Link to an article by Steve Rushton:
“Sea Change in Spanish Politics As Citizens Reclaim the City”
Cultural Detritus, Reviews, and Commentary
Link to an article by Steve Rushton:
“Sea Change in Spanish Politics As Citizens Reclaim the City”
Professor Michael Schwalbe wrote an essay entitled “A Brief for Equality.” The basic thrust of his argument is a good one: liberal insistence that egalitarianism is too extreme is really about maintaining certain inequalities, which are not morally justified. However, there is a curious flaw in his argument. He writes:
“equality would produce a flourishing of creativity and constructive diversity. The cultivation of talent that is possible now for only the privileged few would be possible for all. What’s more, an equal sharing of resources would by no means hinder the appreciation of virtuosity. There would in fact be more virtuosity and accomplishment to appreciate.”
Why is this a logical flaw? Well, there are different types of capital (as a sociologist, Schwalbe should be well aware of these concepts; though they appear in fiction too). Yet his brief is written only in regard to economic capital. He asserts that a better society flows from equality of economic capital. But he then praises an inequality of cultural capital (virtuosity, accomplishment). Why is it that the liberal position that relies on a core of (economic) inequality is wrong but Schwalbe’s reliance on a core of (cultural) inequality is better? He does not address this point about second level (cultural) hierarchies. This seems to be a flaw in his underlying theory — by failing to account for different types of capital, and associated hierarchies, his argument lacks persuasiveness. Really, this is perhaps a pure expression of ideology, revealing the disavowed assumptions behind his argument. It is somewhat customary for academics to have more cultural capital than economic capital. So does Schwalbe’s argument really amount to self-interested promotion of the type of capital that he possesses over that which he does not possess? And will inequality of cultural capital simply reproduce inequalities of economic capital over time? These are the lingering doubts clouding his argument, which is far more self-interested than it admits.
Link to an interview with Michael Scott Christofferson conducted by Daniel Zamora:
Bonus quote:
“The anarchist denunciations of [state power] from Foucault to James Scott are less worried about transnational monopolies than about the (now defunct) Soviet party state or even the social-democratic nanny state. And as for the intellectual and cultural polemics, they always end up denouncing Marx and Marxism. I think these battles on the left are unproductive politically and intellectually . . . .”
Link to the group Mapping Police Violence‘s report:
Bonus links: Interview with Sam Sinyangwe, Campaign Zero (mostly good ideas, with some flaws: the persistently proposed requirement that “community organizations” nominate civil servants/overseers is flawed [would the KKK qualify as a “community organization”? If not, then which groups? And who decides which groups?], and the “fair union contracts” aspect includes important points but then goes too far [banning contacts that allow officers to “receive paid leave or remain on desk-duty during an investigation following a police shooting or other use of deadly force” is anti-due process and anti-worker]; lastly, “unconscious bias” research is still in its infancy and relies on many troubling ideological assumptions [the research has its own bias of the cognitivist and/or liberal variety: “PC anti-racism is sustained by the surplus-enjoyment which emerges when the PC-subject triumphantly reveals the hidden racist bias on an apparently neutral statement or gesture“] making it difficult and premature to implement as a mandatory process).
Link to an article by Michael Perelman:
Link to an article by Debra Cassens Weiss:
“How ‘Loyalty Effect’ Plays Out Among Supreme Court Justices”
Link to an article by Danielle Paquette:
“Why You Should Always Buy the Men’s Version of Almost Anything”
Link to an article by Linda Gordon:
Link to an interview with Erik Olin Wright by Mike Beggs:
Link to an article by Carl Beijer: