Why listen even SVT on the choleric man’s roar? – Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet

flaxas of arms.

flaxas even hysterical and really very many arms.

Not everyone wants to be photographers – rather, everyone wants to be relevant, preferably also outbytbara.

Edit, a fundamentally no more than sympathetic initiative of the Swedish Television, has therefore as predictable as timely met with the choleric white man’s roar “all involved there are rabid feminist left-wing extremists”.

Why SVT even listening to them is unclear.

The right to define what or who in 2015 are “left” has a fascinating speed annexed by a right wing in bruntintad frame. So skilful is this movement of the border that only licensed Sweden Democrats and a bunch of neo-liberal synthare – which is only a tiny almost invisible snap from them – constitutes the self-proclaimed antithesis. It is understood deeply nauseating but the result is that the zeitgeist turns Edith, a harmless involved small step forward, a disproportionately hot potato.

Reminds Edit a tad on both Politism and Bulletin Board? Sure, but do not give a damn about whether Avpixlat or Flashback!

To be accused – of those who are just simply blames the whole day – for being “left” means that you most likely create an alternative platform actually not follow the populist consensus.

Please read the last sentence again before continuing. For it is true and important.

But arguing about the best you want.

Much more interesting is how something like Edit efficiently manage to create a temporary smokescreen for a far more lacking.

State television should study how food until the middle of last decade was something that just would still hunger but that was developed and elevated to a form of culture.

How? And why?

The scraped away all unnecessary, pure ingredients and found his original essence, their foundations.

Sports Broadcasts usually do this exemplary.

Culture should be packaged in “exciting cross-genre” wrapping paper. Or ignored.

We have, thank God, an excellent weekly magazine for literature.

But where is the serious program of modern music, it not only shows or play it without discussing the knowledgeable and informed?

The same applies, of course, film, art, theater. One could easily rattle off many more similar materials.

It feels like I’m writing about the same thing in this case approximately every ten years. There’s no ad that is changing with age. I thought the same when I was 27: a table with the program called “theater”, “coat”, “film”, “Techno”, “Poetry”, “Housen,” “art,” “hip hop” and “architecture” and deals with exactly what it says on the tin.

The brave because that just has to be cast is that, in popular education purpose, giving culture in all its forms a substantially larger fuck you-space than its increasingly vociferous detractors would stand out with.