"...pirate ranks include Jean Lafitte, a hero of The War of 1812 and whose base of operations can still be found in New Orleans."
One man's hero is another man's villain. We burned the White House in that glorious 1812 War of yours. Ha ha ha. And you do not teach that history in your schools, I learned from my American wife...
Out of jest. Historical and not eulogised Lafitte was an outlaw who smuggled goods against the laws of your country and took part in the war in exchange for a pardon for his crimes. Most historical pirates, corsairs and privateers were individuals of highly questionable ethics if not outright criminal, including my dear Francis Drake. Nevertheless, and psychologists like Mr Wright should know that, pirates come in our culture to represent a symbol of rebellion and refusal to bend to oppressive laws. If Mr Wright would like to dictate the social media avatars that academics can use to be considered respectable, we are at an all time low.
On the specific matter. I think that Mr Wright believes to be saved by the "Such individuals include, but are not limited to" premised sentence. I have seen it used as a safeguard from accusations of discrimination, by people who then maintain that their mentioning those categories is just in order to encourage submissions from underrepresented groups, but does not limit submissions to them nor has any bearing in the actual process of selection, which is done on merit.
Unfortunately I fear that the initial statement defeats that purpose... "The editorial leadership team for the Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science seeks nominations for 4 editorial fellowship positions for early-career psychologists from historically underrepresented groups." There is no "not limited to" clause. Pretty damning.
I miss, though, as a historian, the barb about studying Fascism only on the right. Fascism is by definition a very specific and historically detailed ideology of the right. Totalitarianism on the left takes different names and different shapes, although it is equally illiberal and murderous.
I have not read Jason Stanley. Does he give a generic illiberal, authoritarian attitude the name of Fascism, in the way of Antifa? Because if he does, he is a REALLY poor scholar.
"Why I won't bother pursuing a PhD" part the umpteenth
"...pirate ranks include Jean Lafitte, a hero of The War of 1812 and whose base of operations can still be found in New Orleans."
One man's hero is another man's villain. We burned the White House in that glorious 1812 War of yours. Ha ha ha. And you do not teach that history in your schools, I learned from my American wife...
Out of jest. Historical and not eulogised Lafitte was an outlaw who smuggled goods against the laws of your country and took part in the war in exchange for a pardon for his crimes. Most historical pirates, corsairs and privateers were individuals of highly questionable ethics if not outright criminal, including my dear Francis Drake. Nevertheless, and psychologists like Mr Wright should know that, pirates come in our culture to represent a symbol of rebellion and refusal to bend to oppressive laws. If Mr Wright would like to dictate the social media avatars that academics can use to be considered respectable, we are at an all time low.
On the specific matter. I think that Mr Wright believes to be saved by the "Such individuals include, but are not limited to" premised sentence. I have seen it used as a safeguard from accusations of discrimination, by people who then maintain that their mentioning those categories is just in order to encourage submissions from underrepresented groups, but does not limit submissions to them nor has any bearing in the actual process of selection, which is done on merit.
Unfortunately I fear that the initial statement defeats that purpose... "The editorial leadership team for the Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science seeks nominations for 4 editorial fellowship positions for early-career psychologists from historically underrepresented groups." There is no "not limited to" clause. Pretty damning.
I miss, though, as a historian, the barb about studying Fascism only on the right. Fascism is by definition a very specific and historically detailed ideology of the right. Totalitarianism on the left takes different names and different shapes, although it is equally illiberal and murderous.
I have not read Jason Stanley. Does he give a generic illiberal, authoritarian attitude the name of Fascism, in the way of Antifa? Because if he does, he is a REALLY poor scholar.