the dreams I plant in someone's mind
may bloom as hope for humankind
PART 16: networking
ISO standurd refers:
level 1, physikal: two tins and a bit of string
level 2, data link: you sa things into the tin and the string vibraits
levels 3 4 5 6: erm
level 7, applikation: we pore custard over GRIMES
we shal see.
https://archiveofourown.org/works/45787648/chapters/137248939
Cofnas claims his ideas are protected by academic freedom. In reality he steals the freedom of others: of the students of colour whose work he disparages; of the transgender students whose very existence he disputes; of every scholar whom he deprives of the insights of minorities.
Emmanuel and the University must take a long, sober look at their diversity policies, and then another at his contract. Cofnas must go.
Labour: Azhar Ali is too extremist to be MP for Rochdale
Also Labour: *hands Rochdale to George Galloway*
Edit, copied in from my reply further down:
It's a very difficult line to walk. Both of them said horrendously prejudiced things.
On the other hand:
- Ali said it at least once, and Galloway has been saying it for decades.
- Ali apologised, though who knows whether it was sincere? Galloway has doubled down.
- Ali would have served for six months as an unremarkable backbencher, then been replaced. Galloway is a big name and will use the Commons as a platform to promote himself and his ideas.
It was always going to be either Ali or Galloway, at the option of the Labour whips.
The number of people who believe - and unabashedly say, publicly, - “the murder of these people is okay because those other people were murdered first” is unbelievably astounding, and scary as hell.
PS - If you’re thinking of coming into my replies to justify the collective punishment and mass starvation of an entire population forcibly displaced and corralled into inhumane conditions by a state military offensive, one million humans of which are children, ONE MILLION CHILDREN, don’t.
@freakazoid when you say "a lie", I can read that two ways:
- "it makes the whole l/r axis a lie, and the a/a-a the only one that matters; this is absurd; therefore ancaps are not authoritarian"
or
- "it makes the whole l/r axis a lie, because it implies the l/r axis is essentially equivalent to the a/a-a axis, but with the dividing line moved left so it's between anarchists and everyone else"
You know that list of economic systems explained in terms of "You have two cows…".
The last entry is always "Capitalism: You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull."
Is there actually *any* economic system where someone who owns two cows cannot sell one and buy a bull?
Later: I have often heard criticism of settler states which is particularly about their existence as states rather than about their comprising settlers— power, rather than people. Maybe if the Pilgrim Fathers had lived within the polity of the Nauset, rather than founding their own which would eventually force the Nauset to live within it instead, things would have been very different.
In addition I think we have to distinguish
- this person has a right to live in this place because their ancestors did
- this person has no right to live in this place because their ancestors didn't
- this person has a right to move to this place because their ancestors lived there
- this person has no right to move to this place because their ancestors didn't live there
I think a lot of this also turns on the reason a person's ancestors had to leave— whether they left in order to conquer a new state, versus if they left in chains, for example, or in order not to starve. But, again, people are rarely explicit about what they mean.
And if everyone claiming English ancestry in the US and Canada (about 31m people) had no right to live anywhere but England (population 56m, with 1,124 people per square mile), they wouldn't fit, and a right which can't be exercised is no right at all.)
The terms under which people say that, say, people living in Ireland have less right to stay there if they are the descendants of the Plantation of Ulster, compared to the descendants of the people who were living there before, are similar to those which the far right uses against people of colour in my country.
(comment I made on a friend's post elsenet)
I must admit I have long wondered about the terms under which any particular person can be said to have an ancestral right to live somewhere, because people's assumptions about it vary wildly but are rarely spoken.
This is a matter I'm still thinking over, and I don't have a good answer. It's an important question. Do you have any suggestions of things to read on the matter?
🧵
Stand up, if people called you worthless,
if they kicked you to the floor;
their pride is fading from their faces
and their reign shall last no more.
The rules they made are swept away now,
so you're free to hear our call,
and though they thought of us as nothing,
as we rise we shall be all;
So come stand with your comrades
And tomorrow we shall find
The Internationale
Uniting humankind.
(my translation of the #internationale)
Daftest argument I've ever seen about Palestine, and that's a high bar:
the American who said that Palestine wasn't a real state because the Palestinian flag wasn't available in their iPhone emojis.
The 5yo is at the breakfast table singing, "Solidarity forever, the union makes us strong!"
She learned it on the picket line yesterday where she was supporting Newton's striking teachers, including her mother. Learn more, including how you can help: https://linktr.ee/ntaresources
