A short thread on one aspect of trolling on here, from my recent experience. I’ve got a fair number of followers. I tweet about controversial topics - and yet I don’t get trolled that much. A bit, but not thatmuch. There are times, though, that I *do* get trolled a lot. 1/n

The pattern is pretty clear, and has been played out a few times over the last few days. I get into a conversation about a topic that could be considered race-related. Empire. Immigration. Something like that. And that conversation includes a highish profile BAME person. 2/n
More often than not, a BAME woman. In those cases, it takes very little time for the trolls to come steaming in. Most of them seemingly rational, taking issue with some technical point, but quickly descending into something much worse. 3/n
When I look at the profiles of the trolls, they’re often relatively innocuous. Not saying ‘Hey, I’m a racist troll, a white supremacist’ at all. Not likely to be caught by any kind of anti-troll measures. Instead, they look relatively normal. 4/n
But what happens is very much about racism, and often misogyny. Attacks that are - or appear to be - not that dramatic on their own. Not rape threats or death threats, or ‘go home’ or things like that, but designed to undermine, to disturb, to annoy - but with an undercurrent 5/n
Nothing that something like the Online Harms White Paper as it stands will address - and this, for me, is an occasional annoyance. For the BAME women, it looks to me as though this is what happens all the time. That matters, and matters a lot. 6/n
Amongst other things, it means that people (like me) who don’t get to experience this need to be *very* careful not to image that their own experience is in any real way representative. We shouldn’t pretend that we know what it’s like. We don’t. 7/n
We can have clues, and insights - as now - but that doesn’t mean we understand in any meaningful way. We need to understand at least that. And it means that we need to think differently about trolling, and not imagine there are easy solutions. 8/n
None of this is easy, and there aren’t technical or legal solutions that will deal with the underlying societal problems either. We need to be aware of that too. /ends

More from For later read

Humans inherently like the act of solidarity. We are social beings. We like to huddle up and be together.
They used this against us.
They convinced us that it was an act of solidarity to flatten the curve, to wear a mask for others, to take the vaccines for others,


and to reach #covidzero for others. They convinced us that this was for the greater good of society.
In reality, this couldn't be further away from the truth. They have divided us and broken the core structure of our society. They have dehumanized us with their masks.

They set us against each other into clans on opposite sides of a spectrum. They have turned us into aggressive beings fighting for our survival. Some of us fear harm from the virus, others fear harm from the vaccine, and yet others fear harm from the attack on our civilization.

We are all on a flight or fight mode. We are all operating under the influence of fear. We must collect ourselves and reflect on what has happened over the last year.
How is this for the greater good of society?

They used a tactical warfare strategy against us.
'Divide and conquer'.
We fell for it.
Now we must become aware of it and fight back.
We must reunite. We must find true solidarity to save our world. To free ourselves. To regain our autonomy.
Excited we finally have a draft of this paper, which attempts to provide a 'unifying theory' of the long economic divergence between the Middle East & Western Europe

As we see it, there are 3 recent theories that hit on important aspects of the divergence...

1/


One set of theories focus on the legitimating power of Islam (Rubin, @prof_ahmetkuru, Platteau). This gave religious clerics greater power, which pulled political resources away form those encouraging economic development

But these theories leave some questions unanswered...
2/

Religious legitimacy is only effective if people
care what religious authorities dictate. Given the economic consequences, why do people remain religious, and thereby render religious legitimacy effective? Is religiosity a cause or a consequence of institutional arrangements?

3/

Another set of theories focus on the religious proscriptions of Islam, particular those associated with Islamic law (@timurkuran). These laws were appropriate for the setting they formed but had unforeseeable consequences and failed to change as economic circumstances changed

4/

There are unaddressed questions here, too

Muslim rulers must have understood that Islamic law carried proscriptions that hampered economic development. Why, then, did they continue to use Islamic institutions (like courts) that promoted inefficiencies?

5/

You May Also Like

🌿𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒓𝒚 𝒐𝒇 𝒂 𝑺𝒕𝒂𝒓 : 𝑫𝒉𝒓𝒖𝒗𝒂 & 𝑽𝒊𝒔𝒉𝒏𝒖

Once upon a time there was a Raja named Uttānapāda born of Svayambhuva Manu,1st man on earth.He had 2 beautiful wives - Suniti & Suruchi & two sons were born of them Dhruva & Uttama respectively.
#talesofkrishna https://t.co/E85MTPkF9W


Now Suniti was the daughter of a tribal chief while Suruchi was the daughter of a rich king. Hence Suruchi was always favored the most by Raja while Suniti was ignored. But while Suniti was gentle & kind hearted by nature Suruchi was venomous inside.
#KrishnaLeela


The story is of a time when ideally the eldest son of the king becomes the heir to the throne. Hence the sinhasan of the Raja belonged to Dhruva.This is why Suruchi who was the 2nd wife nourished poison in her heart for Dhruva as she knew her son will never get the throne.


One day when Dhruva was just 5 years old he went on to sit on his father's lap. Suruchi, the jealous queen, got enraged and shoved him away from Raja as she never wanted Raja to shower Dhruva with his fatherly affection.


Dhruva protested questioning his step mother "why can't i sit on my own father's lap?" A furious Suruchi berated him saying "only God can allow him that privilege. Go ask him"