steve keeller
@keellerinstnt445.bsky.social
Crime Fiction Writer
Critical & Cultural omnivore and literary strumpet, always happy to open my legs for any bookish badinage
Hastings-based, Mark Rucker Crime Series
Dr of Cultural Studies/Gothic Marxism (but writer first & foremost)
Critical & Cultural omnivore and literary strumpet, always happy to open my legs for any bookish badinage
Hastings-based, Mark Rucker Crime Series
Dr of Cultural Studies/Gothic Marxism (but writer first & foremost)
If this is the story, plot and dialogue that works for you - go for it. I cast no judgement.
(Tho, personally, I think the Uncharted series is pretty good, and I don't see the similarity, let's just say that).
(Tho, personally, I think the Uncharted series is pretty good, and I don't see the similarity, let's just say that).
September 3, 2025 at 7:11 PM
If this is the story, plot and dialogue that works for you - go for it. I cast no judgement.
(Tho, personally, I think the Uncharted series is pretty good, and I don't see the similarity, let's just say that).
(Tho, personally, I think the Uncharted series is pretty good, and I don't see the similarity, let's just say that).
so, returning to a comment I made about a month or so back...let's just say I think those who wanted this kind of game got the game they deserved, and leave it there.
September 3, 2025 at 7:07 PM
so, returning to a comment I made about a month or so back...let's just say I think those who wanted this kind of game got the game they deserved, and leave it there.
Behind this odd epoch (something that Weber and Horkheimer never addressed) is the evangelical belief of "winning the argument," and consigning the "enemy" to the lower reaches of hell. Thus, the culture war is (as often said) a civic religion. It also gameifies the constant battle.
September 3, 2025 at 3:06 PM
Behind this odd epoch (something that Weber and Horkheimer never addressed) is the evangelical belief of "winning the argument," and consigning the "enemy" to the lower reaches of hell. Thus, the culture war is (as often said) a civic religion. It also gameifies the constant battle.
they self-generate and lead to their own industries (public speaking events, books, rallies) and become a bugeoning filip to new careers.
Obviously platforms have their own ecosystems (the hate you see below is a mirror to that on X), and merely ramps up the business model.
Obviously platforms have their own ecosystems (the hate you see below is a mirror to that on X), and merely ramps up the business model.
September 3, 2025 at 2:58 PM
they self-generate and lead to their own industries (public speaking events, books, rallies) and become a bugeoning filip to new careers.
Obviously platforms have their own ecosystems (the hate you see below is a mirror to that on X), and merely ramps up the business model.
Obviously platforms have their own ecosystems (the hate you see below is a mirror to that on X), and merely ramps up the business model.
It's weird how the discourse can envelop even the most successful professional lives, and how they then find alternative employment as a spokesperson for a cause. It used to be that polarisation was a useful marketing ploy, but - as Niklas Luhmann suggests - these causes are autopeotic
September 3, 2025 at 2:54 PM
It's weird how the discourse can envelop even the most successful professional lives, and how they then find alternative employment as a spokesperson for a cause. It used to be that polarisation was a useful marketing ploy, but - as Niklas Luhmann suggests - these causes are autopeotic
It is therefore a waste of time and resources inciting process so the X'ers and the Bluskyers can indulge themselves with their usual diet of righteous positioning, and what constitutes a fair and equitable society.
September 3, 2025 at 2:49 PM
It is therefore a waste of time and resources inciting process so the X'ers and the Bluskyers can indulge themselves with their usual diet of righteous positioning, and what constitutes a fair and equitable society.
Society is presently experiencing culture wars - in part the result of collapse of Objective Reason to Subjective Reason, the collapse of metanarratives & the real Left in favour of neo-liberalism - which the police (hardly chief exponents of semiotics and semantics) are ill-equipped to deal with.
September 3, 2025 at 2:47 PM
Society is presently experiencing culture wars - in part the result of collapse of Objective Reason to Subjective Reason, the collapse of metanarratives & the real Left in favour of neo-liberalism - which the police (hardly chief exponents of semiotics and semantics) are ill-equipped to deal with.
It's impossible to expect the police to adjudicate over whether an act of violence has taken place when "a man" (as Lineham would see it) trespasses into a female only space,with the right to self defence; or whether violence has been incited towards a woman on social media.
They are a blunt force.
They are a blunt force.
September 3, 2025 at 2:43 PM
It's impossible to expect the police to adjudicate over whether an act of violence has taken place when "a man" (as Lineham would see it) trespasses into a female only space,with the right to self defence; or whether violence has been incited towards a woman on social media.
They are a blunt force.
They are a blunt force.
you credit lineham with too much intelligence, imo.
However, in terms of law he could argue a/violence is perpetrated when - as he sees it - a man trespasses into the private space of a woman b/he suggests "if all else fails": which a lawyer could easily argue as last means of defence.
However, in terms of law he could argue a/violence is perpetrated when - as he sees it - a man trespasses into the private space of a woman b/he suggests "if all else fails": which a lawyer could easily argue as last means of defence.
September 3, 2025 at 2:37 PM
you credit lineham with too much intelligence, imo.
However, in terms of law he could argue a/violence is perpetrated when - as he sees it - a man trespasses into the private space of a woman b/he suggests "if all else fails": which a lawyer could easily argue as last means of defence.
However, in terms of law he could argue a/violence is perpetrated when - as he sees it - a man trespasses into the private space of a woman b/he suggests "if all else fails": which a lawyer could easily argue as last means of defence.
of the dialogic to bed.
In other words, one does not engage with genuine conflict, but enter a linquisitic realm pre-designed to reach agreement (only within that realm). Therefore undermining the more liberal persuasion of thought as emancipatory.
In other words, one does not engage with genuine conflict, but enter a linquisitic realm pre-designed to reach agreement (only within that realm). Therefore undermining the more liberal persuasion of thought as emancipatory.
September 3, 2025 at 12:45 PM
of the dialogic to bed.
In other words, one does not engage with genuine conflict, but enter a linquisitic realm pre-designed to reach agreement (only within that realm). Therefore undermining the more liberal persuasion of thought as emancipatory.
In other words, one does not engage with genuine conflict, but enter a linquisitic realm pre-designed to reach agreement (only within that realm). Therefore undermining the more liberal persuasion of thought as emancipatory.
There's often a school in continental philosophy that argues that - in ideal speech situations - one might reach an agreement. (Usually exponents of lifeworld)
I think it's John Searle who argues, actually, phonetics constrain context. Inhabiting a tone is to inhabit a thought, putting the rationale
I think it's John Searle who argues, actually, phonetics constrain context. Inhabiting a tone is to inhabit a thought, putting the rationale
September 3, 2025 at 12:43 PM
There's often a school in continental philosophy that argues that - in ideal speech situations - one might reach an agreement. (Usually exponents of lifeworld)
I think it's John Searle who argues, actually, phonetics constrain context. Inhabiting a tone is to inhabit a thought, putting the rationale
I think it's John Searle who argues, actually, phonetics constrain context. Inhabiting a tone is to inhabit a thought, putting the rationale
Faultless analysis, faultless solutions.
10/10.
10/10.
September 3, 2025 at 12:00 PM
Faultless analysis, faultless solutions.
10/10.
10/10.
That isn't to say (obviously) that such matters should not be "policed" by X or the part of the government that decides whether there is access to such platforms.
Merely what the police should be involved in.
Merely what the police should be involved in.
September 3, 2025 at 10:32 AM
That isn't to say (obviously) that such matters should not be "policed" by X or the part of the government that decides whether there is access to such platforms.
Merely what the police should be involved in.
Merely what the police should be involved in.
Had he suggested: "Kick X in the balls" That would be a/rude b/a hate crime.
Per se stating "kick the group in the balls," is offensive, but it's not a direct inciting to go out, form a group and commit an action.
What you don't want is a Minority Report situation where police anticipate crime.
Per se stating "kick the group in the balls," is offensive, but it's not a direct inciting to go out, form a group and commit an action.
What you don't want is a Minority Report situation where police anticipate crime.
September 3, 2025 at 10:16 AM
Had he suggested: "Kick X in the balls" That would be a/rude b/a hate crime.
Per se stating "kick the group in the balls," is offensive, but it's not a direct inciting to go out, form a group and commit an action.
What you don't want is a Minority Report situation where police anticipate crime.
Per se stating "kick the group in the balls," is offensive, but it's not a direct inciting to go out, form a group and commit an action.
What you don't want is a Minority Report situation where police anticipate crime.
Both he and Shami provided salient statements that aren't reflected in the headline.
September 3, 2025 at 9:58 AM
Both he and Shami provided salient statements that aren't reflected in the headline.
Streeting is absolutely right. It isn't for the police to have oversight on comments made on social media - whether outwardly reactionary, for comedy effect, or for any other reason. It is because you're not always going to agree with someone that accounts are followed and not followed.
September 3, 2025 at 9:56 AM
Streeting is absolutely right. It isn't for the police to have oversight on comments made on social media - whether outwardly reactionary, for comedy effect, or for any other reason. It is because you're not always going to agree with someone that accounts are followed and not followed.
Before you get too dewy-eyed, it's worth noting that Venezuela works directly for Putin, supplying finance that allows it to kill ukranians and their families.
September 3, 2025 at 9:01 AM
Before you get too dewy-eyed, it's worth noting that Venezuela works directly for Putin, supplying finance that allows it to kill ukranians and their families.
The confusion arises when people equate art, literature, etc with the activites of corporates wanting to persuade people to indulge in a particular form of market decision or behaviour. You need to separate the two in your mind.
September 3, 2025 at 8:56 AM
The confusion arises when people equate art, literature, etc with the activites of corporates wanting to persuade people to indulge in a particular form of market decision or behaviour. You need to separate the two in your mind.
No-one should be de-platformed from stating a view, but that's precisely why we have regulatory oversight. Why we have rules. Why economics and wealthy capitalists doesn't ride over an ideology of a people.
September 3, 2025 at 8:54 AM
No-one should be de-platformed from stating a view, but that's precisely why we have regulatory oversight. Why we have rules. Why economics and wealthy capitalists doesn't ride over an ideology of a people.
If you support "complete freedom" (i.e. if you support Farage) you support market penetration by large capitalist corporations and their messaging. You support Elon Musk. You haven't really thought things through.
September 3, 2025 at 8:52 AM
If you support "complete freedom" (i.e. if you support Farage) you support market penetration by large capitalist corporations and their messaging. You support Elon Musk. You haven't really thought things through.
It's a false argument. It's the argument that supermarkets should not be held to regulatory standards and free to give consumer choice over coffee.
Does this mean all coffees exist on the shelf?
No. Only the large companies stock and have the budget to advertise.
So it is will all information.
Does this mean all coffees exist on the shelf?
No. Only the large companies stock and have the budget to advertise.
So it is will all information.
September 3, 2025 at 8:50 AM
It's a false argument. It's the argument that supermarkets should not be held to regulatory standards and free to give consumer choice over coffee.
Does this mean all coffees exist on the shelf?
No. Only the large companies stock and have the budget to advertise.
So it is will all information.
Does this mean all coffees exist on the shelf?
No. Only the large companies stock and have the budget to advertise.
So it is will all information.
unpick an understanding of a people that might be salient dialectically to how you should govern a war. Only a cretin thinks a soviet historically-located author would be vocaily in favour of ukranians independence, or that you should burn books.
September 2, 2025 at 11:57 AM
unpick an understanding of a people that might be salient dialectically to how you should govern a war. Only a cretin thinks a soviet historically-located author would be vocaily in favour of ukranians independence, or that you should burn books.