#HDFCBANK - Changing my previous counts - Top done at 1725 and flat abc correction seen. Stock should settle down in range 1270-1290 (like double top, double bottom is possible), https://t.co/9dDR6NFVDH
sir hdfcbank counts please
— om namo venkatesaya (@being__trader) April 19, 2022
More from Harsh / 허쉬
#tatasteel - I expected 3rd to be over at 1246 and fall below 900 in 4th. But retracement was not enough. And hence the 3rd continued till 1481. May be inch a little higher but fair to call end of 3rd round about here.. 4th should take it to 1000 https://t.co/NWDc24fjJn
#Tatasteel - 2 possible count options -
— Harsh Mehta (@_Harsh_Mehta_) June 8, 2021
Bearish - 5 waves complete (RED) and bigger retracement towards 700
Bullish - 3rd over (BLUE) and 4th goes towards 900 and then 1500+#Nifty https://t.co/ETBkbUkCO8 pic.twitter.com/an2EoHHxnU
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x