote from: Constantine on October 08, 2012, 05:49:07 PM

China in Revolt

This was framed in a pretty horrendously leftist window, but it's a good summary for overall labour activity and at least managed to frame the possibilities for Chinese labour's success or failure pretty fairly.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #7 on:** October 08, 2012, 08:59:49 PM »

Quote from: Mongrel on October 08, 2012, 08:12:19 PM

Quote from: Constantine on October 08, 2012, 05:49:07 PM
China in Revolt
This was framed in a pretty horrendously leftist window, but it's a good summary for overall labour activity and at least managed to frame the possibilities for Chinese labour's success or failure pretty fairly.

It's from the magazine Jacobin. Leftist is their raison d'etre. But you say that like it's a bad thing.

Mongrel · « **Reply #8 on:** October 08, 2012, 09:07:00 PM »

Just because we could do with a little more leftism right now, doesn't mean I'm going to give a magazine like that a wholehearted endorsement.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #9 on:** October 08, 2012, 09:11:04 PM »

"a magazine like that", is it a whore or something? You'll note that article is by Eli Friedman, who is an assistant professor at Cornell. He's well-studied in Marxism, labor and history. Sometimes you just gotta fuck it and realize that their announcing their leftism and wearing it as a badge of honor adds to what they're saying.

For my money, Jacobin is one of the more intellectually challenging magazines I've read, and that's coming from the left. They're willing to go against the grain of normal leftism to provide a full, thought-provoking critique. Hell, the issue that article comes from also challenges preconceived notions of the benefits of small business and environmentalism.

Mongrel · « **Reply #10 on:** October 08, 2012, 09:32:18 PM »

It's exactly what you just called it: a pro-Marxist magazine titled "Jacobin". So "like that".

This board may be pretty leftist, but you do lean farther left than most of us. I really wouldn't imagine that everyone here would just nod and agree with everything with no reservations whatsoever and I really I don't see the point in taking offence to what I said.

It's not like my reply was "Huh. Pretty good for a stack of commie buttwipe.", or something. I mean, did you want to post an article or was this just a case of

Big Whoop, Wanna Fight About It?

Royal☭ · « **Reply #11 on:** October 08, 2012, 09:59:17 PM »

It just struck me as odd that you had no objections to the content, but had to throw in a "but they're so leftist" defensively.

Mongrel · « **Reply #12 on:** October 08, 2012, 10:39:58 PM »

I wouldn't call it defensive. It was a true comment that that kind of strongly non-centrist voice annoys me (to a degree).

If a source is too political, or carries a perception of strong bias (even if it doesn't have much of one in practice or the particular article in question is very balanced), its utility to me is limited. First, because there will be blind spots sometimes, and second, because it limits the number of people I can usefully share it with - many people will just dismiss it out of hand without bothering to read it at all, even if I preface it with a "no really, this is good". It's not really much different than if someone linked a good article from say, National Review.

So, yes, it was a good article, but I do wish it was in a different publication.

Brentai · « **Reply #13 on:** October 08, 2012, 11:29:43 PM »

"Leftist framing" was the proper way to put it. I detected no heavy bias in that article, other than that it was statedly written for liberals by liberals.

I haven't read much of the rest of the journal, since in general reading left-wing writing too much leaves me with more anger than even the other extreme, but I don't see in that article where people are doing the sort of scenario-redefining that usually merits a Magical Yarn Ball.

Also, it doesn't make the mistake of assuming that liberalism is inherently the best path. Hell, there are tons of places in that particular article that seem to acknowledge that a more (lowercase) conservative fiscal/lifestyle/moral mindset is perfectly rational and proper given various circumstances in play.

Brentai · « **Reply #14 on:** October 08, 2012, 11:45:08 PM »

As opposed to capital Conservative fiscal mindset, which is to eliminate all traces of competition from small businesses (in the name of small businesses), lifestyle mindset, which is to uplift the wealthy while demanding sacrifices from the poor (in the name of the poor), and moral mindset, which is to deny the fairer sex equal pay, treatment and freedom (in the name of the fairer sex).

In other words: Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentation of their women.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #15 on:** October 09, 2012, 05:24:13 AM »

Not liberal, Marxist. There's a difference.

And yeah, he does mention that having a fiscal, personal conservatism is valid, but only in so far as work options are limited and the country's capitalist class is starting to crack down on wages. The leftist viewpoint of the article, though, is deliberate and necessary. It's not a "Let's win over the right!" type of article. It's meant to re-align western, mostly liberal, viewpoints on China. It's how about the labor struggle, and how Americans trying to define themselves as consumer/saviors doesn't work out that well. It's basically a call to keep your liberal friends from worrying too much about whether the iPhone 5 is a good purchase, and start worrying about labor struggle in general.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #16 on:** October 11, 2012, 05:13:10 AM »

Mysterious Algorithm Was 4% of Trading Activity Last Week

Royal☭ · « **Reply #17 on:** October 11, 2012, 07:07:13 AM »

For-profit inspectors allow toxic food

Royal☭ · « **Reply #18 on:** October 26, 2012, 08:48:13 AM »

The Haunting Human Zoo of Paris

Ted Belmont · « **Reply #19 on:** October 30, 2012, 03:57:03 PM »

Don't fall in love with your robot.

News:

Author Topic: Reading List (Read 2441 times)