Time to Take a Stand • Hacker News Board

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#731

Post by tptacek » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 9:41 PM UTC

myblake wrote: post #22

_m8fo wrote: post #7

Why is that all of these posts saying to "take a stand" fail to explain the political process? I'll just quote myself here. If you want to help stop trump the most effective ways are to: 1. Call - Local congresspeople (http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/) - Senators (https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/) - Local officials (https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials) 2. Participate - Get involved in local electi…

How effective is calling local congress members if you live in an area with a strong progressive majority such as the Bay Area. Not that we shouldn't voice our option to our represented officials but I suspect in some ways it's redundant whereas things like raising money for national organizations may be more impactful.

It's extremely important. The Republican coalition has had outreach programs for years set up to generate floods of calls; my senator, Dick Durbin, had to shut his phones off because of one such effort to push through pro-Israel legislation.

A large number of Democrats have voted to confirm John Kelly, the anti-immigration former general who will now run DHS and enforce Trump's Muslim ban. Almost all of the Democrats supported Mattis for DOJ, because he appears to be the sanest member of the administration's team. A decent sized number even supported Pompeo, a Muslim-alarmist, for CIA.

Coming up soon is Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III for Attorney General. Sessions is by many accounts an unreconstructed white supremacist. But Democrats will support him, because he's also a member of the Senate, and collegiality goes a very long way in the Senate.

Unless the Democratic coalition makes it clear to their representatives that we are holding them accountable for their votes to give consent for confirmation votes, and for their actual confirmation votes, the Democrats will act "strategically", holding back resistance until they're absolutely required to offer it. It doesn't help that the Republican party is almost uniformly conservative and extremely white, while the Democratic party is a coalition of interests that leans but is not firmly planted in liberal tradition.

Even if you're in a liberal state. You have to call. Social media doesn't count. It's very easy to do and if enough people do it, it does make a difference. It's like voting, except that your calls have more influence than your votes.

I cannot recommend highly enough the Indivisible Guide, which is the outcome of a bunch of legislative staffers attempting to reverse-engineer the Tea Party's process from the last 8 years and apply them to Democratic objectives:

https://www.indivisibleguide.com/

It's all actionable stuff.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#732

Post by Tulip68 » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 9:41 PM UTC

iaw wrote: post #109

mozumder wrote: post #74

You really do need to demonize Trump voters. Most of them are in favor of his horrible policies, and are malicious themselves. You're never going to get anywhere without recognizing the source of the problem.

> You're never going to get anywhere without recognizing the source of the problem. So... Demonize the voters that naively thought Trump would help them more than Hillary? What comes next after they're alienated? Pragmatically: where are we going to get with you proposed tactic?

It's very simple: make it socially unacceptable to promote the ethnic cleansing of a religion comprised of nearly a billion people, 99.999% of whom are decent, peaceful people who share the same types of dreams, goals and values as the rest of us.

This wouldn't be the first time we've had to confront bigots who want to eliminate entire groups of people because they have a different skin color or pray to a different sky-man. And we didn't get rid of them by playing nice or trying to split the difference.

Rather, whether we're talking about slave-owners in the 1860s or fasicists the 40s, we've faced this menace before and stamped them out the promotors of hate and division. And we will do it again.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#733

Post by scrollaway » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 9:41 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #444

scrollaway wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You focus so much on holding people accountable rather than prevention. Lay off seeking justice for a while, try to seek order instead. Listen to why people voted Trump rather than call them all bigots and justify it with "they knew what they were getting into". As a european who truly despises Trump: This idea that you're too busy blaming people for being racist to spend time listening to them is honestly frightenin…

Lay off seeking justice for a while Dude, I'm also European and I've spent 25 years listening to and debating with conservative people - in person, on the net, at academic gatherings and many other places. I have studied a wide variety of conservative philosophies and social groups. At what point are you OK with me drawing some conclusions, even temporary working conclusions that I might have to alter later? When I h…

I'm sorry, I have no idea what you're saying here. Is this a reply to me or to the parent comment? Where do you see me make assumptions about how strong anyone's opinions are?

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#734

Post by Cyph0n » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 9:41 PM UTC

artursapek wrote: post #530

gizmo wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of this justifies discrimination against Muslims. I'm flagging this because this kind of incendiary racism has no place on HN.

- Islam is not a race, it's an ideology - Go live in one of these European cities that have been turned into a refugee ghetto by their government, and come back and tell me that

Have you actually lived in such a city? This is pathetic.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#735

Post by Frondo » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 9:41 PM UTC

thex10 wrote: post #603

Frondo wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know who really needs to take a fucking stand? The low-level workers at these airports who are enforcing this bullshit ban. They need to grow some spines and start ignoring bad orders, no matter who they come from. "I was just following orders" was never an acceptable excuse to do the wrong thing.

I agree, but they often are the ones who have the most to lose. They lose their job and then aren't able to pay rent that month/feed their family etc. A VP or probably even a middle manager taking a similar stand likely has cash saved up/secondary income/investments/other options to withstand this sort of change with fewer catastrophic results.

You know who might have more to lose? The people with green cards, the refugees, the people from that list of 7 countries, kept out of the US for bullshit reasons.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#736

Post by pavlov » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 9:43 PM UTC

general_ai wrote: post #225

Scirra_Tom wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First, it's not a "ban". It's a temporary suspension until new vetting procedures are put in place. He's got his foot in the door. That's all he needs right now. > But there's another aspect of this that baffles me. Somehow Sam has no issues with democrats totally destabilizing the Middle East, and funding/arming ISIS to depose Assad. Yet the moment Trump attempts to mitigate the negative side effects of that to th…

Trump stated his intention to stabilize the region. So far he has demonstrated very clearly that he intends to keep his promises. All that needs to happen there is we need to stop arming ISIS, and join forces with Russia and Assad's government to destroy ISIS. It'll be over in a year or two. And if you find the US interventionism repugnant, congratulations, we now have a president who is against it, too.

You mean the guy who, exactly a week ago, said that maybe the USA will have another chance to "keep the oil" from Iraq?

Here's the quote from his speech at CIA:

"We don’t win anymore. The old expression, “to the victor belong the spoils” -- you remember. I always used to say, keep the oil. I wasn’t a fan of Iraq. I didn’t want to go into Iraq. But I will tell you, when we were in, we got out wrong. And I always said, in addition to that, keep the oil. Now, I said it for economic reasons. But if you think about it, Mike, if we kept the oil you probably wouldn’t have ISIS because that’s where they made their money in the first place. So we should have kept the oil. But okay. (Laughter.) Maybe you’ll have another chance. But the fact is, should have kept the oil. " [1]

Claiming that Trump is against interventionism is just you projecting your own wishes and hopes onto the blank canvas of his mind.

[1] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-cia-speech-transcript/

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#737

Post by MisterBastahrd » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 9:43 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #504

Things companies in tech can do: - Demand to see the detailed plan for TrumpCare. What's it going to cost us? What will it do to our employees? Where are the details? That's what lobbyists are paid to find out. Employers have a big stake in this. - Demand to see the tariff plan. So far, it's all talk, but soon it will be legislation. This has huge impacts for many businesses. Business planning and investment will sta…

The tariff plan will never pass Congress. It might not even get out of a committee. Except for the most diehard extremists in the Republican party, the tariff plan is an economic non-starter.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#738

Post by axon » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 9:44 PM UTC

bassman9000 wrote: post #347

burkaman wrote: post #16

In case anyone is still skeptical that this is really a Muslim ban and not just a blanket ban on refugees and immigrants, note that Trump has said he will give priority to Christian refugees: http://www1.cbn.com/thebrodyfile/archive/2017/01/27/brody-fi...

Irrelevant. The text of the order is what matters. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/us/politics/refugee-musli... Yeah, he's doing a shitty job communicating it, but what did you expect... > (b) Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made…

The religious minority is a nice grey line drawn. Do you consider subsets of major religions separate religions themselves?

A terrorist could claim they are a minority to get priority... the prejudice is apparent.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#739

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 9:45 PM UTC

TuringNYC wrote: post #454

finid wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Muslims, then GC holders. Very soon, certain group of citizens will suffer the same fate. The prison walls are getting closer... By the time you're able to reach out and touch them, it'd be too late.

Well, that didnt take long. The definition is about to get broader, per WSJ: In a statement that the State Department is due to release, which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, the 90-day visa moratorium extends beyond just citizens of Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Libya, and Yemen. It also applies to people who originally hail from those countries but are traveling on a passport issued by any other natio…

[deleted]

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#740

Post by guildwriter » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 9:45 PM UTC

cmurf wrote: post #687

thilmo wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about the best way: 7. THINK Think up better arguments, that might convince people. Examine your own opinions, to see whether they're actually right. Examine your opponents' opinions, to see whether they're right too. Maybe come up with new ways of thinking about the issue which are better than the way anyone's thinking about them at the moment. And then start talking. People in politics should put less thought i…

I'd say evaluate the actual target audience for this conversation, and choose to not engage an audience that clearly has no interest in anything other than what amounts to tribal warfare. And that includes the president smearing every source of criticism as "FAKE NEWS!" He exactly represents those who voted for him: ignorant, fearful, angry, reactionary, conspiracy theorists, suspicious and vindictive. There is no po…

You do realize this sort of behavior doesn't grow in a vacuum right? In a relationship it takes two to tango, unless dealing with someone mentally ill. To claim that say 10 million voters who hold resentment against the left for what they perceive as hostile bias are all mentally ill is grossly unfair.

Conservative resentment against what they perceive as liberal intolerance has been going on since at least the early 2000s. The conservative blogosphere really took off around that time. There they either endured constant ridicule for their views or total ignoring from the established media which mostly runs liberal aside from Fox News. When they broke the story on Dan Rather and the faked National Guard memo on Bush, they were instantly derided for being nothing but people blogging in their pajamas. When they were proven true, the hostile indifference never let up. This has gone on for 15 years or so now. For them, this last election to them was the last straw. The coverage that went on during the 2016 elections was deeply shameful and outright scurrilous in some areas.

Keep in mind that during the 2000s and probably about until 2008 or so, the internet community sites were mostly dominated by liberal views. Reddit for instance looked vastly different compared to now. This allowed the formation of deep and entrenched echo chambers that allowed certain behaviors to foment and become acceptable. When conservatives began to join the internet en masse, they ran up against these entrenched social communities and quickly found that they were getting shut out. Rightly or wrongly, that kind of blanket treatment will cause resentment.

Vast swaths of people on the left have been dismissive of people on the right for ages. This is not a one sided issue, of course conservatives do the same. But that does not matter. We got here because everyone started talking past each other, insulting each other, and not doing the hard work of emphasizing irregardless of our agreement or not. Emotional labor matters and we've all dropped the ball hard. Conservatives are not monolithic and people always appreciate feeling listened to and that their concerns matter. You don't have to agree with someone to do this.

When we want to fix a relationship with our partners we don't concern ourselves with who was right or wrong. We concentrate on the relationship itself.