50 Assorted Magazines - January 23 2020. De Sapio V. Advanced Analytical Dynamics. Theory and App. 2017. "Karrs memoir is searching and profound, one that will ignite discussions about self-control, childhood wounds, parenthood, and having faith. "–Al Woodworth. This Assorted Books Collection - December 12 2019 was updated on 02/14/20 13:40:03 +03:00. How to Hack Whats App Account (2017) Pdf,Epub,Azw3) Gooner. Incurvati L. Conceptions of Set and the Foundations of Math 2020.
HUGE COLLECTION IELTS MATERIALS. 35 Comments Facebook Twitter RSS Feed print Comments 3. No consideration given by either side that there had been, and continue to be, native Americans whose fate predated and was far worse than that of the slaves. No mention of the fact, and such it was, that the American Revolution was essentially another battle in England's War of the Three Kingdoms. One could also easily make the case that the War Between the States was also the result of the English affair. One could also easily make the case that the War Between the States was also the result of the English affair. I've never heard of such a case, so you're invited to make it here so we can see how plausible it is. Nodnarb the Nasty December 28, 2019 at 11:57 pm Hide Replies 3 Attacking the 1619 project is useful, but not if you're going to do it from a website/org that employs neo-Confederates, as AIER does. (Jeffrey Tucker helped found The League of the South and wrote Ron Paul's racist newsletters. Get some new friends Phil Magness. > native Americans whose fate predated and was far worse than that of the slaves. Native American were the first Slaves and before 1619 though. Well before 1619. Slaves of other tribes, just like the rest of the world. You're missing the point. Slaves are valuable property to whomever owns them. The native Americans that were held as slaves by the European invaders didn't work out so well. They weren't enthusiastic about the work, died easily, and had knowledge of the country and allies that aided their escape. Thus the most practical procedure was to simply kill as many as possible and drive the others away. They were regarded as vermin. The African slaves, on the other hand, were very valuable, both for their labor and their use as breeding stock for more slaves. Nobody was interested in breeding native Americans. They wanted them to be extinct. 4. I live in Bergen County, and I passed it while heading back from the airport, and I was just wondering, like, how exactly is this supposed to make money? It's like the retail equivalent of Facebook or snapchat. The real money from malls comes from its selection of stores, not from the entertainment, and there are already plenty of malls in Bergen County, particularly Paramus. And the idea of going to a mall to ski is. I mean I suppose there are no options in Jersey, but still. They are over investing in entertainment, with is not going to make back the investment, in a bid to develop a status and draw people to the mall, and then they monetize it by hoping they monopolize the market and people stay to buy stuff, even though they are under investing in options for monetization. Which is exactly the business model of a silicon valley high tech startup. And it's a very risky proposition, especially given that this is a multi-billion dollar investment. All the codpieces I've tried are too small. I distinctly recall we had a discussion on codpieces in the comments section of MR about a year ago. Seems not just Trump but fashion mavens are reading MR comments! The tone of the Guardian codpiece article is more "aww" than awe. Eldridge Clever beat them to it in the 70s. Brother Eldridge was ahead of his time in so many ways. Most of the scientist I know are conservative, so I don't hate them. I'd say the problem conservatives have with scientists is the abuse of science committed by them. So many issues with replication, and in topics that are politicised, outright fraud - IPCC conclusions vs what the science is if you dig in, EPA policies vs what their scientists recommend, ect. I've often found that most scientists I know in objective studies are conservative, and in subjective studies are liberal. Selectivity bias I suppose. Actually it's more like 10-20% of scientists in objective studies are conservative compared to 0-10% in subjective studies. 10-20% of scientists in academia possibly. That us what we have become: 5 Did we really need "performativity" to explain this? Or maybe it is Straussian. the use of performativity demonstrates what is wrong with scientists. Oh, man, there are so many levels here... 5. It's becoming increasingly common for people to believe that scientists will lie (if only through omission, but sometimes outright) to further their careers or economic prospects. The reproducibility problems in the social sciences and the frequency with which findings are withdrawn in medical research have given the impression that scientists will do almost anything for tenure, a grant, or to get their paper into a top publication. The stakes in academia are too high to expect normal humans to resist the temptation to "adjust the numbers" a little to achieve statistical significance. It is common to believe that on politically fraught issues such as climate change, scientists will only present those findings that are politically acceptable within their tribe, or spin those findings in the best possible light for their tribe. Because the academic tribe is so closely identified with the political left, there is no longer any presumption of objectivity. This is particularly true when university campuses are seen as the home of political correctness and cancel culture. You can't have both that and objectivity. Yep. Thirty years ago, probably even 20, I would have assumed best effort as a default for scientists - they might be wrong, but they werent intentionally cooking the books. Thats no longer the case, even in the hard sciences. For the social sciences, unless its an admission against interest, there is just no way to know, but as you suggest, Occam suggests skepticism is the appropriate default. 5) Can someone do a study separating hard sciences from social sciences and how people feel about them? The way these things are phrased it sounds like conservatives are rejecting physics and engineering, when it is probably highly (completely. skewed towards social science-type headlines like “Science says income redistribution makes everyone happier. ” This is coming from a biased practitioner of the hard sciences... Rows over credit for e. g. the discovery of Calculus, or HIV, suggest that any difference is not due to the moral qualities of the scientists themselves, but how clear cut the discoveries are, and how easy it is to confirm them. "The Art of Computer Systems Performance Analysis" by Jain mentions biased comparisons as early as section 1. 2 "Some games are intentional, because the proponents of a system want to show the superiority of their proposed alternatives. " I dont think scientists are necessarily lying, but it is really hard to go against group think. Capitalism works so well because at the end of the day companies can go out of business if they have the wrong ideas about what works. This aspect of correction is entirely missing in most academic spheres, you can be consistently wrong forever without consequences. "you can be consistently wrong forever without consequences. " 1 "Because the academic tribe is so closely identified with the political left, there is no longer any presumption of objectivity. You can't have both that and objectivity. " If plain English, you mean the findings hurt your felleings (and some big businesses'profits) therefore they can not be true. No, he means they lie. He was just being nice. You though do seem to have an emotional attachment to this 3. The disputed claim in subject two is that Abraham Lincoln's "reputation as a racial egalitarian has been exaggerated. Magness shows that the critics have bad arguments against this claim, but does that mean Hannah-Jones has the upper hand? As Magness says, Lincoln did not did not pursue this course [colonization] out of personal racial animosity. *Quite the contrary. his public and private statements consistently link the policy to his personal fears that former slaveowners would continue to oppress African-Americans after the Civil War. Even if the critics' counter-arguments are not good, Hannah-Jones would seem to remain quite wrong on this point. I quit reading the moment I realized that we were going to ignore not just the native slaves from before 1492, but also all the slavery of the hundred years prior in Puerto Rico and Florida. 1619 was not some magical date. Nor was the American slave trade particularly large (Brazil took in far more slaves) nor brutal (the average Haitian slave at independence had been born in Africa after hundreds of years of importing slaves. If slavery had such massive explanatory power, we see it wielding far more influence in places like Turkey, Brazil, and China. As far as colonization. Had I been alive back then, I might well have lit off to Liberia. Absent a very strong commitment to putting down white resistance, history had shown very little in the way of amicable relations after successful violent emancipation conflicts. Lighting out to some new colony might not mean that my ancestors were inferior, but that they quite rightly anticipated that the ex-Confederates were incapable or unwilling to let them live in peace. You could believe blacks are inferior. Or you could believe that whites were ungovernable on race issues. Either were consistent with Lincoln's actions. Sure maybe he is forcing the burden to be born by the innocent, but that may have been all that was practical at the time. Most of the continental U. S. is not suitable for sugercane farming so that served to limit the extent of slavery. That said, on the eve of the Civil War, Mississippi and South Carolina were majority-slave states and the overall U. population was over 10% slave - whether this counts as "particularly large" or not is purely subjective. The numbers I have seen suggest that 11 or 12 million slaves were brought to the Americas during the Transatlantic Slave Trade. Of those only around 300, 000 went to North America. The US is notable not so much for the number of slaves nor the percentage, rather they are notable for the segregation (low rates of manumission, interbreeding, and intermarriage) and its relatively high survival rates for slaves. If we include enslaved native Americans, the numbers show the US to be an even larger outlier. If we include serfs and at least some of the "indentured servant" chicanery (e. the 99 year indentures in Texas, the rape clause for extended indentures in VA) we still end up with the US being pretty low in the scheme of things. As low as Canada or even the British Empire writ large? Not so much. But the real problem was much worse and larger all around in most human societies, contemporaneous or otherwise. International Pants Apparatus December 28, 2019 at 11:01 pm 31 Sane people worldwide understand that the "1619 project" is a monumental sham with no purpose other than to promote the electoral prospects of the Democrat Party. but that would exclude Tyler, wouldn't it? Golly, our death-spiraling mall just has a collection of those coin-operated "rides. Sometimes the jewelry store or the Macy's shoe department get knocked over, so I guess that's a little like flashmob entertainment. Sometimes too I'll come over the rise and notice the bigtop of the Circo Hermanos Vazquez filling the parking lot of the defunct Sears. I'm so glad they had the wisdom years ago to excavate the biggest hill in the area and wrap it in concrete for our beautiful mall. That the N. Y. T. wants desperately to help steer "the national discourse" over the perceived history of slavery in the US is no surprise, but the N. can yet be faulted for its defensive journalistic efforts. NO FURTHER ACCOUNTS OF THE HISTORY OF SLAVERY IN COLONIAL AMERICA (not even partly-informed journalistic accounts) MERIT THE WRITING OR THE READING UNTIL SUFFICIENT NOTE IS FIRST TAKEN OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE INSTITUTION OF SLAVERY THAT FLOURISHED ACROSS EUROPE FOR AT LEAST THREE MILLENNIA PRIOR TO 1500 CE. (American journalists and academics, nota bene. Seriously: what responsible American academic has embarked on such study? If Times editors are uneasy with black urban unrest simmering up and down the length of the DC-to-Boston Corridor, they instead might want to own up to the role New England shipowners played in trafficking slaves with their rum-slave-molasses trade triangle, highly lucrative trade for underwriting the region's mechanization and industrialization through and just past the end of the colonial era. - or instead of citing fabled date 1619, the responsible editors of the N. may instead elect to treat the Columbia College "Doctors Riot" of April 1788, a civil disturbance (in which A. Hamilton was compelled to intervene) resulting in part from medical school anatomists' body-snatching practices in the cemeteries of enslaved and freed blacks. (A good dramatic treatment of this affair would make for a worthy Broadway successor to Hamilton: The Musical. ) 5: Trump got elected because the Liberal/Progressive policy of Obama was an economic failure. Yet L/P's have worked very hard to hide this horrible fact from themselves, creating a massive mythology about racism, Russian interference, cheating, money, bla bla bla; The same processes is going on with L/P explanations of why trust in science is declining. The real problem is that science is just increasingly bad and getting worse. But delusional L/Ps, rather than acknowledging the actual problem, instead try to explain rising distrust of science through some quackery about conservative identity and religion. Newspapers can't even get today's events right. But analyze and revise 400 years of history? No problem! Comments for this post are closed.
Our editors handpick the products that we feature. We may earn money from the links on this page. Oprah's Book Club picks, scintillating short stories, and enthralling novels top our list. Temi Oyelola For the December issue of O, the Oprah Magazine, our team rounded up some of the best books of 2019. And as our fearless leader Oprah herself says in the issue: If a year can be measured by the quantity of great reads it produced, 2019 is one for the books. So many brilliant writers bared their souls, dug deep for truth, spent years honing characters and story arcs, and did the hard work of creating literature that sears our hearts and broadens our understanding of what it means to be human. From engrossing novels like Sally Rooney's Normal People to Oprah's Book Club picks like Ta-Nehisi Coates' The Water Dancer, these book releases from the past year woke us up, haunted us, wowed us, and made us marvel again at the magic writers can create with words. 1 An Oprah's Book Club Pick! The Water Dancer, byTa-Nehisi Coates Coates's powerful debut novel, Oprah's inaugural pick for the Apple iteration of her Book Club, chronicles an enslaved mans journey out of bondage aided by a superpower he didnt know he had. “I have not felt this way about a book since Beloved, ” Oprah said. "I knew early on the book was going to cut me up. I ended up with my soul pierced. ” Read an excerpt here. 2 Maggie Brown & Others: Stories, by Peter Orner A pregnant woman goes missing in the Cascades. A former camp counselor confronts mortality and the echoes of his own desires. A Jewish community feuds in Fall River, Massachusetts. Orner brings grace and vigor to the short-story form in a preeminent collection, earning a place alongside Carver and Munro as he ranges across a broad emotional register. 3 The Dutch House, by Ann Patchett Occasionally, the most radical storytelling is a riff on “once upon a time. ” Here, the acclaimed novelist unfurls an enthralling tale of a 20th-century Hansel and Gretel and the suburban-Philadelphia manor that haunts them. Danny and Maeve Conroy cobble together lives both content and contentious in a beautifully crafted exploration of one familys fractured connections. 4 Dreyer's English, by Benjamin Dreyer Brimming with wit and revelatory wisdom, this style manual–cum–linguistic jubilee from Random Houses copy chief (a frequent corrector of the presidents grammar on Twitter) entertains as it enlightens. Covering everything from the true uses of semicolons and the notion that “clichés should be avoided like the plague” to the redundancy of “assless chaps, ” Dreyers guide is a gift to sticklers as well as those who need to relearn the basics. And remember: “There is a world of difference between turning in to a driveway, which is a natural thing to do with ones car, and turning into a driveway. ” 5 The Need, by Helen Phillips In an ingenious, edgy speculative fiction that finds the monstrous in the notion of domestic tranquillity, Phillips leads us into a fraught daymare in which a young mothers anxiety—exacerbated by insomnia and her husbands absence—serves as a parable for all that keeps us up at night. 6 Sontag: Her Life and Work, by Benjamin Moser Susan Sontag once confessed shed hoped “being famous would be more fun. ” She may have found celebrity unamusing, but this evocative and entertaining biography of the late cultural doyenne is anything but. Moser renders Sontags ascent to intellectual stardom as a rich and often rollicking affair. 7 Patsy, by Nicole Dennis-Benn Like New York City itself, Dennis-Benn s sweeping second novel—about a young Jamaican mother who leaves her homeland and her 5-year-old daughter for the promised freedom of the Big Apple—swells with gritty grandeur. An unflinching rumination on ambition and ambivalent motherhood, Patsy turns a fish-out-of-water tale into a morally complex epic. Read an excerpt here. 8 Doxology, by Nell Zink Pynchon meets the Pixies in this riotous, rocking novel set in Manhattan and D. C. in the early 90s and the gentrifying decades that follow. Gen X punkers on the fringes of the downtown music scene, Pam and Daniel raise their daughter with a freedom she doesnt want. Zinks pop culture references—and caustic social commentary—sparkle in a hipster valentine to a milieu that still shapes us. 9 Lost Children Archive, by Valeria Luiselli With nods to Kerouac and Least Heat-Moon, an immense talent thrillingly reinvents the American road novel. Their family adrift, a pair of acoustic researchers and their two children drive from New York to the Southwest, recording the border refugee crisis as it etches enduring grooves on their souls and ours. 10 Grand Union: Stories, by Zadie Smith From the renowned novelist and critic comes a stirring debut collection of short fiction, exacting in its technique, jazzy in its improvisations, as it roams among drag queens, murderous soldiers, Greenwich Village puppeteers, and Hollywood icons fleeing the chaos of 9/11. Smiths versatility astounds as she weaves tapestries from “the half-done, the unfinished, the broken, the shard, ” fashioning keen reflections on our absurd world. 11 Normal People, by Sally Rooney Imagine Jane Austen as an Irish millennial, and youll grasp the zeitgeist-capturing allure of Rooney, a literary wunderkind whose wry, psychologically shrewd style makes her an astute observer of the dynamics of love. Her sophomore novel centers on the beguiling will-they-wont-they of two teenagers (Marianne, a bookish late bloomer; Connell, a once-popular jock turned social outcast) who “over the course of several years, apparently could not leave one another alone. ” Read our interview with Rooney here. 12 Red at the Bone, by Jacqueline Woodson As seductive as a Prince bop, Woodsons follow-up to Another Brooklyn is a move-to-its-own-groove multigenerational saga of racism and an unplanned teen pregnancy that throws together two disparate families. This deceptively slim novel pulses with yearning—for more, for better, for love, and for the chance to write our own stories. 13 Rules for Visiting, by Jessica Francis Kane For those needing a reminder to stop and smell the roses: Look no further than Kanes wholly palate-cleansing fourth book, about a middle-aged gardener still living with her father who embarks on a Homeric quest to revive friendships that need a little tender loving care. Read an excerpt here. 14 An Oprah's Book Club Pick! Olive, Again: A Novel Oprah's most recent Book Club pick is a vividly realized novel-in-stories that revisits the iconic title character of Strout's 2009 Pulitzer Prize-winning novel, Olive Kitteridge. Of Olive—who's now older and a tad wiser— Oprah said: She reminds me that aging is no picnic—but then again, that very vulnerability is what we all have in common and what binds us together. Read an excerpt here.
I've Seen the End of You by W. Lee Warren EPUB.
The Hand on the Wall by Maureen Johnson EPUB. Uehara R. First Course in Algorithms through Puzzles 2016.