[a pleasurable headache] the irrational factionalism of human beings
It’s a very short set of links this time around. I read quite a few longer pieces during the last fortnight, rather than a lot of shorter pieces.
///
Overdue Impartiality: GB News & the Voice of the Octopus
https://bylinetimes.com/2023/04/17/overdue-impartiality-gb-news-and-the-voice-of-the-octopus/
GB News, for those not in the know, is fast approaching becoming Britain’s answer to Fox News. This article, from Byline Times looks at the shadowy figures behind the channel, as well as the convoluted financial structures that look to hide said ownership in an effort to skirt impartiality concerns.
///
‘I feel like I’m selling my soul’: inside the crisis at Juventus
Those not interested in football may wish to skip this one. However, the current state of former giant Juventus is indicative of the state of modern football, particularly in the now tarnished (once spectacular) Serie A in Italy.
Juventus have been accused of multiple accounts of rigging records, using loopholes to get around financial caps and ceilings and all manner of similar chicanery.
Chelsea, take note.
///
Climate Fiction Won’t Save Us
https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/books/a43541988/climate-fiction-wont-save-us/
Jeff VanDerMeer penned this article for Esquire. Here he looks at the (sub)genre of climate fiction and whether it can really inspire us to change or provoke action.
“For me, the best “climate fiction” uses its knowledge of the subject as underpinning, not foreground. Omar El Akkad’s American War continues to haunt me not just because the political situation in the United States slouches ever closer to the “new Confederacy” scenario in his novel, but because the socio-economic situations and underlying politics of white supremacy seem authentic.
We recognize the novel as realistic or real-adjacent by these anchors, and thus whether or not the overlay of details about climate crisis will hold up over time feels irrelevant to the novel’s urgency—and what it can tell us about the future. Like Robinson, El Akkad uses nonfiction forms throughout his novel. But they are not meant to convince us about tech—rather, they’re meant to convince us about the irrational factionalism of human beings.”
This, in turn, linked to this very thorough analysis and criticism of Kim Stanley Robinson’s recent climate-focused novel The Ministry of the Future.
I’ve read the book and thought it introduced (at least to me) several concepts and ideas that could be used to combat climate change, as well as some of the moral and ethical quandaries we are likely to face as the years roll on.
However, the article raises some very valid criticisms on how Robinson presents some of his ideas, as well as the lack of depth and follow through on some of the very same ideas he proposes. It’s definitely worth a read for anyone who has read Robinson’s book.
“Ministry also makes errors such as suggesting that plastic manufacturing is a preferable alternative to burning petroleum while still keeping the petroleum economy alive. While it’s important to provide transition work for former fossil fuel employees, who cares about keeping the petroleum economy alive? Even if for some reason we did, this is still a weak premise: ecologically speaking, plastic proliferation is only somewhat less bad than climate change. It’s already killing wildlife at rapid rates, and microplastics permeate every biome and every human body in the world.”
///
I told you it was a short one this time around. I’m off to nuke my ToDo list. See you in two!