I guess Graeber's answer would be "less regulations". But then, two pages earlier he told us that an "academic friend" let's students waiting so that he can play video games. So I feel like less regulations won't cut it

This is pretty much the exact justification for why a good part of (academic) bureaucracy is good, actually. Universities are a place of personal power relations, and those need to be regulated on some level

Recently it was big news in Austria that Austrian former chancellor Sebastian Kurz is in the Epstein E-mails, and that they seem to have some connection. So that's fascinating
www.derstandard.at/story/300000...

Fuck ‘em. I don’t care if they’re Democrat, Republican or Santa Claus; they need to be held accountable.

James McPherson's "Battlecry of Freedom" is certainly a page-turner

“I’ll fight until hell freezes over and then I’ll cut the ice and fight on”

What I mean is: An ambitious sociopath, who just can't wait to stake a claim

So Cruz is just the Republican's Newsom

What's actual violence that's indirect? His example immediately afterwards suggests he means a sometimes-enacted threat of violence. But that's not really actual, and it undermines his criticism of abstract theories of violence. So I don't know, it's a head-scratcher. And everything is like that

Pretty much, yeah. And some of the examples are just puzzling

My main complaint is that Frankenstein mistreats his creature. That makes everything so much less interesting. In the book, he's a "monster" because he creates life without any second thought. In the movie he's just an asshole and a bad "father". There's a million movies about that already, though

At one point, there is basically a scene where a character almost looks into the camera and says "Frankenstein is the monster". No need for subtext.