The article mentions Robin DG Kelley who i had never heard of. I found this whole article interesting…”being in but not of the University”….:

Kelley:http://bostonreview.net/forum/robin-d-g-kelley-black-study-black-struggle

“…Instead I want to draw attention to the contradictory impulses within the movement: the tension between reform and revolution, between desiring to belong and rejecting the university as a cog in the neoliberal order. I want to think about what it means for black students to seek love from an institution incapable of loving them—of loving anyone, perhaps—and to manifest this yearning by framing their lives largely through a lens of trauma. And I want to think about what it means for black students to choose to follow Stefano Harney and Fred Moten’s call to become subversives in the academy, exposing and resisting its labor exploitation, its gentrifying practices, its endowments built on misery, its class privilege often camouflaged in multicultural garb, and its commitments to war and security.

It is fair to say that most black students have minimal interest in joining the current wave of activism. Many are not politically radical, while others feel that they do not yet have the discernment to know if they are. Others fear that an activist past may haunt them in the future, while the majority is simply trying to get through school and join the ranks of professionals. This essay does not attempt to offer such students an invitation to activism, although that would be a worthy project. Rather, I am interested in speaking to those who are already activists, specifically about the ideological fissures in their movement and what these might tell us about the character of contemporary black movements, the future of the university, and what I believe is a crisis of political education. And while crises reveal contradictions, they also signal opportunities.

In particular, I challenge student activists to not cleave their activism from their intellectual lives or mistakenly believe that because the university does not offer them the education they crave, it is beyond their reach. There is a long history of black activists repurposing university resources to instruct themselves and one another—to self-radicalize, in effect. This is not to say that today’s student activists should do exactly as was done in the past, but historical models may provide valuable insights for those seeking novel solutions. Moreover, I encourage student activists to carefully consider the language they use to frame their grievances. In particular, I argue that while trauma can be an entrance into activism, it is not in itself a destination and may even trick activists into adopting the language of the neoliberal institutions they are at pains to reject…..
….
…..
….Recently, Rodney’s notion of the guerrilla intellectual has been resuscitated and transformed in Stefano Harney and Fred Moten’s The Undercommons: Fugitive Planning and Black Study.

Harney and Moten disavow the very idea that the university is, or can ever be, an enlightened place, by which I mean a place that would actively seek to disrupt the reproduction of our culture’s classed, racialized, nationalized, gendered, moneyed, and militarized stratifications. Instead they argue that the university is dedicated to professionalization, order, scientific efficiency, counterinsurgency, and war—- wars on terror, sovereign nations, communism, drugs, and gangs. The authors advocate refuge in and sabotage from the undercommons, a subaltern, subversive way of being in but not of the university. The undercommons is a fugitive network where a commitment to abolition and collectivity prevails over a university culture bent on creating socially isolated individuals whose academic skepticism and claims of objectivity leave the world-as-it-is intact.

Unlike Rodney’s guerrilla intellectuals, Harney and Moten’s guerrillas are not preparing to strike, planning to seize power, contesting the university (or the state; the difference isn’t always clear)—at least not on the terms they have set. To do so would be to recognize the university and its legitimacy and to be invested in its regimes of professionalization. Instead Harney and Moten argue that the university’s power over our lives is illusory. It lulls us into believing that politics—to lobby for access to, or control over, such institutions—is our only salvation. The book is a clarion call to think together, to plan together in undisciplined assembly. When The Undercommons hit the Internet—first as a 2008 essay and then as a 2013 collection of essays—it spread like wildfire among the PhD precariat and radical-thinking graduate students. For many young scholars cobbling together a life adjuncting, Harney and Moten’s critique of the university spoke an essential truth: “It cannot be denied that the university is a place of refuge, and it cannot be accepted that the university is a place of enlightenment. In the face of these conditions one can only sneak into the university and steal what one can.”….see link….

Titans are no.5 in sacks, btw.

=================
1 Jacksonville Jaguars 51.0
2 Los Angeles Rams 47.0
3 Carolina Panthers 43.0
3 Pittsburgh Steelers 43.0
5 Tennessee Titans 40.0
6 Chicago Bears 39.0
7 Baltimore Ravens 38.0
7 Cincinnati Bengals 38.0
7 Los Angeles Chargers 38.0
10 Atlanta Falcons 36.0
10 Philadelphia Eagles 36.0

Its a long article but i enjoyed it…

“…Turner said Evolve Politics is particularly benefiting from The Guardian’s perceived anti-Corbyn tone, which has alienated many supporters of the Labour leader who previously paid to be part of the newspaper’s membership scheme: “I find it incredibly disappointing, but that’s opened up the market for us. People say they used to subscribe [to The Guardian] but now say they actually prefer to give us a tenner a month instead.”

The Canary’s Mendoza agreed that The Guardian’s centre-left politics don’t necessarily suit the online left-wing reader: “I think they’re liberal, not left-wing. They’re centrist, largely middle-class, and white. The gradualism approach doesn’t play so well on the left. It’s not OK to ask people at the bottom of the pile to wait until a convenient time until you guys are comfortable. That’s the key distinction.”.

What terrifies the anti-Corbyn faction within the Labour party is the extent to which the growth of alt-left news outlets leaves them increasingly unable to influence the party’s internal discussion and deludes activists going into the general election.

One anti-Corbyn Labour aide told BuzzFeed News many of the party’s MPs now felt unable to place stories or comment pieces in The Sun or the Daily Mail – where they could potentially reach floating voters – because sites such as The Canary and newcomers such as Skwawkbox will immediately launch a series of attack pieces on the politician for cooperating with enemy media, which then causes trouble with activists at a community level.

There’s also the lack of chumminess in the relationship between alt-left reporters and political staffers. Labour aides point out that even when dealing with political correspondents who work at unfriendly newspapers such as the Mail or the Telegraph it’s still possible to build up relationships and argue that a story is unfair, thereby softening the impact when it finally reaches the public. Alt-left sites are far less susceptible to such influence, since they’re almost entirely run by part-timers outside London who care little for arguing the toss over the story of the day. Instead they view it as part of their mission to criticise these relationships.

“There has to be some link to reality,” despaired the anti-Corbyn aide. “People will always read papers that reinforce their views – you’re a Mirror reader or a Guardian reader. But this is a different order. This is no mechanism by which to correct.”

(Most of the sites mentioned in this article would strongly disagree, insisting they are happy to retract and correct where necessary – The Canary goes as far as to pin corrections to the top of its Facebook page, while Skwawkbox insists it gives equal prominence on its homepage to retractions.)

Multiple Labour MPs have independently told BuzzFeed News they are shocked by the influence the new wave of alt-left news sites is having on the party membership and the frequency with which stories posted on such sites – often featuring interpretations of events that many of the MPs dispute – are mentioned unprompted by local activists in constituency meetings. One staunchly anti-Corbyn Labour MP struggled to control their anger, describing these sites as “propaganda and ideological purity dressed up as news and views and beamed on the internet direct to the politically deranged”. They declined to be named, as they have been a frequent target of several of these sites.

The Labour MP suggested the sites were the modern equivalent of “the six nutters who sell the Socialist Workers Party newspaper in any town centre” but were being boosted by an online echo chamber….see link…

That was an interesting team. You had the old-guard: Pace, Faulk, Ike, Holt playing with, S.Jax, Dane Looker, Sean Macdonald, Kevin Curtis…and Bulger of course.

The Rams were about to descend into the abyss in the next few years, as the oldguard disappeared and the personnel decisions were mainly bad.

w
v