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

Make America Hate Again

avc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 368 posts

Re: Make America Hate Again

#221

Post by nailer »

pluma wrote: post #188
soneca wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"People become sick of this, and vote Trump just to fuck with everyone." This is extremely superficial, arrogant, even offensive to people who voted for Trump. And that is the reason why Trump won IMO. Opposition couldnt understand (not even recognize) the legitimate and valid thoughtful reasons people had to vote for Trump.

I'm still struggling to understand where this obsession with explaining how Trump got people to vote for him comes from. The real killing blow was the low turnout for the Democrat candidate. Trump only had to beat Clinton and practically nobody (outside the most progressive parts of the US) voted for Clinton. Trump may have swayed some undecided voters in his favours as a protest vote but all he had to do was rally t…

I know a Trump voter who voted for him because of his Orlando speech where he was apparently the only candidate to state what actually happened: Islamists were killing gay people. Everyone else apparently didn't talk about either or both of those things.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#222

Post by lallysingh »

Just a quick request: let's not get lost on semantics here. It's a huge field of rabbit holes to get stuck in in usual populations, and discussions derail to garbage pretty quickly.

Please don't vent here. We have a chance on this forum for a meaningful discussion, but venting will ruin that.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#223

Post by 0xFFC »

pluma wrote: post #213
0xFFC wrote: post #57

Iranian here, I do completely respect his decision , although I am 100% against his decision. The only point I don't get is how Trump is not same Trump before election, He talked about banning Muslim (I was born in Muslim family , although I am not Muslim and I am atheist , I want to clear things out that I am not against ordinary people.), But he literally banned people from countries which have not participated in…

FWIW the list isn't even Trump's, it was copied verbatim from the Obama administration's. The excuse I often hear from Trump supporters is that the countries on the list are majority-Muslim countries where it's easy to get fake documents. Of course that still doesn't explain why the origin countries themselves aren't on the list. I'm not an American but I find it incredibly weird that Iran is always seen as a "terror…

To be honest , I am not law expert, I dont have very experience about citizenship laws in Iran, but as far as I know (You should consult an expert if you want to become sure) Iran's law written in a way you cannot get rid of your citizenship, even if you change your nationality, I think Iran government would consider you an Iranian. This law is ridiculous (I know). But I think the reason they wrote law in such way was not dictatorship or something like this , there was rationality (at least in their mind) behind such law.

p.s. I want to make you sure, the information I wrote in this comment maybe are wrong, so do not rely on them.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#224

Post by mst »

mikeash wrote: post #110
Corristowolf wrote: post #56

Obama was the one who implemented the visa ban for 7 islamic countries. Trump is just continuing the policy and added a LGBTQ clause. The left is blowing this out of proportion, just because it's Trump. They had no problem with airstrikes everyday that Obama was in office. I wish the press could be more objective. Every country has a right to deny access to people from other countries. Same with all the islamic middl…

I have seen this statement several times now. Obama did the same thing, and nobody complained. It's not the same thing at all. Obama didn't block people who already have valid visas. Obama didn't block green card holders. Why do you say it's the same? Do you consider those two things to be essentially the same, or are you ignorant of the actual substance of one or both of these actions, or what?

Green card holders are being exempted, that was shitshow disorganisation rather than policy.

This policy is still not the same though, no.

The previous administration only suspended Iraqi refugee processing for ~6 months.

The thing I'm mostly annoyed about is people claiming "only the new administration would pick this list of countries" when they inherited the list. I'd much rather we focused on how much worse things they're doing with the list instead.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#225

Post by gonvaled »

Internal american politics, not of interest. Flagged. When we were discussing the terrorist attacks in France, they were being consistently flagged. I complained about [1] the anglo-centrism of HN and dang replied this:

> I'd caution against drawing general conclusions about HN from spot observations about what does/doesn't get flagged. People usually fall prey to cognitive biases when they do so, e.g. thinking that the community is against them somehow. We're all primed to feel that way; the feeling just hops to different things depending on our different identities. > Occam suggests you needn't look for "Anglo bias" as an explanation for why a story gets flagged when the thread includes "We must get rid of Merkel and the refugees" followed by "What do you suggest, gas chambers?" > (Not that there isn't inevitably going to be something like "anglo bias" on an English-language website. But FWIW the moderators here are acutely aware of, and grateful for, and interested in, the international aspects of the community—definitely including the German ones.)

Either stop being USA (and UK) -centric, or stop pretending that you are not.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12145481

Re: Make America Hate Again

#226

Post by losteverything »

tluyben2 wrote: post #100
mikeash wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While we're banning these other words, can we also ban "virtue signaling"? It basically means "you are being insincere" and is just as unproductive.

Never heard about that as maybe not a native English speaker. What is it?

Me neither.

I'd define it "When in Rome ...."

Personally I would never attach the word "virtue" to opinion/thought only actions.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#227

Post by 0xfeba »

mikeash wrote: post #113
tluyben2 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never heard about that as maybe not a native English speaker. What is it?

The Wikipedia article seems good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling The short version is, it's when someone acts in a "moral" fashion not because they truly believe it, but because they want others to see them as virtuous. Imagine someone attending a protest purely so that their friends can see them protesting, or donating to charity just so they can tell everyone that they donated.

Or if someone proclaims "support the troops!" yet doesn't donate to veterans efforts, or support simple policies toward that end.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#228

Post by tptacek »

rayiner wrote: post #145
kalleboo wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Trump went to election on "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States" [0, donaldjtrump.com] The fact that it was implemented as a ban on citizens from the most prominent Muslim-majority countries (as seen by the eyes of the average American voter, who forgot about Saudi Arabia) could be interpreted as a way for Trump to say he kept his pledge while not being instantly impeached for n…

How are those the "most prominent Muslim majority countries?" They don't have he largest Muslim populations, etc. They're a list of the most unstable Muslim-majority countries.

Iran is not one of the most unstable Muslim-majority countries, and the ban on Iranians is creating lots of problems here. Iran's inclusion in the list is purely political.

Re: Make America Hate Again

#229

Post by [deleted] »

Lawtonfogle wrote: post #90
yummyfajitas wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. I'm told I'm racist because I think blacks and whites are interchangeable, and because I don't care about one over the other. I'm told I'm racist for thinking the opposite. I'm told it's racist to discriminate on the basis of race. I'm also told it's racist NOT to do so. The closest principle I can find that predicts who is considered a racist is "republican = racist". Can you provide a clear definition of racism…

The second half of your last sentence is the key to the issue, IMO. People calling things racist, and yet those who agree with the things being called racist seeing those name calling ignoring similar behavior weakens the concept of bigotry. My favorite example of this is the legal system. The legal system is racist against blacks and Hispanics because it is harder on them. The legal system is also sexist against wom…

[deleted]

Re: Make America Hate Again

#230

Post by derrickdirge »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #179
panglott wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is a racist society: "race" has no valid biological basis, but is a salient social category which impacts social and economic interactions in a wide variety of ways, producing inequalities of privilege and injustice. Whether or not you have bigotry in your heart is beside the point—no one can know such things. When you spend all your energy trying to prove that you are untainted and innocent of racism, it seem…

I don't know what you mean by "racist". Can you provide a clear and unambiguous definition? I don't think you can.

You're being willfully obtuse. The points the parent was making were not reliant on a concrete shared definition of 'racism.'

Do you want to be part of a discussion, or do you just want the rush of endorphins that contrarianism provides?

Post reply on HN