Submitted by anon (not verified) on Thu, 10/21/2021 - 18:44
i'm annoyed at how my dig at ill will for being ill will (they really do have a thing for the yellow vests) got drowned out by the anons butthurt about race and racism being topics
you can't so much imply the topic of race and they scream "id pol! maoism!"
it doesn't help that ill will and its readership are commies, making the insult fit well for some reasons, but not others
what they say in this casual conversation is not much to get worked-up about, if you can look past their pet obligatory references and treating Idris Robinson and Fred Moten as if they were the new luminaries
they're just trying to show the progress they've made with their reading list and how excited they are that it has anything to do with the exciting events of last year. the exciting events that owe nothing to their reading list and to their comments which have very little to do with anarchism except for some minor conceptual flirtation.
and that's alright, expected for academics. did you expect anything more? this flirtation seems to be more explicit here -nominally at least- than say in Graeber's latest book making the rounds.
i'm annoyed at how my dig at ill will for being ill will (they really do have a thing for the yellow vests) got drowned out by the anons butthurt about race and racism being topics
you can't so much imply the topic of race and they scream "id pol! maoism!"
it doesn't help that ill will and its readership are commies, making the insult fit well for some reasons, but not others
what they say in this casual conversation is not much to get worked-up about, if you can look past their pet obligatory references and treating Idris Robinson and Fred Moten as if they were the new luminaries
they're just trying to show the progress they've made with their reading list and how excited they are that it has anything to do with the exciting events of last year. the exciting events that owe nothing to their reading list and to their comments which have very little to do with anarchism except for some minor conceptual flirtation.
and that's alright, expected for academics. did you expect anything more? this flirtation seems to be more explicit here -nominally at least- than say in Graeber's latest book making the rounds.