|
cafel posted:It's actually a fairly correct title. I mean as long as you focus on the Middle East or China and not Europe. You're entirely correct that I was presuming a Euro-centric historical analysis on a piece that I've not read. ... it's a Euro-centric historical analysis anyways though isn't it.
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 03:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 16:34 |
|
|
That Irish Guy posted:You're entirely correct that I was presuming a Euro-centric historical analysis on a piece that I've not read. I haven't read it either, but I'm going to take a wild guess and say that it's incredibly Euro-centric. I'm just noting that the Islamic state had a Golden Age of art and science before the twin pressures of the Mongols and Crusaders ended it. I actually want to read it now out of a perverse sense of curiosity.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 04:48
|
|
|
The first heading under the High Middle Ages Chapter is literally "Islam vs Civilization".
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 05:48
|
|
|
cafel posted:I haven't read it either, but I'm going to take a wild guess and say that it's incredibly Euro-centric. I'm just noting that the Islamic state had a Golden Age of art and science before the twin pressures of the Mongols and Crusaders ended it. Not to debunk the idea of perpetual western military prowess, but the Arabs were thriving in the midst of the crusades. The period of time considered to be the Islamic golden age begins right before the first crusade. If anything, the Muslims used the crusaders as just another chess-piece for their own internal disputes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 06:22
|
|
|
Bait and Swatch posted:Not to debunk the idea of perpetual western military prowess, but the Arabs were thriving in the midst of the crusades. The period of time considered to be the Islamic golden age begins right before the first crusade. If anything, the Muslims used the crusaders as just another chess-piece for their own internal disputes. I suppose I was silently placing much more weight on the Mongols and the sacking of Baghdad than the Crusaders carving out rump states. Either way using 'Islam vs. Civilization' to describe that period is stupid enough to give me a head ache.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:The first heading under the High Middle Ages Chapter is literally "Islam vs Civilization". I wonder just how much of that chapter is spent fellating Charlie the Hammer's dusty cock? I'm betting at least 2/3rds.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 06:41
|
|
|
FMguru posted:Sullivan is a tremendous piece of poo poo. You forgot to mention his continued advocacy for racist junk eugenics that proves negroes are just born stupid, the poor dears, so there's literally nothing to be done for them, might as well dismantle the welfare state right now, WHY WON'T YOU LIBERALS ACCEPT THIS IRON-CLAD SCIENTIFIC PROOF?!?. I'd pretty much cosign all of this, and I'd like to add that his hypocritical internet hookup profile was him soliciting anonymous bareback fucks while being HIV positive.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 06:43
|
|
|
The crusades weren't really that big of a deal for the major players in Europe. They were basically just a way to get marauding youth to stop marauding in Europe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
pd187 posted:I'd pretty much cosign all of this, and I'd like to add that his hypocritical internet hookup profile was him soliciting anonymous bareback fucks while being HIV positive. Andrew Sullivan is sort of like the Michelle Malkin or Katie Roiphe of gay issues (i.e., someone who got attention because they bashed their own "groups"), only he is savvy enough to every once in a while take the safest controversial stance on a topic to look moderate and sane. And then he will of course play up how he was a martyr for taking that position. So he claims that the left was out to get him when he decided to defend gay marriage, but of course he doesn't mention that the reason for that was that he used gay marriage to attack the "libidinal pathology" of gay culture, and talk nonstop about how San Francisco made him sick, how you should read this book about why Matthew Sheppard totally deserved it, and how there should be no hate crime or anti-discrimination legislation. And so of course now he will be very popular again as the gay man who takes the mantle of defending the right of people to be bigots against gay people. joepinetree fucked around with this message at 07:49 on Apr 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 07:46
|
|
|
That Irish Guy posted:What in the loving hell? How could you possibly even come to such a lovely conclusion? lovely doesn't even come close to describing such a blatently wrong conclusion. Loathed as I am to defend one of these regressive assholes, the idea of the middle ages as an intellectual backwater was pretty much made up out of whole cloth by Petrarch saying that if it wasn't inspired by the Romans it must have been bullshit. The standardization of language in the period (that is, making everyones writing legible to everyone else) was one of the biggest advances that gets overlooked. And then you've got the huge reduction in slavery (that came roaring right back with the renaissance). Sure, overall the renaissance was better, but the idea of the dark ages as actively regressive is a bit much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 10:26
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Loathed as I am to defend one of these regressive assholes, the idea of the middle ages as an intellectual backwater was pretty much made up out of whole cloth by Petrarch saying that if it wasn't inspired by the Romans it must have been bullshit. The standardization of language in the period (that is, making everyones writing legible to everyone else) was one of the biggest advances that gets overlooked. And then you've got the huge reduction in slavery (that came roaring right back with the renaissance). How mainstream is FOX in the US? In Australia the loony and deliberately misinformed right wingers are top rated on radio.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 14:06
|
|
|
Hypation posted:How mainstream is FOX in the US? I'd say that it represents the mainstream of older, middle-class white male opinion. The average Fox viewer is 68 years old, so that should give you an idea of what their demographic is like.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 14:12
|
|
|
Hypation posted:How mainstream is FOX in the US? Number one most watched cable news network by a wide margin.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
Zeroisanumber posted:The average Fox viewer is 68 years old, so that should give you an idea of what their demographic is like. Whoa! Is that number for real? I want to see where you got it from. That's a seriously aging demographic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 14:54
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Number one most watched cable news network by a wide margin. Not that the other ones give you a reason to watch outside of prime time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
Bluemillion posted:Whoa! Is that number for real? I want to see where you got it from. That's a seriously aging demographic. Frank Rich broke down the numbers for a New York Magazine piece earlier in the year.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:01
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Number one most watched cable news network by a wide margin. Doesn't this still mean that most people who watch news don't watch FOX news? ie: Viewers who want FOX's spin will tune-in, but they're still greatly outnumbered by viewers getting their news from CNN, BBC, MSNBC, the broadcast networks, etc. Nobody else is really competing for that particular demographic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
Don't like 10-15 million tune into the network nightly news and about 1 million tune into Fox at best?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
I learned an interesting fact reading the new book on Roger Ailes, Fox had to put a spinning logo in the bottom right hand corner because people were writing in to complain they non spinning one was burning the image into the tv.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
Flaggy posted:I learned an interesting fact reading the new book on Roger Ailes, Fox had to put a spinning logo in the bottom right hand corner because people were writing in to complain they non spinning one was burning the image into the tv. Ha, that's great. It's amazing how one sentence can tell you so much about an audience. I got viewing habits, TVs, and means of correspondence out of that. Truly old as gently caress
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:How in the gently caress does he make comparisons between two vastly different countries with vastly different laws? Like, how do you look at Afghanistan and say "hurrr they have IDs no reason poor American's can't have IDs." The sheer amount of willful ignorance required to make a 1:1 comparison between the two is mind-boggling. The guy is a truly malignant dummy. He can't even go beyond reposting that one picture two dozen times to argue his point. He has no argument; he's a poo poo-stirrer who drinks his own poo poo. I try to stay away from the #tcot/Twitchy crowd. turnip kid fucked around with this message at 16:46 on Apr 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
lil mortimer posted:Don't like 10-15 million tune into the network nightly news and about 1 million tune into Fox at best? Fox averages a daily viewership of around 2 million. Major network nightly news averages about 10 million per network. Fox number are actually kinda sad when you realize they are the only tv news source for crazy right wingers. Except the ten extra crazy people who pay for The Blaze.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
Zeroisanumber posted:I'd say that it represents the mainstream of older, middle-class white male opinion. The average Fox viewer is 68 years old, so that should give you an idea of what their demographic is like. To be fair the average for the rest of cable news is like 62 or 63. It's an old people market all around. The median voter age is creeping up toward 50 as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
comes along bort posted:To be fair the average for the rest of cable news is like 62 or 63. It's an old people market all around. The median voter age is creeping up toward 50 as well. That's not terrible, considering the median age in the US is like 36-37 and you can't vote until you're eighteen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
So I just stumbled upon this on reddit but it is absolutely hilarious. Sean Hannity and Mark Levin called into a radio show in 2006 that was interviewing Alec Baldwin and had total hissy fits for 10 minutes. It ends with Alec declaring that Levin is Hannity's Cabin Boy. The best loving part is Sean berating Alec because Alec said some not nice things about our President while he is trying to lead troops in a war over seas, compare it to all the things Hannity says about Obama now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjnNo1j0THA
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Fox number are actually kinda sad when you realize they are the only tv news source for crazy right wingers. Except the ten extra crazy people who pay for The Blaze. I think I've seen The Blaze more then Fox News the last 6 months since Dish keeps putting Blaze on month long previews (psst Dish, nobody wants it). Yes I do subscribe to a Dish package so low even Fox won't pay for it, fringe perks. I still get Daily Show and MSNBC though, liberal media! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
comes along bort posted:To be fair the average for the rest of cable news is like 62 or 63. It's an old people market all around. The median voter age is creeping up toward 50 as well. MSNBC captures the youth market well with an average age of 59. Also to be fair, tv overall skews older.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
Vertical Lime posted:MSNBC captures the youth market well with an average age of 59. Also to be fair, tv overall skews older. Also something like a third of their audience is black. They're an outlier pretty much universally. Related to this Pew did a survey of news consumption habits a couple years back that's really interesting: http://www.people-press.org/2012/09/27/in-changing-news-landscape-even-television-is-vulnerable/   
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 20:32
|
|
|
Limbaugh spent another day ranting about how the gay fascists are suppressing the free speech of our once proud country  quote:RUSH: Ten years ago... Maybe not even that long ago. Six years ago, the polling data on gay marriage was different. You could hardly find a significant percentage of people who were for it. Now five/six years later, the polling data has done an amazing reversal, something like -- if I remember this right, and I don't have this in front of me. There was voluminous stuff I read over the weekend. There you have it. Because Obama is President fascism is on the rise and the homomafia is going to come and bedazzle your shoes if you don't shut the gently caress up with your bigoted hate speech!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
People don't change their opinions of their own free will. They have to be strong-armed by jack-booted thugs to change their minds!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
You missed the best part.quote:How many people voted for Barack Obama 'cause they really supported what he intended to do, versus how many people were afraid not to?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 22:30
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:You missed the best part. Because if you didn't vote for the black guy you'd be racist. kik2dagroin posted:Because Obama is President fascism is on the rise and the homomafia is going to come and bedazzle your shoes if you don't shut the gently caress up with your bigoted hate speech! And don't forget the bromafia. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:You missed the best part. He almost has a valid point. Except he meant it as "being afraid not to because RACIST" and not "being afraid not to because BATSHIT GOP Robber-Baron"
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
kik2dagroin posted:Limbaugh spent another day ranting about how the gay fascists are suppressing the free speech of our once proud country Good. Like, what's the reaction here? The gay mafia is going to tell people that bigots did bigoted things? Oh noooo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Good. Real intolerance is being held to account for your terrible opinions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
Bluemillion posted:Whoa! Is that number for real? I want to see where you got it from. That's a seriously aging demographic. They're the only ones with the time to waste on being constantly angry about things on the TV.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
poor nose posted:So I just stumbled upon this on reddit but it is absolutely hilarious. Sean Hannity and Mark Levin called into a radio show in 2006 that was interviewing Alec Baldwin and had total hissy fits for 10 minutes. It ends with Alec declaring that Levin is Hannity's Cabin Boy. "Alec Baldwin, I challenge you to come on my program and back up all your tough talk!" --A man who has still not been waterboarded 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
What I think is impressive is how Rush passes off his misogyny as "comedy material", in the eleventh paragraph. Yeah okay, walk it back when you get called out bro. We believe you. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 00:18
|
|
|
Mister Macys posted:What I think is impressive is how Rush passes off his misogyny as "comedy material", in the eleventh paragraph. Also he's trying to draw a link to that and giving money to a political movement. "You dumb libs he was giving money to anti-gay causes as a goof!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 16:34 |
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Good. All I can imagine when I hear this defense is some racist in the 50's railing about how "all of a sudden I'm getting vilified by the fascists who insist that interracial marriage is suddenly okay. Geez, if you dare say that you don't want interracial marriage shoved down your throat and paraded around as 'normal', then suddenly you're a racist." Not that I think Rush believes anything he says, but do people not see this obvious parallel? Surely they must see that they're on the wrong side of history.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2014 00:35
|
|
