#JUBLFOOD -3410
Now above 4.618% Objective is to move higher towards
6.857%( 4491) and beyond..
Near term base Case 2900.
#Probability
More from MaRkET WaVES (DINESH PATEL ) Stock Market FARMER
More from Jublfood
#jubilantfoodworks @ 2443, an "abc" correction is "almost" done fm 4575
Holding 2500 & moving past 2615 would be the 1st sign of reversal attempt
Only +ve factor "Highly oversold"-meant for aggressive traders
Conservative traders wait for some "Bull candle" formation in Day t/f https://t.co/NbwmqJxo0W
Holding 2500 & moving past 2615 would be the 1st sign of reversal attempt
Only +ve factor "Highly oversold"-meant for aggressive traders
Conservative traders wait for some "Bull candle" formation in Day t/f https://t.co/NbwmqJxo0W
sir view on jubilant food works pls
— om namo venkatesaya (@being__trader) March 21, 2022
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