3 ms·
Answer: No. I hate to invoke it, as it ends up not adding anything to the discussion, but Betteridge's law of headlines comes screaming out of this article [0]
by Balgair 10y ago
Answer: No.
I hate to invoke it, as it ends up not adding anything to the discussion, but Betteridge's law of headlines comes screaming out of this article [0].
I know this was only published ~6 days after the election, but I don't see how any editor could have let this one out after Trump's win. Like, guys, even in your own little sphere of Marxism and leftyism, you have to recognize that the large majority of elected representatives in the US federal, state, and local govs are very red. Let alone the rightward swings Europe and East Asia are taking. Like, nothing you are saying is getting out there to the people in the democracies that are actually voting. If you are claiming to be more public then how do you reconcile these rightward swings, are you then causing them with the increased leftish talk? This article made no sense with what is happening and felt like there are fingers in their ears.
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...
- gipp 10y agoThat's a little simplistic, don't you think? The article was more about the resurgence of a particular subculture than about culture at large. "Intellectual discourse," however you define it, is something that affects larger society only on the timescale of many years. The article was much more about optimism for the future (in a very restricted way) than for the present.