Anusar

“As spaces of promiscuous proximity, often lit poorly if at all, where existential fear suddenly was converted to the euphoria of being still alive and no longer having anything to lose, bunkers were also places of uncontrolled sexual encounters. The concern to discipline sexual conduct seems to have played a greater role in Great Britain than in Nazi Germany. Contrary to an idea born in the 1950s, according to which Nazism was marked by sexual repression, the anti-bourgeois dimension of the Volksgemeinschaft implied certain possibilities of sexual liberation.37 The British ‘people’s war’, on the other hand, was based far more strongly on a community founded on the bourgeois family and the need to repress sexual deviance, imputable both to women and the lower orders. As a clear sign of the particular role played by the family, the British authorities were initially against the idea of collective shelters, fearing that, in this mixing of classes, bourgeois virtue might be contaminated by the bad habits of the ‘lower orders’, leading to moral dissolution followed by a challenge to the social order. The middle classes were thus encouraged to build shelters in their gardens, which had the additional advantage of privatizing part of the costs bound up with air-raid precautions – something unthinkable in Germany, where the collective ideology of the Volksgemeinschaft was paramount.”
― Thomas Hippler, Governing from the Skies: A Global History of Aerial Bombing

“As Betsy Leondar-Wright put it in her 2005 book, Class Matters: Few middle-class people would say we have prejudices against working-class or low-income people, of course. Our classism is often disguised in the form of disdain for Southerners or Midwesterners, religious people, patriotic people, employees of big corporations, fat or non-athletic people, [heterosexual] people with conventional gender presentation (feminine women wearing make-up; tough, burly guys), country music fans, or gun users. This disdain shows in our speech.”
― Barbara Jensen, Reading Classes: On Culture and Classism in America

“Engels had read The Origin of Species and wrote to Marx about the book in December of 1859. Engels praised Darwin for his theoretical triumph over teleology in the organic sciences, but at the same time also cautioned Marx against Darwin’s ‘clumsy’ style and apparent lack of sophistication in philosophical matters.2 The following year, Marx himself read Darwin’s book, whereupon he immediately accepted the theory of natural selection as a scientific confirmation of his own ideas about human history. Darwin’s theory, he felt, with its emphasis on struggle and evolution in the natural world, was the perfect complement to his own theory of class struggle and historical development. Writing to Ferdinand Lassalle in January, 1861, Marx explained that ‘Darwin’s book is very important and serves me as a basis in natural science for the class struggle in history.’ Of course, he added, echoing Engels’ comments of the previous year, ‘one [had] to put up with the crude English method of development.”
― Daniel Gasman, The Scientific Origins of National Socialism

“The mapping uncovered widespread deep valleys below the ice sheet, many of which lie below sea level. Many valleys also originate far inland and end at the sea. Out of 123 marine-terminating glaciers, “60 drain 88 percent of the ice sheet in area and are grounded below 300m depth at their termini, meaning they are deep enough to interact with subsurface warm Atlantic waters and undergo massive rates of subaqueous melting.”32 Under the right conditions, this could lead to a rapid meltdown that would affect a substantial portion of Greenland.”
― Vivien Gornitz, Vanishing Ice: Glaciers, Ice Sheets, and Rising Seas