I will continue to insist that without a real reassessment of what dialogue means and how it is co-opted, COP30 will once again leave every one who matters dissatisfied with the resulting agreements.

Estoy buscando investigadores/académicos en America Latina que esté en las humanidades (y particularmente literatura y teoría) trabajando sobre temas de la globalización, política, imperio, el medio ambiente, literatura contemporánea, etc. para conectar por aquí. Repost por favor! Y conectemos!

Estoy buscando gente en investigación/academia en America Latina que esté en las humanidades (particularmente literatura y teoría) trabajando sobre temas de globalización, política, imperio, el medio ambiente, literatura contemporánea, etc. para conectar por aquí. Repost por favor! Y conectemos!

This is one of the first things I point to when people ask me about Franco's Spain. 6,000 mass graves in a country under 200,000 square miles (for reference: Texas is 260,000 square miles)

El #MapaFosasRTVE es el primer mapa audiovisual con las 6.000 fosas comunes de la guerra civil y el Franquismo. Los restos de más de 17.000 víctimas se han podido recuperar, pero otras 12.000 personas podrían ser aún exhumadas. rtve.es/noticias/fos...

Estoy buscando investigadores/académicos en America Latina que esté en las humanidades (y particularmente literatura y teoría) trabajando sobre temas de la globalización, política, imperio, el medio ambiente, literatura contemporánea, etc. para conectar por aquí. Repost por favor! Y conectemos!

This made me laugh. Friends, we are all nerds

Post about your book! And if you're feeling extra generous, you can even post about your friends' books! 👇

Paolo Virno

Academic authors: self-promote! 💫 This is not a particularly popular account but: 🚨 If you have published a book in the last 5 years (since the hype wears off after a while), especially in the humanities, feel free to reply here and repost! 👇

As COP30 is around the corner, a reminder that dialogue is only a spectacle as long as it's framed to stifle dissent. That's the main idea in my book Resisting Dialogue: Modern Fiction and the Future of Dissent. I discuss the issue more directly in "The Failure of Climate Dialogue" (see below)

As COP30 is around the corner, a reminder that dialogue is only a spectacle as long as it's framed to stifle dissent. That's the main idea in my book Resisting Dialogue: Modern Fiction and the Future of Dissent. I discuss the issue more directly in "The Failure of Climate Dialogue" (see below)

Read and read and read!

Are you teaching an environmental studies/Global South/Postcolonial and Global Studies class? If so, as the COP30 climate talks get closer, you may want to check out/assign my recent open-access article "The Failure of Climate Dialogue: Why Global South Voices Must Be Climate Talk Leaders" 👇

Not great

Read my friends, read! Purchase, borrow, pass on!

More reading to do!

I develop these ideas in this open-access article recently out with Public Humanities: www.cambridge.org/core/journal...

I insist one of the main issues of the climate problem is dialogue, how it's weaponized, neutralized, and defanged. www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...

I insist one of the main issues of the climate problem is dialogue, how it's weaponized, neutralized, and defanged. www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...

... and read some more!

More books! Get them! Read them! Lend them!

Let's go! Who doesn't need more books!

Post about your book! And if you're feeling extra generous, you can even post about your friends' books! 👇

Read more my friends!

A great endorphin boost is to help a colleague spreading the word on their book!

All hail Skeletor

Read up! 👇

One of the big questions of the climate problem is the meaning of "a meeting of voices" precisely because, even though policy, science, etc. are crucial, dialogue (and its cooptation) are the front line of how frameworks are decided and how people's awareness is shaped

All hail Skeletor

Read up! 👇

Read up! 👇

Read up! 👇

Academic authors: self-promote! 💫 This is not a particularly popular account but: 🚨 If you have published a book in the last 5 years (since the hype wears off after a while), especially in the humanities, feel free to reply here and repost! 👇

A great endorphin boost is to help a colleague spreading the word on their book!

Read and, if you can, support university and indie presses!

Read! Read! Read! 👇

A moratorium where "communication" is not siloed to the professional world of "mass communication" (media) and it recognizes the labor of so many people. A doctor who knows how to speak to a patience is, in my view, an expert in communication

Not great

One of the big questions of the climate problem is the meaning of "a meeting of voices" precisely because, even though policy, science, etc. are crucial, dialogue (and its cooptation) are the front line of how frameworks are decided and how people's awareness is shaped

Submit (your work)!

What's the incentive for academics and and other who are outside of "journalism"/the "op-ed world" if newspaper/magazine editors will continue to mangle the stories they write to the point we constantly see authors saying what was published has little to do with what the author turned in?

Beginning of the project/End of the project

Una analogia aleccionadora contra la IA es que si puede pensar, como argumentan algunos estúpidamente, entonces también puede votar. Si te parece bien que la IA "vote" (por ti, etc.), "escriba," or "cree," entonces te debería parecer bien que "vote" (por ti, etc.)

A good, cautionary analogy against AI is that if it can think, as some foolishly argue, then it can also vote. If you are OK with AI "thinking" (for you, etc.), "writing," or "creating," then you should be comfortable with it "voting" (for you, etc.)

Read up! 👇

Una analogia aleccionadora contra la IA es que si puede pensar, como argumentan algunos estúpidamente, entonces también puede votar. Si te parece bien que la IA "vote" (por ti, etc.), "escriba," or "cree," entonces te debería parecer bien que "vote" (por ti, etc.)

A good, cautionary analogy against AI is that if it can think, as some foolishly argue, then it can also vote. If you are OK with AI "thinking" (for you, etc.), "writing," or "creating," then you should be comfortable with it "voting" (for you, etc.)

Indeed, how *is* your campus pantry doing?

The other argument is that the profession is increasingly more apocalyptic for scholars younger or more precarized than us and while we are increasingly powerless to fight the structures we can at least do what we can to make it less inhospitable