*rubs hands* I was born for this moment. Here are several: (1) They are actually not very good at queueing or general bodily awareness and organization in public spaces. See also: no custom for which side of the pavement to walk on. …
(2) The food can actually be very good. Even traditional English foods such as pies, Cumberland sausages, etc. are good. Not known for coffee (if I call it a ‘coffee spoon’ people flip) but their coffee options are also very good. Good tomatoes. Better bread than in US. …
(3) The English can actually be a very warm and friendly people. They just hate the idea of that so never cop to it. Plus they need to be nudged off a default suspicion of other people before you see this. But it’s there. …
(4) It’s not so much dry humor as goofy humor. I don’t understand where the dry humor stereotype comes from. Maybe it’s just a US stereotype of the English? And before you go there, no, it’s not that I’m missing the jokes. …
(5) [last one] A bap slathered in unmelted butter with nothing but a rasher of bacon in between is not a real breakfast sandwich, don’t @ me Gregg’s. /end
N.B. I intentionally kept these relatively unrelated to straight partisan politics because generalizing about a whole nation in those ways is sure path to a trash fire in my mentions, and as a US person who lives part time in UK I hate terrible English stereotypes of ‘Americans.’
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1) This is a short thread on how and why we're getting the 'culture wars' wrong. You think e.g. Christopher Rufo similar are culture warriors fighting on the battleground of ideas (perhaps so do they). But that's wrong. ...
2) A better analogy for Christopher Rufo & co. is Oreskes and Conway's concept of 'merchants of doubt.' In plain terms, they're not 'culture warriors'; they're like the scientists who were paid to convince the public that cigarettes don't cause cancer. ...
3) More specifically, what I mean by this analogy is that they are paid by dark money orgs and interest groups to undermine the credibility of public institutions. ...
1) OK, here’s a drunk thread (as in I’m in a pub and currently drunk) / guide for picking a Premier League club to support if you’re not from the UK. N.B. I’m from the US so no regional ties to any club; Tottenham chose me in 2008. ...
2) Let’s get the obvious out of the way. On the one hand it’s easier to follow a rich superclub (Chelsea, Man U, Man City, Liverpool) because their marketing reach is huge, so if you’re abroad they’re present in a way that, say, Crystal Palace are not. ...
3) (N.B. I said ‘are not’ and not ‘is not’ bc British take clubs as a noun in the plural, whereas US would say eg ‘Crystal Palace is winning...’). I digress...
The anti-Critical Race Theory panic comes in large part from Intelligent Design Theory (IDT)—people who don’t think evolution is true—and has adherents in the anti-vaxx conspiracy movement. These people are against science.
The reason they openly admit that what they’re calling CRT isn’t actually CRT is that they don’t believe in facts or truth. They are anti-science, anti-fact, anti-truth.
1) Here's a short thread combining thoughts on @CT_Bergstrom et al recent warning paper about the potentially catastrophic impact of ad-driven social media, algorithmic search, etc. *and* ... what's going on with 'critical race theory':
2) In particular I'm concerned about the possibility that many if not most adults' intellectual life is strictly in the form of reading and responding to online bullshit on Twitter, FB, etc.
3) By 'intellectual life' I mean time and energy dedicated to thinking through ideas and their implications. I worry that the social media effects we all talk about for being bad--misinformation, disinformation, filter bubbles, amplification, etc. ...
1) A searching thread on how to advocate for people in less advantaged positions than mine. I.e. I’m asking for *your* thoughts and advice, no matter who you are, not offering mine. The issue that prompted this for me is …
2) I read as approachable in a lot of ways but also as someone with the privilege to stand up to people. [Both are for the most part true.] So I’m a go-to person for a lot of students and contingent colleagues who’ve been ignored by those who are supposed to hep them. …
3) I also have a very particular sense of justice, bordering on pathological, which means I honestly relish righting wrongs. I mean, I wrote a book on Don Quixote and that wasn’t an accident. But here’s a snag:
1) Here are some context notes about the tenure review process for journalists and others commenting on the @nhannahjones case. Observing these might help reduce confusion and misinformation:
2) The substantive academic merit case for tenure is decided by a committee typically called something like 'tenure and promotion' or 'promotion and tenure.' It's widely regarded as the most challenging, arduous committee to be on bc of how extensive and rigorous the process is.
3) At larger institutions that committee makes recommendations after a similar process happens at the level of the department or school (school of journalism, of engineering, etc.). But in either or both cases, the recommendations of such committees are where the substance is. ..