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

431–440 of 1001 posts

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#431

Post by pif »

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…

> Racism is not just racism, sexism is not just sexism.

They are just wrong and they have no place in a modern western democracy.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#432

Post by grandalf »

tptacek wrote: post #422
grandalf wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> more and more Moral Fashion Police on the democratic side of the isle This hits the nail on the head. It's a moralistic sort of righteous indignation and it's profoundly, dangerously illiberal . In addition, many of these are the same people who are pleased that HRC is not being challenged over the revelations in the email leaks so far. I want whoever takes office to have been vetted as much as possible by journali…

People keep claiming that this sentiment is "profoundly illiberal". Those people should read more liberal philosophy, because it is not as if this is the first time this issue has come up. You can bring it back to John Stuart Mill if you like, but (very unsurprisingly) it's also one of the major themes of post-World-War-2 liberal philosophy. We are not required to tolerate intolerance when intolerance poses a threat…

I do not believe Trump is significantly more intolerant than HRC or any other likely presidential candidate, he simply focuses his rhetoric on populist ire across all of his positions. It's the only trick he knows so he does it again and again.

Additionally, HRC has in the past advocated a nearly identical "wall" policy but used softer rhetoric:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gUAdAYFbIc

GOP candidates for several elections have said much the same stuff Trump is saying only with a rhetorical style more like HRC's. Trump borrows economic populism (and its racist undertones) from the rust belt rhetoric of democrats.

> If you don't believe Trump's intolerance poses a real threat

This is not my belief. I believe both Trump's and HRC's intolerance both pose a major threat. I also believe that the trend toward unabashed executive power is the biggest threat to stability. HRC and Trump both show a similar chance of abusing this, and fortunately congress would be more vigilant about preventing Trump from abusing it, since he has not spent years aligning interest groups in preparation for his day in power.

I could not vote for either of the two major party candidates, my position is not to defend Trump but to apply some of the same criticisms to HRC which seemingly exist in the blind spot of Altman, Graham, and other HRC supporters.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#433

Post by youforpresident »

I don't think that a person, president or not, is to play a crucial role. Society has a dynamic in which a president is only a mirror for you to watch yourself. Perhaps the mirror show you something that you don't want to see and you can try to clean it or hide it, but that mirror just show how society is for real. I sincerely and literaly think that we should get used to watch candidates for presidency to be nuked in tv, as in a big brother show, no more secrets allowed. We should see clearly and understand deeply that we are just human animals and nothing more. A candidate for presidency should be able to show some kind of humor, witful ideas, clear thinking, some catastrophic behaviour and be able to inspire some trust. I believe that nothing more can be expected.

For those looking forward for a better future, the challenge is not in choosing your president, but in becoming your best friend.

Any of you can be the best president, I am sure of it, just awake, get up in the morning and see yourself in the mirror for real.

Edited for clarity of mind.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#434

Post by undersuit »

tptacek wrote: post #224
Bartweiss wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm deeply uncomfortable with the narrative where support for Trump is a basis for excluding a person from discussion and employment. He's a major party candidate, supported (if sometimes disliked) by roughly half the population. That's not a number of people you can fire or silence! The usual argument runs that this time is unique, that Trump has embraced racism and violence and his major-party status should not bur…

Nobody is suggesting excluding Trump supporters from employment.

Wasn't that the exact reason many developers cancelled Oculus Rift support unless Facebook severed ties with Palmer Luckey?

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#436

Post by surfmike »

tptacek wrote: post #416
surfmike wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can agree with that and still continue working with Thiel. You can be against fascism and but still be against creating a society where everyone must get in line politically or else be shunned.

I don't need people to get in line politically. I would be content with them not bundling millions of dollars for Donald Trump before getting up on stage at the RNC and claiming, as Thiel did, to speak for Silicon Valley in claiming that Trump is the only honest candidate in the race. I'm a simple sort of guy. My needs are not complicated.

I have never heard him claim to speak for Silicon Valley.

The question becomes then, what do you consider your line. Is this about his outsized financial support? What if he gave his RNC speech and only donated $10,000?

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#437

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #416
surfmike wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can agree with that and still continue working with Thiel. You can be against fascism and but still be against creating a society where everyone must get in line politically or else be shunned.

I don't need people to get in line politically. I would be content with them not bundling millions of dollars for Donald Trump before getting up on stage at the RNC and claiming, as Thiel did, to speak for Silicon Valley in claiming that Trump is the only honest candidate in the race. I'm a simple sort of guy. My needs are not complicated.

[deleted]

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#438

Post by tptacek »

undersuit wrote: post #434
tptacek wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody is suggesting excluding Trump supporters from employment.

Wasn't that the exact reason many developers cancelled Oculus Rift support unless Facebook severed ties with Palmer Luckey?

I wasn't aware that there was a boycott of Oculus over Palmer Luckey, but man, that's heartening to hear. I have to admit that I would not have picked "political integrity" over "access to VR toys" in that particular sparring match. Good for those developers!

Boycotts are a form of speech. The right to criticize is inalienable.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#439

Post by [deleted] »

exstudent2 wrote: post #384
criddell wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For all the crazy things Trump says, for all is egoism he has some very important points which needs to be addressed and discussed and he represents a group of people who haven't been represented for the last 40 years. Is there a line that Trump could cross where you would start to say he's dangerous and doesn't deserve his spot at the table?

> doesn't deserve his spot at the table? No one gets to decide who gets a spot at the table. It doesn't really matter if you think Trump is "dangerous", the idea that if you think the "right" way you're entitled to shape the dialogue by censorship if needed is exactly what people who are anti-anti-Trump are trying to fight.

[deleted]

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#440

Post by ThomPete »

d7oaks wrote: post #397
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 disagree. I think Marco’s point, which I strongly agree with, is that donating to Trump goes beyond just supporting a political candidate that you don’t happen to agree with. The fact that Trump has some valid policy ideas is completely besides the point. Amongst other things he is inciting racial and ethnic hatred, undermining trust in American democracy, encouraging violence and legitimising sexual assault. When…

So it's ok supporting Hillary even though she is largely responsible for huge parts of US foreign policy having sacrificed hundreds of thousands of innocent people as collateral damage for a bigger political goal.

Yet somehow the very words of Trump is immoral.

I guess I just don't get it.

Post reply on HN