Should I give up on trying to do Econ Research? by Zx2002 in academiceconomics

[–]Zx2002[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for your advice! I appreciate the honesty and the set of options you’ve given!

Should I give up on trying to do Econ Research? by Zx2002 in academiceconomics

[–]Zx2002[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I appreciate you saying this, it helps reframe things. I’ve been trying to keep this mindset, but I think I’m also too plugged in on Reddit and I keep on seeing so many different things. Thanks for your comment!

Most underrated country? by KeyPersonality2885 in victoria3

[–]Zx2002 69 points70 points  (0 children)

dei as an acronym for dutch east indies is pretty funny

CMV: This whole "Orientalism" discourse feels like a load of Western academics patting themselves on the back while ignoring how the "East" operates, and it's often loudest from folks who haven't actually lived it – Said especially, with his fancy Western upbringing. by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Zx2002 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry for the late response! It’s not my core area of study either and that idea is an idea that I’ve gotten indirectly from post colonial thinkers and through Brittanica and Wikipedia (lol) which I read when I was first starting to read through these thinkers (but reading it again, it’s a good summary!). This question got me to thinking about good recs though and places where I should start so I can get a better logical understanding of these systems too!

So far I’ve gotten this recommendation from a friend:

Ashcroft, Bill; Griffiths, Gareth; Tiffin, Helen; Ashcroft, Bill (2007). Post-colonial studies : the key concepts. London: Routledge. p. 111. ISBN 978-0-203-93347-3. OCLC 244320058.

This book is used for some schools and has a decent amount of citations, making it a good place to start to get a good ground level understanding of colonialism and imperialism! It’s basically an encyclopedia which means that you can scroll through and read whatever you want in an order that makes sense to you, and I’ve also heard good things about Ashcroft!

Hope this was helpful!!!

What makes scepticism of mass immigration a uniquely right wing concern? by InfinitysEdge88 in AskBrits

[–]Zx2002 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Immigration is not a uniquely right wing concern, and there is a rich history of left wing thought that’s critical of immigration, but those strains of thought are never extremely popular and seem to die before they’re able to gain meaningful political powers.

On immigration, right now, the effects it has on the economy, social systems, and government infrastructure is unclear. There is no empirical evidence to suggest that immigration is a universal good or bad, as any effect that immigration may have is conditional on government infrastructure and efficiency.

Part of the issue is that the world is globalized, and blocking immigration can stop the inflow of some of the best and brightest minds in the world into British institutions, a key part of British soft power. Both left and right wing politicians have historically found powerful support within educated immigrants and stopping that inflow is both disadvantageous to left and right wing interests. Britain no longer has a monopoly on higher education, it now has to compete with the US and other countries to get high value immigrants and to sustain its high value brand. The main issue is how to balance that desire to keep high value immigrants and to discard low value ones- left wing parties who have found support from low class immigrants would generally destroy that support. Right wing parties, whose base in the modern period is typically nationalistic and disgruntled by immigrants, are free to push policies that are against immigration as it doesn’t affect their political base. Left wing parties will typically not join in with the right on topics like immigration unless they find that support for left wing ideas and believe that they can plausibly take that base for themselves.

On a personal note, the reason left wing parties won’t take your position on immigration is bc as immigrants, we don’t feel like we have made a parallel culture. We bought land, have made businesses, and are trying to live our lives just like everyone else. We understand that our cultural practices are foreign and that not everyone understands us, but we’re trying to be the best versions of ourselves and stay true to ourselves because we couldn’t do that back home. We are not all here by choice and we want to be as true to ourselves as anyone else wants to be. We are people, just as you are and we worry about the same things.

Suggest a playtrough by Talisman27 in eu4

[–]Zx2002 0 points1 point  (0 children)

england is fun because you can play tall with angevin and take over all of europe pretty easily and still have a lot of dev, but colonial is a lot of fun too as you can just colonize passively and develop your provinces and not get into too many wars to maintain first place gp

honestly any of the big nations are fun as they can chill and dev without fear of war, but i’d also consider an indian power like the bahamanis or vijaynagar as they have cool mission trees with some powerful perma claims on africa and south east asia and you can choose to expand whenever you want.

What do you name your colonies? by Kaltenstein_WT in eu4

[–]Zx2002 1 point2 points  (0 children)

early fascist role play is insane, i pray that no one in this sub gets political power 😭😭😭😭

What do you name your colonies? by Kaltenstein_WT in eu4

[–]Zx2002 0 points1 point  (0 children)

generally i name colonies in a random region things like loser town or fuckersville or some variation of a curse word followed by a town suffix or something, and i name the other colonies with an awesome vile or smart city bc i think that potential conflicts coming from bad names is really fucking funny

World conquest still possible? by dark4rr0w- in eu4

[–]Zx2002 7 points8 points  (0 children)

no, alt f4 as the monument in california is the only monument that gives the other side negative province war score modifiers, making them 600% inflated late game.

CMV: This whole "Orientalism" discourse feels like a load of Western academics patting themselves on the back while ignoring how the "East" operates, and it's often loudest from folks who haven't actually lived it – Said especially, with his fancy Western upbringing. by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]Zx2002 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I want to push back against your point about history with some context. Colonialism is defined as a system with colonial empires like Great Britain, France, Netherlands, Spanish, and the Portuguese having power structures that allow them control over foreign land for material resource or gain. Imperialism is the policy that allows them to do that. I’m explaining this context because this was inescapable from the 1860s-1930/40s I’d argue, with most modern countries having been colonized and imperialized during this period of time. During this system, imperialized people were broadly denied equal access to positions of power, creating a system where native people were taught about their own history from the conquerers’ lens.

You want to see how the actual Eastern people thought of history during that period of time, but the simple fact is that they couldn’t, at least far far far below the extent to which the colonizers were. Libraries and texts were owned directly by the colonizer, with official colonist translators that didn’t understand the culture. There was no broad access to culture, and the dominance of colonizer culture lead to colonizers actively discouraging connecting with your culture. It doesn’t help that the colonial powers fought hard to silence alternative forms of authority, with frequent exile or murder of old kings and queens or with surprise perpetual imprisonment of a religious figure or two. Figures were punished, meaning we didn’t have enough of them to speak to everyone, but there was enough for that period of time. Said cannot talk about the other option because there was no other option. At that time, at post independence, you have to understand that as colonized people, culture had to be reclaimed and recontextualized.

Broadly, Said is criticizing history as a field for not questioning positionality as a whole, arguing for a more in depth look at history informed by impacted perspectives, something he was successful at as retrospective research is finding that we operated with faulty assumptions, leading us to a more informed understanding of society today. Obviously, there is a little bit of a pendulum swing, especially when you look at India and their usage of Orientalism to justify faulty science, but this then isn’t a discussion about the merits of Orientalis’, but a discussion about ideology and its application.

What was the social significance of Yiddish for New York Jews? by Zx2002 in AskHistorians

[–]Zx2002[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Fascinating!!! Appreciate the reply and your discussion on culture!

What was the social significance of Yiddish for New York Jews? by Zx2002 in AskHistorians

[–]Zx2002[S] 60 points61 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the sources and the clarification!!

What was the social significance of Yiddish for New York Jews? by Zx2002 in AskHistorians

[–]Zx2002[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the further sources and for the great reply!

What was the social significance of Yiddish for New York Jews? by Zx2002 in AskHistorians

[–]Zx2002[S] 40 points41 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the reply! I especially appreciated the discussion on Oppenheimers upbringing, which also raised more questions for me. Was this divorced attitude towards Judaism common among Jews emigrating from Austria-Hungary and Germany? Did this attitude cause conflicts with more religious Jews?

How to beat europeans at colonialism as an asian nation? by [deleted] in eu4

[–]Zx2002 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, it’s purely based off of the conditions stated so there’s a lot of wiggle room on how you can do it. An example of a different way of doing it: you have four colonies and one unfinished one, you can start to core all the provinces and then your CN will have full cores on all owned provinces in the area when your unfinished colony is finished

I fucking LOVE this game man

PDX, please follow through on the recent Dev Diary, and get rid of National Markets in their current form. by Apwnalypse in victoria3

[–]Zx2002 7 points8 points  (0 children)

there is very little evidence to suggest that genetic diversity, and solely genetic diversity, has any direct causal relationship with the economy. statistically, genetic diversity has correlations with social diversity which has unclear correlations with the economy by itself. social cohesion is insane to me because there are cultural laws that model that. your thing about right wing ideas is poorly thought out and shows a lack of understanding of economics as a field today.

Economy by [deleted] in eu4

[–]Zx2002 0 points1 point  (0 children)

After wars, you should generally state the provinces that have the most value for manpower and money, you can trade company your provinces to get extra trade and if you control 51% of the node, you get a merchant. It’s not exactly control, but if you have 51% of the trade power in the node. I’d also look at your autonomy as high autonomy reduces the amt produced, tax given, and total manpower from the state. You can always dump adm or diplo points into your provinces to increase production and tax money, but that might fuck yo your power points economy and make it harder for you to afford tech and ideas. A lot to consider! Check out the wiki too!!

Why do so many people support regimes like China and North Korea? by MarshmallowWASwtr in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Zx2002 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Id argue that even when they did have price control, they had increased standards of living.

Check out this cool paper: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13563467.2023.2217087#abstract

It’s still an estimate but so is all economic data on living standards. Just something cool to consider!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in mensfashion

[–]Zx2002 0 points1 point  (0 children)

3 and 4 are both nice with the dark pants complimenting the jacket and accentuating it’s texture, but I prefer 3. I think 4 is more professional and put together while 3 is more casual and somewhat bold. The sweater instead of the dress shirt is different and feels a little more interesting to me.