nhold.bsky.social
Hey bluesky. Historian. In decline. Views expressed here are those of a future insightful majority.
2,371 posts
7,535 followers
763 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
'wtf kind of game is this it doesn't even rhyme!'
comment in response to
post
something like a neighbor walks next door to ask to borrow a gas can to refill their lawn mower, on the way mentally playing out possible negative responses, getting more and more agitated until arriving then banging on the door and immediately yelling 'keep your damn gas can!'
comment in response to
post
it reads particularly weird to because the initial post in the retweet of you treats it as a conditional - 'this better not mean something sexist!' - then all subsequent replies express conviction you could only have meant something sexist. reminds me of a joke or sketch I wish I could fully recall
comment in response to
post
Thanks for reading and yeah that poem is incredible, I think about it very, very often, I feel like it makes so much about life in the hellworld more comprehensible
comment in response to
post
you're kind, thank you! (and this one's very handwavey, even more than usual, idk if any of them are all that good but there are definitely some better ones in the back catalog!)
comment in response to
post
there is no such thing as “ethical ai” given the environmental and labor issues inherent to literally all of it
comment in response to
post
I feel like you're implying there's other ways to feel?
comment in response to
post
I can hear a slightly growly voiceover 'BOYS smile but MEN glare'
comment in response to
post
similar here - I live in a neighborhood with a lot of latino neighbors some of whom I know for sure are undocumented. we had a problem with shootings a few years ago, which sucked, but I'm still far more afraid for neighbors under current circumstances.
comment in response to
post
shit I can't do nothin right [kicks dirt]
comment in response to
post
oh nice! I don't remember anymore if I was in 8th grade or first year of high school at the time. I lived in the country a few miles outside Marengo and Union, used to go to movies in Woodstock a lot.
comment in response to
post
yep, and very briefly worked at the Woodstock Opera House!
comment in response to
post
you're very kind, thank you!
comment in response to
post
Thanks Dan, much appreciated!
comment in response to
post
Save the Date: the inaugural Association of Law and Political Economy conference will be taking place *February 5-7, 2026* at the University of Richmond School of Law. And keep an eye out for the CFP this later this summer!
comment in response to
post
Thanks dude! Just to be clear tho, in your view which of us was more comradely?
comment in response to
post
appreciation back at you, shit's real ugly rn in ways that demand critical thought and also make thinking harder because one (well, I) has to spend some time just screaming in anger and sadness, seems to me that means doing that thinking is near impossible (and hurts more) w/ out interlocutors
comment in response to
post
I mean, I'm fine w/ whatever degree of proximity or not (my intent wasn't to go 'you're over there and I'm over here' but to say 'unpicking where we do and don't agree in relation to a nest of issues knotted together is likely to be beneficial!') I'll read the piece ASAP, thank you!
comment in response to
post
I think they often exist unbundled but are taken as bundled - to say 'this is wrong, we must stop it' is not per se to invoke law but some people assume so, and to say 'that's illegal, obey the law' is not per se to address the substantive matters but some people assume so.
comment in response to
post
I agree w/ yr 2nd to last sentence here and if I said otherwise that's an error I regret - my point wasn't intended as 'to use law is always bad' (you're right that that's a false claim) but 'to use law is probably always limited and often goes bad longer term, especially absent important context'
comment in response to
post
each other, in ways that set the movement up to have an appearance of relatively high degree of apparent success that is not an accurate appearance and also to have both limited outcomes and lack of staying power. (Sorry if that was obvious to you from the piece and I'm annoyingly repeating myself)
comment in response to
post
do we think of the current moment. To my mind anyway, in the current moment (and in the recent past of the early 00s anti-war movement and late 10s opposition to the Tories as discussed in the Rob Knox pieces I nod to) there's too much bundling of the two types of claim and assumption the two entail
comment in response to
post
vs do they imply each other - then there's a matter of historical generalization - do we tend to find these claims mixed together in reality and if so how does the mix tend to work out over time, unproblematically or virtuously (what I assume is your view) or problematically my view) - and then what
comment in response to
post
I suspect we disagree on all, idk, levels or registers (and that's fine, good even because generative) but/and I think it's worth unpicking them since we tend to encounter them knotted/bundled. So there's the point in principle/theory - to what degree are these 2 conceptually distinguishable claims
comment in response to
post
Well said. Staggering is such a good word for it, I feel this literally, like I find myself spluttering and having trouble thinking for a bit because it's so obvious wrong both in that it won't work and in that it'll kill a ton of people.
comment in response to
post
ehhhh I have my moments, I guess
comment in response to
post
to a farmerworker behind closed doors' while some other responses are like 'my god, this is no way to treat a senator!' Those claims can be paired but don't come automatically paired - neither implies the other.
comment in response to
post
Sure, but 'this is against the law' and 'this is evil/leads to evil' are distinct claims. One can combine the two, but the two are not automatically combined. I think the responses to Padilla's manhandling are close to this Padilla himself is like 'if they can do this to me on camera what'll they do
comment in response to
post
I'll add, I read a bunch of Rob's stuff earlier this year and found it very thought provoking, excellent mix of thoughtful theorizing, concrete situating and laying out strategic implications for the left. Way more people on the left should be reading his stuff imho liverpool.academia.edu/RobertKnox
comment in response to
post
related, it's bananas how many self-described libertarians were like 'hey you threw the brick so what the cop did is fine, I would simply obey authority'
comment in response to
post
that sucks so bad, I'm so sorry