Er fragt sich, ob auch gemäßigte Parteien populistischer auftreten, mehr die eigenen Leute emotionalisieren sollen, mehr in die Tiefe denn Breite gehen, um mehr Dynamik zu erzeugen. Er selbst mache es nicht, wisse aber nicht, ob das wirklich zielführend sei.

Interessanter und authentischer Vortrag

Well, I try.

I would rather put it this way: be idealistic, do what you believe in — because good work and quality will prevail.

But in doing so don’t be naive, you need to be somewhat strategic, because otherwise you’re out.

So *some* balance indeed is key. But please don’t overdo the strategic part.

Thank you, Nicole :)

Yes. Also personally, I have seen female colleagues being attacked in ways I was never (e.g., „get back to the kitchen where you belong“). Tough.

Exactly. And it’s this very norm that we’re against. Complexity for complexities sake. The “nuance is always good”. No it’s not. The incremental insights need to outweigh the added complexity. And often the reported complexity is just empirical noise.

Particularly curious how students will respond. This is mostly written for scholars, and our inherent inclination for nuance. Perhaps they'll just shrug? Let me know :)

Great, that's cool to hear :) Curious how it will go! Always happy to get feedback, from you, students, or others.