4 ms·
I disagree. I read the full article and enjoyed it a lot. But the attempts to pull in “late capitalism” and gender / queer issues were just poor writing. It’s l
by mlthoughts2018 6y ago
I disagree. I read the full article and enjoyed it a lot. But the attempts to pull in “late capitalism” and gender / queer issues were just poor writing. It’s like mixing all the paint colors and just getting an ugly gray. There was no convincing connection to “structural inequality” in this at all, nor any sense of significant radical opposition to entrenched powers that be. Piling that stuff on just made the essay bloated. It felt more like having an unsupported agenda of radical left issues forced upon me with no serious intellectual basis or connection, with lots of language thrown in to make sure you know that the author feels those radical aspects are 100% correct (without justification) and must be taken as truth and as an assumed shared starting point for the reader. It significantly detracts from the article, lowering both the basic writing efficacy and the intellectual merit, and watering the whole thing down as an assertive (but unsupported) criticism of capitalism instead of the rather interesting discussion of negativity that it used as a bait and switch.
- belval 6y agoIt feels a little bit like the author combined two different articles. Both are good (I don't mind anti-capitalist rhetoric), but the tone change and continuity break is hard to miss.
- Nasrudith 6y agoReally it feels like they had a vocabulary list of anticapitalist terms and names to include in a separate assignment. Just dropping all of the communist bits and stating /how/ and /why/ capitalism pushes optimism would give it some intergration. It would at least fit in as a "novel or less commonly listed flaw of capitalism" instead of just including the list of top down beliefs as articles of faith.
- bsenftner 6y agoThe voice in the article is an ordinary every-day frame of reference for Eastern Europeans; you're simply reacting to the lack of an American Capitalist frame of reference and the every-day American talking points.
- mlthoughts2018 6y agoIn Eastern Europe everyone interjects assertions that don’t follow from any part of the discussion? Because that is the article’s approach to connecting topics of late capitalism and gender/queer issues and structural inequality. They are disjointedly introduced in an unmotivated, ungrounded way that violates basic, universal conventions of successful writing and communication in all nationalities. I really doubt what you are saying here. Eastern Europeans are just as capable of logical trains of thought supported by compelling writing and evidence as anyone else in the world - which is very different from this article.