• @SCB
    link
    -3
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    A historian is not a leading scholar on economics. That’s a Jacobin-level tale from ya there

    • @SquirtleHermit
      link
      3
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      A historian, with a Ph.D from Yale, Professor at Columbia University, first African American woman to earn tenure there, a multiple award winning author including the MacArthur’s Fellows Program, who spent her professional career studying the concepts of race and racism in America.

      But sure, throw out her point because a website you don’t like talked about it.

      • @banneryear1868
        link
        19 months ago

        Not only that but race and racism in America as a uniquely economic relation. One of her central thesis is that this notion of race developed out of economic relations and not the other way around as it is often presented, or in her words, “as though the point of slavery was to produce white supremacy instead of cotton.” She argues that race is not a real biological category and against essentialist notions of race that suggest they are ontologically “real,” and that race is invoked to explain and justify economic inequalities. She often invokes the absurdities within so-called “biracial” or “mixed” racial categories to highlight the lack of explanatory power race offers as a point of analysis.

      • @SCB
        link
        -39 months ago

        None of this has anything to do with economics lol

        • @SquirtleHermit
          link
          3
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          First off, Neolibralism is broader in scope than just economics, reducing it to such shows a profound lack of knowledge on the subject.

          Secondly, even if your limited definition was sufficient, the study of how economic systems affects racism and societal structures is a common topic amongst scholars in her field. Racism and racial divides directly impacted the social structures of the United States, economic systems also directly affect social structures, so (intentionally or otherwise) economic systems will have an effect on the divisions along racial lines.

          Feel free to make continue glib assumptions that a respected scholar discussing a topic she spent her life researching must have missed your brilliant point that “economics is a different word than race”, but the reality is that you are dismissing a well researched point out of ignorance on both the topic at hand, and the argument being made. But do us all a favor, the next time you don’t know what you are talking about, read up or shut up.

          • @SCB
            link
            -2
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Oh I will definitely continue to mock the Jacobin blaming every I’ll in the world on “neoliberalism” because The Jacobin is not deserving of respect and “neoliberalism” loses all meaning when they say it.

            But do us all a favor, the next time you don’t know what you are talking about, read up or shut up.

            I know more than you and everyone who now or ever has or will ever work at the Jacobin

            • @banneryear1868
              link
              2
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              I know more than you and everyone who now or ever has or will ever work at the Jacobin

              “The Jacobin” sounds like how an old person says “the pokeymans.” ITS PRONOUNCED JACOBIN MOM!

              • @SCB
                link
                09 months ago

                You’re not wrong, and that’s very funny

              • @banneryear1868
                link
                19 months ago

                I know more than you and everyone who now or ever has or will ever work at the Jacobin Wendy’s

    • @banneryear1868
      link
      09 months ago

      historian is not a leading scholar on economics

      Their major area of study and impact as scholars is contextualizing the institution of slavery as a primarily economic relation. You’re being confidently incorrect.

      Jacobin is a leading left publication, if you’re a right wing or liberal you probably don’t agree with it’s editorial stance, but dismissing leading scholars on a topic because of this is pure anti-intellectualism. Here’s one of her essays Ideology and Race in American History that a prof seems to have hosted on their university site which contains some of her main ideas, you can lead a horse to water after all…

      • @SCB
        link
        -29 months ago

        Jacobin is a rag, regardless of its leanings. It is poor quality reporting, writing, and commentary.

        That it happens to be leftist is not part of why it sucks.

        • @banneryear1868
          link
          09 months ago

          Yes you have made your opinion known, I would just say don’t read it if it makes you uncomfortable. This is what happens when you get between an American and his anti-intellectualism I guess. For someone who is so self-aggrandizing about their superior intelligence it’s surprising you don’t know who someone as renown as Barbara Fields is. Your other pedestrian remarks make it obvious you don’t know about the ideas being discussed here either.

          • @SCB
            link
            -1
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            It doesn’t make me uncomfortable though. My OP says, straight out, that I read it for the laugh.

            Same reason I read shit from Heritage Foundation.

            pedestrian

            Have you ever seen the old Nicktoons show Doug?

            • @banneryear1868
              link
              0
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Only thing I’m hearing is that I need to share way more Jacobin links on lemmy now, but I’ll block you so you can’t see them, best of both worlds. Move over New Left Review it’s Bhaskar’s time to shine.

              • @SCB
                link
                09 months ago

                Lol have fun