Sunday, November 25, 2018

"Diversity" in Academia: How the Ivory Tower Stays White


Academia wants diversity without diverse people. 

One of the ironies of academia is that it preaches diversity while at the same time locking its doors to people of color. This problem has become more apparent in recent years, with the academic job market crashing just as new cohorts of non-white PhD Candidates are beginning to seek tenure-track positions. This has not been helped by the fact that Universities have attempted to address the issue of job scarcity with solutions that perpetuate academia's lack of diversity. Indeed, in attempting to address the lack of available tenure-track positions, universities have barred people of color from the Ivory Tower and secured its status as a white institution.

Blogger Tricks

Wednesday, November 14, 2018

Review - Among the Powers of the Earth: The American Revolution and the Making of a New World Empire

Eliga H. Gould. Among the Powers of the Earth: The American Revolution and the Making of A New World Empire, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2012 1 + 301 pp. $40.00. Notes, bibliography, and index.
          
            Eliga H. Gould’s Among the Powers of the Earth: The American Revolution and the Making of A New World Empire is less about the revolution itself than it is about the external forces that influenced the early United States and its foreign and domestic policy. For Gould, these external forces came largely in the form of Europe’s power and influence. Indeed, early in the book he notes how, while “the revolution enabled the Union’s citizens to begin making their own history...the history that they made was often the history that others were willing to let them make” (2). In other words, the revolution did not so much mark the entrance of the United States as an influential nation on the world stage as it did signify the desire of U.S. political leaders to create a European inspired nation that might eventually be worthy of having a place “among the powers of the earth.” This meant, according to Gould, integrating the United States into the legal geography established by Europe’s law of nations, a set of “neither coherent nor binding” treaties that governed everything from war to commerce between countries in Europe (5). Among the Powers of the Earth thus borrows from one of Gould’s earlier articles, which demonstrated how the thirteen colonies and the early United States were entangled in a web of European customs and traditions. In Gould’s mind, the American Revolution was not complete until the United States could be accepted as a nation in the eyes of Europeans.  

Sunday, November 11, 2018

Review - The River Flows On: Black Resistance, Culture, and Identity Formation in Early America


Walter C. Rucker. The River Flows On: Black Resistance, Culture, and Identity Formation in Early America, Baton Rouge, Louisiana State University Press, 2006 xii + 288 pp. $49.95. Notes, bibliography, and index.
 
          One of the major criticisms of early American history is that it ignores Africa. In the past few decades this has changed, with historians like Ira Berlin and Randy J. Sparks using the Atlantic World lens to insert Africa into otherwise Americanist histories. But some scholars, like Walter C. Rucker, argue that inserting Africa and Africans into the story is not enough. One must also seek to understand African people at a more fundamental level. For Rucker, this means acknowledging that the behavior of African Americans was "largely shaped by their African past" (4). Rucker's book, The River Flows On: Black Resistance, Culture, and Identity Formation in Early America, does this by analyzing slave revolts in North America in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. His central thesis is that African culture did in fact survive the middle passage to British North America, and that these cultural ties inspired slaves to resist chattel slavery. 


Saturday, September 9, 2017

Why Kevin Doesn't Deserve to Win America's Favorite Player



It's clear to me right now that America is divided between choosing either Cody or Kevin for America's Favorite Player. Though I am actually a big fan of Kevin, I've made it quite clear that I would rather see Cody win the award.

But perhaps a more interesting question to ask than "why should Cody win America's Favorite Player" is "why should Kevin lose?" I think I know why most people, including myself, have a soft spot for Kevin. He's genuine, witty, kindhearted, endearing, and memorable.

That said, I'd argue that there are still a number of reasons why Kevin doesn't deserve your vote. Let's talk about a few below...


Thursday, September 7, 2017

This is Why You Don't Like the Cult of Paul


Previously....on BIIIIIG PAUL!

In the past few days I've gone over why Big Brother 19 is hard to watch, and why, as a result, I think Cody should win America's Favorite Player. In this article I'm going to do something similar, but with a twist.

First, I'm going to delve into why each of the remaining houseguests are either unlikable or likable. I've also cooked up a list of character traits that I think defines each of these people, from the manipulative Paul to the gullible Jason.

Lastly, for each houseguest I've boiled all of this down to a number ranging from one to ten. A "one" means this person is less likable than Frankie Grande; a "ten" means this person is the second coming of Dan Gheesling (or whoever you really like in Big Brother's history).

My intention isn't to anger fans of Paul or his followers; I simply wish to put in written word something that captures why the Cult of Paul is despised by so many.

That said, let's do this.