The English language already uses a capitalised I by default in common language, so attempting to use the same conventions would be at best unnecessarily confusing.
Maybe it didn’t strictly have to be Latin, but it easily makes sense to invent discrete terms.
Got my hands on a pair of raw denim jeans with most of the bells and whistles(no leather patch with pointless branding) and I really think my workwear larp is going to be irreversible now.
Shit just really is that cool(to me). It’s very neat to roll up the goofy long pants legs.
Broadly the discussion has been very absolutist about these terms, I don’t really care wether or not Parenti is “better” on a spectrum.
I want to hear what his usage of the term in his most famous lecture actually implies about him and these sorts of terms as a whole. Is this post actually a discussion about language or just a massive circlejerk about how much we dislike academics.
It’s not pedantic, he used one of the example words in his most famous lecture. Why?
Were his ideas not clever enough? Is he bourgeoise? Did he change terminology afterwards?
what about this makes English “cucked”?
Those ones are literally just normal, you’d have to just not have engaged with political-historical discourse at all in English to not have heard hagiography used to insult mainstream presidential retrospective articles at the very least.
The only imaginable bright spot is that the obvious attempt to groom his young son into a predator too happened so recently that there’s some hope that he might receive effective therapy for it before he becomes an adult.
Literally what is there even to say, fifteen women. And that’s just the number who spoke to his wife personally!
Also the most horrific shit he was doing literally like 2022, 2023, 2024.
Neil Gaiman is going to need to hire a private military for life to be able to walk the streets without getting three Luigis in the back.
Recently I’ve taken to just idly browsing secondhand and auction sites to look at funny vintage clothes and the weird phrasings people come up with.
Lots of what I assume to be attempts at gaming search results by typing “BRAND NEW VINTAGE/ANTIQUE” in the title and shit like that.
What did Robert Eggers mean when he turned Nosferatu into a half rotten cossack sex pest.
To be serious though, only part I just didn’t like of the new film. Just not an interesting visual design IMO, looked like a better executed generic CGI horror monster of the caliber of the Van Helsing film.
I’m sold, hell yeah.
Did they make Orlok a romantic sadboy?
I want to have faith in Eggers but also it feels like every single Dracula since Christopher Lee has tried to be subversive about the original story in a way that just annoys me to no end.
It’s a common prosecutor folk wisdom that it’s good to gamble on the death penalty because if its on the table then the jury will be more likely to be filled with regimepilled sickos who vote guilty in the name of state violence no matter what.
Ivy league style is pretty sharp.
It seems fine as it’s own work, just sorta comes off like a separate work of fiction that had to be stapled onto the Watchmen IP instead of being its own thing.
Like the whole Hooded Justice thing isn’t bad, but I think it kind of fails to exploit what Moore was going for by making the “first” costumed superhero in his universe a nazi-sympathizing sadist dressed up in thinly veiled lynching iconography and a dark klan hood.
I’ve essentially never seen anything from the sphere of “parapolitics” that actually appears to impart any useful practical knowledge for understanding the past or predicting the future, at best it appears to be a masturbatory hobby that lets you be smug about JFK for 50+ years straight, at worst it makes you some annoying asshole who goes around saying shit like “denying the existence of snuff films is leftist flat earth” for attention.
Also Programmed To Kill is a very stupid book.
Within the context of himself, not the worst look he’s ever had.
But it definitely helps that he’s taken off that dumbass ugly cap.
I think the AI tools used for the last song was primarily to separate Lennons voice and piano from the artifacts of the poor quality demo, including a persistent hiss.
Bad sensationalist headline, should really be more clear about what uses are being discussed. He’s clearly not against the audio tools that helped on the song, but against generative AI exploitation. There’s no reversal going on.
Granted I haven’t read it, but I really don’t think a Grover Furr book about the historical debate around the secret speech is intermediate.
I’m not sure I would include a work like that at all on a general reading list but at the very least it seems like something you’d get into on an advanced focus level.
I’m also not sure Mark Fisher actually needs to be there, but I see possible arguments at least.
Anyone got any nice recommendations for romantic films, classic or otherwise, that are easily accessible on like youtube or the internet archive?
Would like to check something out with my gf on friday but I’m also very lazy and busy with working evenings all week up until then, so it’d be nice to have something simple to access.