The liberty and mobility granted to average people by cheap gasoline and home energy is absolutely infuriating to socialist central planners. They need you people to stop moving around so much. You keep scuttling their glorious five-year plans.
More from John Hayward
More from Society
Hong Kong protester equipment list:
- respirator (dubbed "pig snouts" in Cantonese)
- helmet
- eye mask
- heat-proof gloves
- water bottle
- cling wrap
- saline
- traffic cones
- pots and pans
Demonstrators find creative methods to battle police tear gas
https://t.co/kPeUTu9iFh
AFP graphic charting Hong Kong's main socio-economic indicators and opinion polls on press freedom and government performance
@AFPgraphics
AFP graphic showing the main equipment used by hardcore pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong to battle police tear gas, pepper spray and rubber bullets
@AFPgraphics
Frontline first aid.
Nurses, doctors, medical students and ordinary citizens with first aid training have clamoured to join a small volunteer corps helping treat people involved in the Hong Kong protests
@AFP's Yan Zhao reports: https://t.co/uDfYkMeZJf
📸 Anthony Wallace
Pro-democracy activists kick off three days of rallies at Hong Kong airport.
Protesters hope to win international support from arriving passengers. The last demonstration at the airport on July 26 passed off peacefully without causing flight disruptions
https://t.co/jmVqtEd4M2
- respirator (dubbed "pig snouts" in Cantonese)
- helmet
- eye mask
- heat-proof gloves
- water bottle
- cling wrap
- saline
- traffic cones
- pots and pans
Demonstrators find creative methods to battle police tear gas
https://t.co/kPeUTu9iFh
AFP graphic charting Hong Kong's main socio-economic indicators and opinion polls on press freedom and government performance
@AFPgraphics
AFP graphic showing the main equipment used by hardcore pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong to battle police tear gas, pepper spray and rubber bullets
@AFPgraphics
Frontline first aid.
Nurses, doctors, medical students and ordinary citizens with first aid training have clamoured to join a small volunteer corps helping treat people involved in the Hong Kong protests
@AFP's Yan Zhao reports: https://t.co/uDfYkMeZJf
📸 Anthony Wallace
Pro-democracy activists kick off three days of rallies at Hong Kong airport.
Protesters hope to win international support from arriving passengers. The last demonstration at the airport on July 26 passed off peacefully without causing flight disruptions
https://t.co/jmVqtEd4M2
Two things can be true at once:
1. There is an issue with hostility some academics have faced on some issues
2. Another academic who himself uses threats of legal action to bully colleagues into silence is not a good faith champion of the free speech cause
I have kept quiet about Matthew's recent outpourings on here but as my estwhile co-author has now seen fit to portray me as an enabler of oppression I think I have a right to reply. So I will.
I consider Matthew to be a colleague and a friend, and we had a longstanding agreement not to engage in disputes on twitter. I disagree with much in the article @UOzkirimli wrote on his research in @openDemocracy but I strongly support his right to express such critical views
I therefore find it outrageous that Matthew saw fit to bully @openDemocracy with legal threats, seeking it seems to stifle criticism of his own work. Such behaviour is simply wrong, and completely inconsistent with an academic commitment to free speech.
I am not embroiling myself in the various other cases Matt lists because, unlike him, I think attention to the detail matters and I don't have time to research each of these cases in detail.
1. There is an issue with hostility some academics have faced on some issues
2. Another academic who himself uses threats of legal action to bully colleagues into silence is not a good faith champion of the free speech cause
How about Selina Todd, Kathleen Stock, Jo Phoenix, Rachel Ara, Sarah Honeychurch, Michele Moore, Nina Power, Joanna Williams, Jenny Murray, Julia Gasper ...
— Matt Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ) February 17, 2021
Or is it only Eric you pop at?
Are they all making it up too Rob?
Are they "beyond parody"? https://t.co/drQssTD0OL
I have kept quiet about Matthew's recent outpourings on here but as my estwhile co-author has now seen fit to portray me as an enabler of oppression I think I have a right to reply. So I will.
I consider Matthew to be a colleague and a friend, and we had a longstanding agreement not to engage in disputes on twitter. I disagree with much in the article @UOzkirimli wrote on his research in @openDemocracy but I strongly support his right to express such critical views
I therefore find it outrageous that Matthew saw fit to bully @openDemocracy with legal threats, seeking it seems to stifle criticism of his own work. Such behaviour is simply wrong, and completely inconsistent with an academic commitment to free speech.
I am not embroiling myself in the various other cases Matt lists because, unlike him, I think attention to the detail matters and I don't have time to research each of these cases in detail.
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