1. johnconley said: "The only plausible explanation for these findings is that a considerable number of transoceanic voyages in both directions across both major oceans were completed between the 7th millennium BC and the European age of discovery." I'm sorry, but that's some of the stupidest shit I've ever heard. From an academic standpoint, the mere idea of ancient Egyptian sailors visiting the western hemisphere is laughable right off the bat. Do you really believe this stuff?




    I always really wonder what kind of reaction people are expecting when they send messages like this. Are my feelings supposed to be hurt? It’s not like I wrote that paper.

    I don’t even have to check; the quoted sentences are from an article from the Sino-Platonic papers, related to the Warring States Project at University of Massachusetts at Amherst. The whole point of the project and the format change of the publication to open access was as a challenge to academic gatekeeping, with a focus on unconventional research.

    If anyone would like to read all 273 pages of Scientific Evidence for Pre-Columbian Transoceanic Voyages to and From the Americas by John L. Sorenson and Carl L. Johanssen, you can do so.

    Not sure where you’re getting the “ancient Egyptian sailors” thing from. But it’s a sad academic world indeed if saying that no one ever traveled across the Atlantic ocean in this particular 2,000+ year span, NO EXCEPTIONS EVER!!! is perfectly reasonable, but saying that it’s possible that someone may have done so since that is a massive amount of time is “laughable”.

    But hey, who am I to challenge the assumptions and easily-memorized generalizations you’ve accrued in your undergrad education? I’m sure you’ll go quite far without ever questioning what you’ve learned from your textbooks, which of course could never possibly have some kind of agenda like a free tumblr blog does. ;) Yay! you win! Enjoy your life full of self-satisfaction over your extremely narrow, yet widely accepted worldview.

    Not to mention “wah wah its so stupid” isn’t an argument at all.

    Which I’d only really point out if it wasn’t so obvious that johnconley expects me to be very emotionally invested in their personal approval of things I post.

    I’m pretty sure that part of the point of colonization in the first place was the end result that your great great grandchildren can stomp around like Godzilla yelling “COLUMBUS DISCOVERED AMERICA NO EXCEPTIONS” and receive near-universal applause for doing so, or at least an A+ in Intro to World History class. And then you get to call anyone who questions this rather questionable narrative “laughable” and “the stupidest sh*t [you’ve] ever heard”.

    I mean…that’s the point of invading a continent and burning their histories, and then literally forcing the people there to rewrite their history with your approval and supervision, right? You get to control what is “acceptable” history, and what is “the stupidest sh*t [you’ve] ever heard”.

    It doesn’t matter whether or not “wah wah it’s so stupid” is a real argument.  You can go your whole life without ever questioning it or challenging it, and you’ll be rewarded. And if you’re white, you get the added self-esteem boost of “only white people ever did anything worth mentioning in History classes.” And actually enforce this narrative by making it illegal to teach anyone otherwise.  What’s not to love?

    You get to push everyone else’s history out of the way, make them electives, call them nonsense, and laugh at them. You get to marginalize other narratives.

    That’s not news to me. This project is about questioning these narratives, and coming to my inbox to inform me that you learned NOT to question these narratives isn’t something I’m obligated to give a crap about. In no uncertain terms, everything about the original message says “I have already made up my mind”. My reaction is, “good for you; I’m still interested in learning something new.”

    You’re right, of course, “wah wah it’s so stupid” is NOT an argument. And I don’t think it was meant to be one, either. So maybe we should all think about what it is meant to be, instead.

    At the same time, you have to admit that “pre-Columbian voyages” has always been an extremely touchy subject in scholarship. Even the accepted fact of Viking settlement took considerable argument to establish in scholarship, and then only after the confirmation of archeological remains verified a written/formerly oral source.

    What’s really interesting me about this study is that, if true, this would very likely mean that the proportions in the genocide of the natives of America tip (more) decisively towards colonizers actively killing them, since it would show that the introduction of Old World parasites and, probably, diseases had not resulted in the death of as many indigenous previously.

    What’s also a little worrying to me from a scholarly point of view, which often worries me due to my research interests in cultural exchange, is that if this research is true it indicates a gap in the historical record which we can never satisfactorily close without the landmark discovery of an entirely new written source.

    Also, can I just say that I love this paper series just for the name Sino-Platonic Papers, since I really feel like Platonism embedded in Indian philosophy and transferred into some Chinese philosophies?

  2. magictransistor:

    Will Sweeney

    (Source: alakazamlabel.com)

  3. rawgothinsurrectionnn:

Write this on my tombstone


    Write this on my tombstone

  4. Layla does the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge.

    (Source: ohyeahlaylael)

  5. scspeak said: What are some thoughts about West Asia? Though contemporarily recognized as the Middle East, I’ve had some discourse amongst people within U.S. Pan Asian communities and/or those with cultural ties in that particular region that went back & forth of whether there could be a claim of Asian identity (I’m still just scratching the surface of this). I’m wondering what are other people’s thoughts? Taking into account of our relation to the term "orientalism" with our histories in being racialized.


    My answer will cover the individual answer and the broader academic answer: 

    First: That as a personal individual, I do not (and can not) have an opinion about the Asian Identity in the U.S. or otherwise. This is because I myself am not Asian in any framework, and as a scholar, I’d rather not define who can and cannot subscribe to an identity that isn’t my own. Aside from telling you that if you’re not Asian, don’t say you are, I can’t really claim anything. 

    Second: My own approach is therefore, covered in the FAQs:

    #FAQ #3: So Who is Asian, then?

    Whoever identifies as such. This is not really the purpose of this blog. You will find posts about people who are not considered Asian here, as long as the events transpire in Asia. 

    Third: The definition game of “so where/what is Asia?” is also played out and explained in the FAQs: 

    […] For more on defining Asia, please read Columbia’s What is Asia?Asia is NOT a separate continent. Asia is part of the Eurasian Continental plate, and all “divides” are purely constructed. 

    So on a scholarly level, when you come down to it, you’re playing the “what do words and labels mean?” game. Asia is a social, political, cultural, and geographic construct. Really, I encourage people to read the link I have there, it covers the basic questions at play. 

    Really, all of AFE is easy to access and read through: http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/geography/

    There are large discourses on how Asia has been defined, when it was defined, and by whom. 

    You’ll also find that Orientalism refers to North Africa, the Middle East (and sometimes) the rest of Asia — usually East Asia. This can be confusing — Orientalism had predominately referred to the Islamic world, not a general Asian one.

    The text for those wanting to dive right into the theory of this concept, is, of course, Edward Said’s Orientalism. A quick google will pull it up. 

    Now for many, it seems that Orientalism generally might be applied to all of Asia, not just the Islamic dominated parts. After all — chinoiserie and japonisme are material styles of mimicking Asian cultures within “western” culture, not terms which can explain the fetishization or stereotyping of humans by race, ethnicity, etc. The word has adapted - much more recently. 

    This is a complex sort of issue, and while I’m sure this doesn’t seem helpful, isn’t really one that should be answered by me as yes or no, or even with my own “feeling” on the matter. It’s more of a localized, intra-community issue regarding the US that can really only be answered by individuals of middle eastern descent about how they feel they should ID. 

  6. cartoonpolitics:

"There’s a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state. The other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people." .. (Commander Adama, Battlestar Galactica)


    "There’s a reason you separate military and the police. One fights the enemies of the state. The other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people." .. (Commander Adama, Battlestar Galactica)

  7. politicalsexkitten:

    John Legend doesn’t take shit.

  8. (Source: redkorner)

  9. (Source: nipplethief)

  10. (Source: yaniv-schulman)

  11. (Source: scorpioncrosslocks)

  12. (Source: theronindiaries)

  13. ilovecharts:

by Guillaume Morissette


    by Guillaume Morissette

  14. newgrounds:

Rocket Raccoon by geogant! 


    Rocket Raccoon by geogant!