Reddit mentions: The best human geography books

Wikileaks has in the past leaked information about US warcrimes and foreign policy that every American should pay attention to. I have a copy of their book that is largely analysis of the diplomatic cables that they leaked back in 2010. The media went out of its way to downplay that whole deal, but if you actually read them and put them in context they are a wonderful illustration of neo-imperialism, which is something Americans tend to ignore.

That said in recent years Wikileaks has been obviously compromised and has gotten more incoherent in its values. Even in the introduction of that book (the only part written by Assange) it becomes kind of obvious that the guy has an agenda that goes way beyond "exposing the truth". Nobody who's interested in truth can make the claim that Assad is "the only meaningful force against ISIS" with any sincerity. That is, by the way, also Russia's party line. In fact Assange seems to go along with Russia's views quite a bit for a guy who claims to be interested in democracy.

My guess is Assange's continued freedom is dependent on him not pissing off Russia, which is an ally of Ecuador. In that sense he's in their orbit. Remember when Ecuador shut off his internet a few months ago? The basic reality is that they could turn over Assange to British police in a heartbeat. Assange can only avoid this if he plays by their rules, more or less.

The guy's cornered and afraid right now. I'd argue nobody should have trusted him to begin with (he's always been sensationalistic and self serving), but now? People need to think seriously about what the guy's agenda and reason for releasing things he does is.

It was obvious the timing of the leaks this year was meant to impact the election. You just have to look at how and when wikileaks released them. Right before the election. If they weren't intending to get Trump elected they have a funny way of showing it.

I won't pretend to be an expert on any of these! But I can recommend some great colleagues who are super smart on these issues....

Mexico: Shannon O'Neil has an excellent / pretty recent book on the political economy of Mexico: http://www.amazon.com/Two-Nations-Indivisible-Mexico-United/dp/0199898332/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1395348060&sr=1-1&keywords=shannon+o%27neil

Indonesia: Josh Kurlantzick: http://www.cfr.org/experts/asia-southeast-asia-democracy-human-rights/joshua-kurlantzick/b15522

Nigeria: John Campbell has an excellent book: http://www.amazon.com/Nigeria-Dancing-Council-Foreign-Relations/dp/1442206896

And, finally, Turkey: try Steven Cook's writings: http://www.cfr.org/experts/middle-east-israel-egypt-turkey-arab-world/steven-a-cook/b10266

There are entire books on Chinese nationalism that I would recommend you seek out, but I'll try to sketch a useful answer for you.

I don't think we could point to a unified response among Chinese nationalists to this question. Different contexts and the passage of time has meant that there are different types of Chinese nationalists, who themselves might disagree on everything but the existence of a Chinese nation. Consider, as an example, anti-traditionalists like Qian Xuantong who thought China would be strengthened by abolishing its "backward" language and replacing it with something more practical (like Esperanto according to Qian) and then consider nationalists today (like Xi Jinping) who invoke Confucianism in trying to construct an essentialist Chinese national identity:

> "The honor and shame of an individual is related with that of the nation," Sha said. "This goes back to the time of Confucius, when Chinese were taught to protect the honor of the nation. Society is a complicated network, and we play our roles as members of a collective unit, so this is natural for us."

source)

 

Qian Xuantong represents those anti-traditionalist nationalists who blamed China's humiliation largely on cultural differences--a backwards language, Confucian social structures, feudalism, and non-scientific ways of thinking. This anti-traditionalism was the common sentiment among leaders of the May Fourth Movement and New Culture Movement. Mao is difficult to pin down on this issue, in my assessment, but here is an early writing of his that follows along these lines:

> It is not that basically we have no strength; the source of our impotence lies in our lack of practice. For thousands of years the Chinese people of several hundred millions have all led a life of slaves. Only one person — the 'emperor'— was not a slave, or rather one could say that even he was the slave of 'heaven'. When the emperor was in control of everything, we were given no opportunity for practice.

 

Though the Manchus would soon be incorporated by the ROC as one of China's five major ethnic groups, Sun Yat-sen at one point also blamed the ruling Manchus of the Qing dynasty for China's backwardness: China could not respond effectively to European imperial powers because it was ruled by corrupt and backward barbarians. If only the Chinese people could shrug off the Manchu yoke, China would be able to restore itself to its former glory. This Han-centric nationalism, as you might expect, runs very much counter to the Chinese nationalism we see today which emphasizes the territorial integrity of China and the ethnic harmony and brotherhood of China's various ethnic groups.


 

This leads me to the next view, which claims the "century of humiliation" occurred predominantly because foreign powers were naturally (because they were capitalist) aggressive and exploitative whereas Qing China was not. For example, imperial powers plied the Chinese people with opium and their addiction to it meant they were unable to deal with the Europeans and Japanese. Consider this line from Mao's famous speech "The Chinese People Have Stood Up!":

> The Chinese have always been a great, courageous and industrious nation; it is only in modern times that they have fallen behind. And that was due entirely to oppression and exploitation by foreign imperialism and domestic reactionary governments. For over a century our forefathers never stopped waging unyielding struggles against domestic and foreign oppressors, including the Revolution of 1911 led by Dr. Sun Yat-sen, our great forerunner in the Chinese revolution. (Compare this Mao quote to the one above!)

Nationalist scholars today have echoed this sentiment when pushing back against claims by Western scholars that the Qing was an aggressive, expansionist empire. An English explanation here.

For communists, this also fits in nicely with Leninist explanations for imperialism which sought to place imperialism as the highest manifestation of capitalism.


In any case, there are other explanations I have not touched on; Chinese nationalism is so virulent today that there are probably some pretty half-baked strains out there on internet forums with their own explanations as to why China was humiliated for a century.

I majored in political science, but I always have interest in anthropology. I find Ted Lewellen's Political Anthropology: An Introduction pretty interesting and easy to relate with (in fact that was the book used during a political anthropology class I took).

I see these sites recommended by anthropologists too:

• Cultural Anthropology
  
• Savage Minds
  
  Real experts and students in anthropology may want to chime in and correct me though.

Right. Money matters for everyone up to a point. We all have to eat, have a roof over our heads, etc. It matters to hit the essentials. Beyond that, some people are there to get something done and some are there to make money. She may have to dial the knobs around to hit the right balance point, making sure staffers aren't worried all day about the basics, but she might as well use it as a filter above that because what she needs beyond a certain point are people who want to use the job to make life good for everyone, not people who are there for themselves.

The salary profiles other Congress people are choosing to offer is one that favors the rich in various ways. In this context, which is directly relevant, I can't recommend highly enough Sarah Kendzior's book The View from Flyover Country in this regard. (I listened on audiobook, which she reads herself and is excellent.)

What I've seen is a term called urbanormativity. I've only seen it pop up periodically in my research (how urban elites have engaged with rural communities is part of my dissertation research), so I'm not sure that there really is a cohesive framework as of yet. Below are some books/papers on the subject (or at least related to the subject). I would recommend the last two, as I've met and seen presentations by both Lisa Pruitt (UC-Davis) and Alexander Thomas (SUNY-Oneonta), and I find both scholars work to be interesting and well done.

Studies in Urbanormativity: Rural Community in Urban Society

Urbanormativity, Spatial Privilege, and Judicial Blind Spots in Abortion Law

Critical Rural Theory: Structure, Space, Culture

Other general books that might be of interest:

[Born in the Country](https://www.amazon.com/Born-Country-History-America-Revisiting/dp/0801850401/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1479150780&sr=1-1] by David Danbom (a general history of rural America)

Remaking the Heartland by David Wuthnow

Note: Because of my focus, I'm mostly familiar with rural agricultural communities, especially those in the Midwest. If you want more on Coal Country or the Mountain West, I can dig for more resources. I know that there has been a pronounced interest as of late in the Appalachian identity and attempts to use it as a source of pride.

I'm really glad you are interested in the topic of race in America. Especially its intersection with politics. It's a serious issue that needs more attention. Here are several books I recommend to get you started:

https://www.amazon.com/Race-Human-Diversity-Biocultural-Approach/dp/0131838768/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1473351402&sr=8-3&keywords=human+diversity

https://www.amazon.com/Between-World-Me-Ta-Nehisi-Coates/dp/0812993543/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1473351442&sr=8-1&keywords=coates

https://www.amazon.com/Race-Matters-Cornel-West/dp/0679749861/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1473351540&sr=8-1&keywords=race+matters

If you don't have the money to purchase one right now I'd be glad to try to find a pirated version for you. If I can't find one (or your not comfortable with pirating) I'm sure some redditors would be happy to crowd fund your curiosity on this subject and buy a few books for you to get started.

That is awesome. I am so glad people took the time to read it. There is so much more to what is going on in Russia then what 'Putin is tyrant' headlines lead people to believe. When I hear those stereotypes along with claims of Russian imperialism, I feel a somewhat obligation to shine a little light on the subject. It is absolutely fascinating to see how this state develops after being forced to undergo such radical transitions and form a new government practically overnight. But like I told the previous individual, please take everything I say with skepticism, I am a Poli Sci undergrad, so I am no expert. Everything from this comes from reading two books this and this. And having a very Russian enthusiastic professor (he even found his wife over there). This is of course a major over simplification, getting into the details of these changes and systems would require writing more than one book and a greater mind on the subject than my own.

assimilation is peace, if you are against assimilation you are against peace.

> Says who? Adolf Hitler?

no my divided societie's class in grad school.....why is everything about hitler with you people? are you so vapid you can't entertain new ideas without attacking them?

you need to unify a society to make it work. you can't just cram different groups of people together and expect them to get a long. that means consuming the minority culture slowly and peacefully generation by generaiton until they conform to the majority

its better for everyone this way

here is the textbook we used if you wana have a look https://www.amazon.com/Politics-Deeply-Divided-Societies-Adrian/dp/0745648509

These links might help, although they are not as exhaustive or as specific as what you are looking for. I don't know of any place having a detailed database of the most important documents, I think you will have to look for them on a case by case basis. Searching on Wikileaks' twitter might help.

• https://www.salon.com/2011/10/23/wikileaks_cables_and_the_iraq_war/
  
  
• https://www.salon.com/2010/12/24/wikileaks_23/
  
  
• https://wikileaks.org/10years/ (see the sidebar too)
  
  
• https://twitter.com/FlickRubicon/status/1021009604333875200
  
  
• https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/on-return-from-spanish-prison-roshan-jamal-waves-wikileaks-cable-as-defence/
  
  
• https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/sep/29/uk-and-saudi-arabia-in-secret-deal-over-human-rights-council-place
  
  
• One notable recent case of Wikileaks documents being used in court is in Chagos Islanders v. UK, currently being heard at the ICJ.
  
  
• Excellent article which analyzes cables that show how the US had been trying to start the conflict in Syria for years: https://truthout.org/articles/wikileaks-reveals-how-the-us-aggressively-pursued-regime-change-in-syria-igniting-a-bloodbath/
  
  Book:
  
  
• https://www.amazon.com/WikiLeaks-Files-World-According-Empire/dp/1784786217
  

If you are unaware of the fact that the US is sponsoring Uyghur separatists, I honestly can't help you.

The National Endowment for Democracy is heavily supporting separatist groups in China, such as the World Uyghur Congress.

It's quite disturbing, really.

If you are actually interested in the topic, I guess start by reading English literature like this?
https://www.amazon.com/Uyghur-Lobby-Coalitions-Strategies-Contemporary/dp/0415709644

To get a better understanding, I would suggest learning Chinese and reading some Chinese sources on the subject.

> Capitalism has been consistently proven to raise the standards of living wherever it has been tried.

Google the word neoliberalism sometime, and spend a day researching it.

> Meanwhile, every single attempt at socialism - the USSR, the PRC, the DPRK, Venezuela, Cuba - has resulted in disaster, and has lowered the standards of living wherever it has been tried.

In what sense are these socialist, apart from what they call themselves in name? An anarcho-capitalist can have some actual, justified criticisms against socialism in practice (I've seen many), but when people like you plow forward with such an elementary misunderstanding, believe me when I say you look bad, even to your own camp.

The Zapatistas? The Paris Commune? The Ukrainian Free Territories? Revolutionary Catalonia? The Israeli Kibbutzim? That is your actual target.

> There is a reason why every single country that was once considered communist has transitioned towards capitalism...

Because they were bombed to hell in the interest of the capitalist class?

> ... and it should be no surprise to anyone that the standard of living has raised in these areas.

Like the four asian tigers did through State intervention? (And like the US did, also). Nothing even close to a free market prescription, albeit a quasi-capitalist one nevertheless.

Cheers. I recommend this amazing book.
https://www.amazon.com/Politics-Heroin-Southeast-Asia/dp/0060129018

https://www.amazon.com/Contemporary-Human-Geography-James-Rubenstein/dp/0134746228

​

This is the paper version, hope that helps

> actually increased south of Vindhyas where sterilization had not been done on the same scale.

Karnataka has Devaraj Urs to thank for that. He would apparently send huge sums of money to Delhi and give them fake numbers to assure the high command that nasbandi targets had been met. Source.

Well, if you read Wikileaks' latest book you'll see they have the documents that prove they did pay for the last one they did (2014), and it is all the same characters from last time, the same people who are constantly ferried between Caracas and Arlington Virginia to meet CIA officials and who give speeches in DC about how they're going to succeed in overthrowing the chavistas the next time. You can read a summary of the wikileaks for Venezuela here.

Excellent book, if a bit pricey.

http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Separatist-Movements-Aspirant-Abkhazia/dp/1936117991

Spirit of the Mountain, by David Mason. It's about the mountain spirit, Sanshin, who just has all this cool mythology around him as part of traditional Korean 무속. His website is here.

I'd also recommed Korea: A religious History, and Myths and Legends from Korea, both of which are written by James Grayson, who I promise is unparalleled by anyone when it comes to this subject.

> DNA test to determine your ancestry and ethnic background. Oops

I didn't say genetics don't exist. Just that the concept of separate races isn't supported by them. Obviously if you did a DNA test on me you could see where my ancestors came from. What you couldn't say in any way that is supported by the scientific community is that I am somehow a separate species or race from someone else, just that I come from somewhere else.

I never said that ethnicity didn't exist.

I'm talking about books like this, ie: recent works that could help to introduce you to what are currently the most subscribed to theories.

Guns, Germs and Steel is widely discredited.

Nonfiction:

• Desert America by Ruben Martinez
  
• Ghost Dances by Josh Garrett-Davis
  
• The Signal and the Noise by Nate Silver
  
  On the fiction front, I potentially want to read Where'd You Go, Bernadette? by Maria Semple. The thing is... with new fiction, I tend to wait for friends/colleagues to read the novel first.
  

Definitely a communist, but also a patriot. Read this if you want to figure it out.

	

	

	

> # The European Diaspora: European Ancestry Worldwide
>
>
>
> [European_Ancestry](http://brilliantmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/European_Ancestry.png)
>
> _Map created by Nagihuin via Wikimedia_The map above shows the percentage of each country’s population that has some claim to European ancestry. Taken together, it could be argued that Europeans are the world’s largest diaspora, with an estimated population of over 480 million people.
>
> However, just what constitutes European ancestry is highly controversial.
>
> The map excludes Turks and Azerbaijanis from being Europeans, but includes Georgians and Armenians. While this may be because the former are Muslim and the latter are Christians this is not wholly satisfying due to the fact that Balkan Muslims are considered European.
>
> Nagihuin, who created the map, got the figures for each country used the European Diaspora Wikipedia page and the following sources:
>
> > USA census. Russian census by oblast, autonomous provinces and other subnational entities linked in the Russian Wikipedia. Ethnic census in Central Asia, Australia states/territories, Latin American and Southern African countries quoted in articles in Wikipedia. Non-european immigrants population recounts in Europe in different articles.
>
> Therefore, based on most national censuses, many mixed race people would also be excluded from the map above and the data below.
>
> If we take the controversial definition the map uses, the European descended diaspora population by country is as follows:
>
> - United States – 223,553,265
> - Brazil – 91,051,646
> - Argentina – 38,900,000
> - Canada – 25,186,890
> - Australia – 20,982,665
> - Mexico – 20,100,000+
> - Colombia – 17,519,500
> - Venezuela – 13,169,949
> - Cuba – 7,160,399
> - South Africa – 4,472,100
> - Chile – 3,5M+
> - Costa Rica – 3,500,000
> - New Zealand – 3,381,076
> - Puerto Rico – 3,064,862
> - Uruguay – 2,851,095
> - Dominican Republic – 2,000,000+
> - Bolivia – 2,000,000+
> - Peru – 1,4M-4,4M+
> - Ecuador – 1,400,000+
> - Paraguay – 1,300,000+
> - Nicaragua – 1,000,000+
>
> To learn more about the subject of European migration, ancestry and diaspora, consider the following books:
>
> - Peoples and Empires: A Short History of European Migration, Exploration, and Conquest, from Greece to the Present
> - Coming to America: A History of Immigration and Ethnicity in American Life
> - Human Geography: People, Place, and Culture
>
> Leave your comments about the map below:

• • • • • -
          
          empleadoEstatalBot, Esto es la versión /r/argentina de /r/place? ^Editar.
          
          Autor | Código fuente

I'd recommend anyone who's interested in learning more about how these sorts of hate campaigns work to go pick up a copy of Fear of Small Numbers by Arjun Appadurai. It's an amazingly clear-minded examination of how minorities are stigmatized and demonized. Once you read it, you'll recognize all of the moves Trump and co. are making as soon as they make them.

Not as violent - only as far as the average Joe is concerned. The actions committed as a direct result of government decisions/commands are frequently just as bad, if not worse. You and I just aren't directly involved in those.

If you want some interesting (and depressing & frustrating) reading, check out The WikiLeaks Files: The World According to US Empire.

While I didn't read that article entirely, this being a shitpost sub and all, the impression I got was that old Stalin was fixed on the individual/collective divide, obviously preferring the latter. Anarchism being individualist was one of his criticisms. The leap from egoist anarchism in particular to communism seems amazingly obvious, but Stalin didn't make that leap. Didn't read many anarchists either, according to some secondary source.

Not sure how accurate that is. He was apparently very well read, boorish persona aside. Scanning through now after Stalin's own wording of socialism he says the first major attack on Marxism by anarchists is to claim plagiarism. This is a long and sordid story which involved a Georgian writer whose name I couldn't spell in fifty years. The Manifesto was just a translation, according to some anarchist figures. Stalin being Georgian himself makes the connection there an obvious one.

This is a weird document in hindsight. Stalin seems to be defending Marxism from various anarchists (Kropotkin, for instance) who are in turn attacking what would in a few decades be a nice description of the Soviet Union. Egoism, unfortunately, doesn't seem to be on his agenda. Likely he never read Stirner, whose popularity must wax and wane like no other. Someone wrote a book which I haven't read on Stalin's mindset/reading list. Might be worth a look.