/lit/ - Literature

>>22774479
this. dont really know what to think, but so far im pretty disappointed. I loved Graebers debt the first 5k years but this book so far has really thrown me off. im not as rigorous a scholar as graeber or wengrow, but some stuff in here just seems false. sometimes it feels like these guys are better sociologists/anthropologists than historians. it feels like graebers apology to mainstream academia. all this anti western intellectualism is totally in the mainstream of modern academia in my experience, but this book frames itself as some expose that goes so completely against the grain. havent finished the book, so take these all with a grain of salt, but i am uneasy. feels like watching my hero take it up the ass after loving everything graeber said in debt, and seeing him basically spout what feels like modern anti eurocentric boilerplate rhetoric at points. and sure, that stuff has a point, but i feel like he goes too far at points. give the west the credit it deserves. it feels like graeber is saying "every intellectual development in the west was the result of taking ideas from other non european sources." somehow these non westerners have the ability to spontaneously and independently develop these ideas, but western ones don't? again, havent finished the book, but im a little worried.

>>20666916
Proactively refuted by Double David

>>19712136
Exchange it for this asap

>>19706040
Read about the possibilities we actually have to choose from.

>>19695174
States don’t work.
Lets try something else

>>19690828
Boredom is a fence