Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Shame on Y Combinator

marco.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 1001 posts

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#161

Post by virmundi »

czzarr wrote: post #126
smt88 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am not sure why endorsement of a political candidate is sometimes equated with 100% parity on every single belief of that particular candidate. Endorsement is one thing. Donating a massive amount of money is something entirely different. Not many people are willing to part with $1.25M for someone they don't fanatically support. And either way, that's not the point. The point is that, while most candidates have de…

$1.25M is less for Thiel than $100 is for most people. The absolute amount is meaningless, you have to normalize by wealth here.

I'm replying to the general concept that it's a lot of money for a campaign. It's really not. While it's a good amount from a specific person, this specific person has a lot of money.

Hillary has multiple people over a million. These are private individuals too. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-16/leaked-list-hillary...

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#162

Post by grey-area »

skywhopper wrote: post #113
fareesh wrote: post #58

I am not sure why endorsement of a political candidate is sometimes equated with 100% parity on every single belief of that particular candidate. It is entirely possibly that some people support Trump because of his crass and divisive rhetoric, and it's also entirely possible that some people support Trump because of his stance on trade. Is it really anyone's place to demand that another voter change the list of prio…

Peter Thiel is doing just fine. If Y Combinator walked away from him, he would not be hurt or marginalized or ostracized in the least. This is not about persecuting people who vote for Trump. But to support Trump with an enormous sum of money _after_ Trump has revealed himself to be willing to resort to borderline anti-Semitic slurs, to welcome the support of the white supremacy movement, to call for locking up his p…

He's a true threat to our democracy.

The responses he provokes are also a threat to democracy.

It's important not to become that which you oppose by calling for opponents to be punished in some way (e.g. be locked up, or lose their job) because of their beliefs.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#163

Post by byuu »

civilian wrote: post #154
byuu wrote: post #139

Citizens United and McCutcheon were such disasters for our democracy. Hopelessly partisan 5-4 votes from the USSC as well. No surprise given the way big money usually leans. Corporations aren't people, and money isn't speech, no matter what five people in robes say. The problem here isn't who Thiel supports, it's that he has the ability to throw $1,250,000 on a whim to that person. Very, very, very few people can do…

If I earn money, should I be able to spend it how I like? If I have freedom of speech, and freedom of the press, isn't it fine to use my money towards the goals of freedom of speech & press? Citizens United is solid in my book. If we were to take down Citizens United, how would you deal with media outlets like Fox or WaPo? They're clearly biased and have an agenda, their biased reporting acts as a contribution to a c…

> If I earn money, should I be able to spend it how I like?

You already can't spend it to buy grenades, chemical weapons, illegal drugs, etc. You should not be able to spend it to influence elections either. I just explained why.

It's not 'fair', sure. But a lot of things aren't fair thanks to stupid people being stupid. Most recreational drugs are outlawed to protect the idiots that can't handle it. (Well, that's the narrative anyway. We'll sidestep the racial undertones, benefits to big pharma, etc.) Because otherwise, those idiots can go on to do the rest of us great harm. There are a lot of stupid people who are swayed by bullshit political attack ads (said attacks are deplorable from both sides), so we need some way to minimize that damage. Campaign contribution laws were not a perfect solution, but at least a stopgap measure. Now the floodgates are wide open.

> If we were to take down Citizens United, how would you deal with media outlets like Fox or WaPo?

They operated long before Citizens United came down. They concern me as well, as does MSNBC, RT, Al Jazeera, etc.

It's probably not possible to get fully unbiased news, but we've definitely gotten way worse in recent years on partisanship in news. And regardless of which party you support, you have to agree that the divide between us is becoming increasingly toxic and dangerous. The media is in large part to blame for stirring that up for their ratings.

Of course, even without news, the internet and social media are a big problem now too. Everyone simply follows like-minded people, blocks those they disagree with, and live in echo chambers to reinforce and polarize people even more. It's ... really starting to get very dangerous :/

> what they do isn't classified as campaign support, even though it should.

Agreed. Not that it'd matter anymore :(

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#164

Post by adpoe »

To me, these attitudes (and their general acceptance + support) are just as worrying as Donald's own attitudes and supporters.

One of the strangest things about human nature--at least that I've seen--is that when we vehemently resist something we detest we often produce its mirror image.

It's honestly extremely frightening to think that making a political donation to a major-party candidate you support could cost you your livelihood in this country. Those are not the principles America was founded on. (It's not even like McCarthyism anymore where they were persecuting a small minority party. We want to blacklist people for being __Republican__? Really?)

This is exactly how Democracy becomes eroded and one party systems emerge. And the fact that more people don't see that is quite chilling.

What's that old American saying? Something like: "I disagree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." That's the America I grew up in. What happened to it?

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#165

Post by trabant00 »

Living through communism in an eastern european country and getting the real freedom to vote and support who we want changed everything .

And this is why I simply cannot understand this. Educated people from countries which I associate with a strong democracy are asking, no, demanding political discrimination. This is illegal in any civilized country and for obvious reasons. And they do it in the name of progress too!

I must control my impulse of getting angry and calling names, but the fact is you are ignorant spoiled children who take your freedom for granted and would trade it for simple feelings of holier than though.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#166

Post by nugget »

bengale wrote: post #155
mabbo wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A large proportion of Trump supporters are not for Donald Trump the human being and all the things he's done. They're for the Republican party being in power; they're against Clinton for her faults (real or imagined); they're for someone who isn't a mainstream candidate being in charge for once. There's all kinds of reasons to support the GOP Presidential candidate that many people may see as more important than the…

Right, but a large portion of supporters are not donating over a million dollars. I'd expect that person to be for Donald Trump, rather than some vague wish for republican values.

I've traditionally associated more with Republicans than Democrats. Like many others around here, I'm fiscally conservative but socially liberal. The Republican party's stance on social issues, especially marriage equality and lack of tolerance in general, has been chronically infuriating to me. I believe Thiel was the first openly gay convention speaker in the history of the Republican party. He received a standing ovation. That was a major moment that went unnoticed by many. But not by me. Consider for a moment that there may be more going on here than meets the eye. Thiel may be quietly doing more to move many old school rank-and-file Republicans out of the past and into the future than anyone else this cycle, and that's a positive development for the entire country.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#167

Post by mangeletti »

tl;dr

The OP feels that if somebody disagrees with his political view point they should be silenced and oustered, and have their life ruined.

People like Marco are ruinous to society.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#168

Post by pron »

ThomPete wrote: post #127

Marcos understanding of this situation is extremely telling for a fundamental problem with many americans relationship with politics. Most only get involved around election. After that their political interest is non existing. It's easy to get lured into the idea that politics is a simple choice between the moral good and the moral bad, that the choice is simple and that there is a one to one relationship between wha…

> he represents a group of people who haven't been represented for the last 40 years.

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/15/13286498/d...

> the fundamental principle that no matter what in a democracy everyone have the right to say and mean what they want without having to fear the repercussions

This is not a principle, let alone a fundamental one, in any democracy or any other kind of society.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#169

Post by maxerickson »

ThomPete wrote: post #127

Marcos understanding of this situation is extremely telling for a fundamental problem with many americans relationship with politics. Most only get involved around election. After that their political interest is non existing. It's easy to get lured into the idea that politics is a simple choice between the moral good and the moral bad, that the choice is simple and that there is a one to one relationship between wha…

I'm pretty sure a huge portion of Trump's support is from people that are essentially single issue tax and supreme court voters (for the presidential election). Or even a Yuuuge portion. Jerry Falwell Jr. isn't struggling or left out of the political process.

I also don't understand what everyone have the right to say and mean what they want without having to fear the repercussions is supposed to mean. If someone repeatedly says stupid things, one of the repercussions is that I'm going to start thinking they aren't very thoughtful. Do they have a right to not be judged by me? Or are you referring to some grayer area of repercussions that they should not have to face?

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#170

Post by brlewis »

Thanks, Marco, for drawing my attention to Sam Altman's great blog post. More people should take Sam's attitude:

The way we got into a situation with Trump as a major party nominee in the first place was by not talking to people who are very different than we are. The polarization of the country into two parallel political realities is not good for any of us. We should talk to each other more, not less.

We should all feel a duty to try to understand the roughly half of the country that thinks we are severely misguided. I don’t understand how 43% of the country supports Trump. But I’d like to find out, because we have to include everyone in our path forward. If our best ideas are to stop talking to or fire anyone who disagrees with us, we’ll be facing this whole situation again in 2020.

Post reply on HN