Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
I get that it's hard to tolerate errant views when they're really ubiquitous or pernicious, and if they're offered up in bad faith by culture warriors, clown away. I'd just be inclined to avoid going "look at this rube, he took a survey class in 1995 and he remembers it!"
I think there's a degree of openness and intellectual humility that can help turn a 'dunk' into a more useful gentle corrective. But then it becomes very important to discern good-faith actors who deserve gentle correctives, and bad faith ones, who deserve the block button.
Yes - and it's possible to deploy material that meets my "scholarship, but just outdated" test and still do so in bad faith. The fact that Dunning school views of Reconstruction have remained common in textbooks doesn't mean they're not usually being deployed for ideological ends
True, I suspect if I did the ACW or Reconstruction, I would have a much less charitable frame of mind. I've no tolerance for Neo-confederate hogwash, but one sees it only rarely these days in my corner of the timeline.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
