Mixing up C and S, leaving out articles, confusion of simple present and present progressive tenses. Hmm these are common English errors Russian speakers make.
The author portrays an evolution of social and economic theory that passes from Marx to Weber to Foucault. In other words, Marx without Lenin. The tactic is diversionary rather than disinformative. Insofar as you will discuss Marxism, it will be in the context of critiques of Marx made by academics operating in capitalist countries. I don't mean to say that Weber's or Foucault's theories are entirely wrong headed, just that as long as you are occupied with them you will be ignoring the strains of Marxist theory that have underpinned any actually successful Marxist political project.
If you want to pick nits though, this passage made me squint:
Democratic government was the result of a political revolution of a new class-the commercial and industrial capitalists or, as Marx called them, the bourgeoisie.
Here the author is stating without citation that Marx believed democracy was achieved by bourgeois revolution. Big if true. Perhaps a certain kind of democracy within a certain class? Where did Marx make this claim?
What do you think of weeb’s take that this is a spoiling attack?
If the source is 'Iran Observer' or some crap then people will make fun of you.
Moscow Times was posted a few months ago, and there was surprisingly little ridicule. But that was off the mega.
Help to the starving in the American manner
Apple pie without cheese is like a kiss without a squeeze
Yo I have never listened to Kino, and I don't know anything about them. I didn't even know the Russian name for the CIA before I googled "ЦРУ". It is fuzzy, but that's what it looks like to me if that is indeed a label.
Edit: the letters are written in white
It's a little fuzzy, but I think it says ЦРУ, which is the Russian spelling of CIA.
I missed this one. It appears the RF is trying to set up reciprocal foreign asset seizures ahead of expected formal seizure of RF assets in the US. Here’s a very short article in Xinhua.
This actually looks like an attempt at de-escalation to me. The seizure of foreign property is an act of war, and the Putin administration seems to be looking for a way to appease RF entities holding those frozen assets in the US without a war declaration, should those assets be subject to formal seizure by the US. Am I reading this correctly?
The Cuban Communist Party is mad at the German Embassy over a Facebook post.
On that same date, Press Freedom Day, 8 161 kilometers from Berlin, the German Embassy in Cuba, and through the Facebook account of that legation, consummated a gross act of interference and flagrant violation of international standards for diplomatic relations, by altering the text and photo on the front page of Granma with erasures typical of (un)classified documents, even on the name of Palestine. "There is not much to see here," the publication added.
To my ear, this style is the Nashville version of "Adult Contemporary" ca. 2010. Similar things were happening in Evangelical Christian music at the time.
does this style actually sound good?
It sold a lot of records. A more interesting question might be "is it country?", or "who gets to decide what country is?". It's probably better not to argue about that sort of thing on the internet though. Instead, here's a video of a contemporary christian group from Nashville performing a minor novelty country hit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ow1pV2MqN8
Very cool. The section describing pre-WWI famine events provides important context for understanding the scale and significance of later famine events in People's China and the USSR. The section on sunspot science helps show that the politicization of agricultural science did not begin with Vavilov and Lysenko. I don't think that Davis intended his book to be read in this way, but it's hard to ignore.
I read Planet of Slums too, but I didn't find it to be nearly as impactful. The LA book is supposed to be good. I haven't heard anything about his new book on epidemics.
but they're not wrong
I've read both, and think they are both excellent. The Williams book is way more fun to read. The Davis book was a bit of a slog in the middle, but it is worth getting through because the later sections are fascinating. If you have the focus necessary for dryly observing the deaths of many millions of people across several continents, now is the time for the Davis book. The Williams book is also a sad story, but is presented in a more engaging manner.
Whenever you get around to finishing the Williams book, I can suggest these two books on 20th century African history:
"In Search of Enemies: A CIA Story" by John Stockwell. This is a memoir of a CIA agent who claims to have left the agency in disgust after the revelations of the Church Committee. It covers CIA involvement in Angola during their decolonization struggle. Obviously taking a history lesson from a CIA agent is problematic, but the book is worth reading. It's short too. Fewer than 300 pages.
"Dancing in the Glory of Monsters: The Collapse of the Congo and the Great War of Africa" by Jason K. Stearns. This book covers the Congo war in the 90s. After reading Williams, you will be able to be see how the actions of the US and Europe in the 1960s set up the conditions for this enormous tragedy decades later. Stearns does not provide this context on his own. I'm not crazy about this author either, but there just haven't been many books published in English on this massive and important war.
This is amazing. Thank you for posting! The Lysenko story is wild, and one of my favorites. There is almost nothing available in the English language that portrays "Lysenkoism" as a reaction to Fascist Eugenics. The compelling part of the story is how extreme the influence of political ideology was on the science of genetics at the time, and this guy gets it.
:goro:
Removed by mod