17 Substack Posts From the Last Week Which You Should Give a Look

Thought I'd do another round-up of intriguing pieces!

Photo by v2osk on Unsplash

I’m going to continue to try and do these sorts of posts highlighting writers and pieces which intrigue me the most on this exciting new publishing and social networking platform. Currently I’m subscribed to 234 different publications on here and I expect that number to only grow as I come across more of interest.

As with the previous round-up, all posts are free.

Here are a few for your consideration:

My absolute favorites this week

Anatomy of a (Mass) Murder

This really incredible piece by

Asha Rangappa

was most definitely my favorite of the week - and not just because I’m working on my own essay with a similar theme and I’ll be citing her in mine!

The Miracle of a Natural Disaster

My beloved

Sally Shideler

had a great post yesterday about our ongoing challenges with finishing our move into our new apartment after the dirt (sand!) road to our previous domicile was destroyed in a flood, now only accessible by 4-wheel drive vehicles.

The financial side of journalism

Katherine Brodsky

continues to be one of my very favorite writers on Substack. She’s just great. I left this as a comment on the post:

"What other financial models could work to address some of the issues around journalism?"

The answer is very, very simple: the non-profit world. The vast majority of journalism that I've done in my career was subsidized by 501(c)3s.

Monday - May 22

The Idea of the Holy

Marry the Market: Reflections on Perry's *The Case Against the Sexual Revolution*

A really good book review from my favorite libertarian intellectual on Substack.

Psychedelics for racial trauma: 5 Questions for radio journalist Tonya Mosley

Tuesday - May 23

Nothing today!

Wednesday - May 24

Ron DeSantis, Internet troll

Start here: Most Americans aren’t on Twitter. A 2022 Pew survey showed that less than 1 in 4 people are even on the site.

And that number is even lower among self identified Republicans and Republican leaners. Among that group just 17% say they ever use Twitter. 17%!

"This is one of the most out-of-touch campaign launches in modern history,” said a Trump campaign spokeswoman. “The only thing less relatable than a niche campaign launch on Twitter, is DeSantis' after party at the uber-elite Four Seasons resort in Miami.”

All of which raises a VERY basic question: Why the hell would Ron DeSantis announce his presidential candidacy on Twitter?

The answer, I think, is that he wants to associate himself with Musk, who has emerged since buying Twitter as a sort of uber-troll, with a particular focus on stirring up shit among the online left.

The advertising recession is definitely here

Thursday - May 25

The Jewish Question

Ehud Neor

continues to be one of my favorite writers on here when it comes to Jewish and Israeli subjects.

7 Truths About Human Beings, Friendships, and Relationships

John Hawkins

is someone I’ve worked with off and on for over a decade and he’s still one of my favorite right-wing writers (not that there are that many these days!)

Friday - May 26

UK Members of Parliament call for psilocybin rescheduling, a new psychedelics Action Group in the European Parliament, and was Australia’s psychedelic reform “too fast and too soon”?

What Does It Mean to be a "Supporter" of a Candidate?

Jonathan V. Last

is really on-point here:

What I want to focus on is that GOP Josh is identified as a “supporter” of Donald Trump.

What does that mean?

GOP Josh did not vote for Trump in 2016 or 2020, though he might vote for Trump in 2024, depending on when his birthday falls. And it is not legal for minors to make political contributions, so he hasn’t given Trump money.

GOP Josh isn’t a “supporter” in the traditional sense. He’s a fanboy.

And here’s where we get to the distinction between real-world “support” and “internet support.”

You can vote for a candidate, or give money to a candidate, and still make objective judgments about the candidate. When the candidate does something unwise or harmful, you can say so. If the candidate is doing badly, you can admit it. Because being honest about the candidate does not diminish your support—Sen. Smith is getting your vote and so it’s okay to acknowledge that Sen. Smith is in trouble in the polls, or that Sen. Smith’s statement on the Widget Act is dumb/wrong/whatever.

But with “internet support” it’s different. If you’re an internet supporter, then the nature of your contribution is your public performance. You are there to rep the brand. Sometimes that means highlighting good stuff for your candidate—“The Iowa numbers show that he’s crushing it!” Or: “Our guy just passed a bill to help veterans who got sick from burn pits.”

But most of the time, being an internet supporter means running cover for your team. It means minimizing mistakes, or positing alternative facts to explain away problems. Not to put too find a point on it: Being an internet supporter means conducting yourself as if you were a paid employee of the candidate.

Because if you don’t—if you concede that he or she did something bad—then it diminishes the fundamental nature of your support, which is not a vote, but a posture.

Friday cartoons

Zoe Si

’s cartoons are just wonderful!

Saturday - May 27

Is the Moral Panic Over Critical Race Theory Justified? A Conversation with Sam Hoadley-Brill

Have I mentioned lately how tired I am of the right-wing obsession with labeling everything which makes white suburbanites uncomfortable “critical race theory”? Look, I know what CRT is and what it isn’t. Back in 2013 or so when Barack Obama was exposed as a college-age supporter of CRT-creator Derrick Bell, I read several of Bell’s books to learn what this variant of hard leftism actually was. And it’s not at all the oversimplification peddled by charlatans like Christopher Rufo - who has actually admitted that he’s intentionally expanded the definition.

Sunday - May 28

Dementia/Alzheimer's as an Ancient Hibernation Response Triggered by Ever Present and Inescapable Chronic Stressors of Modern Life

This seems a very intriguing thesis:

I recently watched a very interesting podcast, and read a related article, about a new theory of Alzheimer’s. Although I don’t agree fully with the scientists’ conclusion, this was the final piece of the jigsaw for my own ideas around dementia, which I have been working on for some time. I can now summarize my own concept with the following proposal:

Some forms of dementia/Alzheimer’s are the outcome of the triggering of an ancient hibernation circuit in humans due to specific chronic stressors in modern life, namely chronic loneliness, isolation/separation, abandonment and loss/grief.

Shiites, not Jews, emerge as a touchstone of Saudi moderation

James M. Dorsey

continues to be one of my favorite analysts of the Middle East and the broader Muslim world - such a sharp thinker filled with valuable insights.

The Atheist's Lament

Sherman Alexie

continues to be the best poet on Substack I have yet do discover. I don’t anticipate finding someone better.

What about you? Any writers I should check out or posts that really stood out for you?

---