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

Welcome, ACLU

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 1001 posts

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#231

Post by soundwave106 »

nopcode wrote: post #72
muninn_ wrote: post #41

Although I think the American Civil Liberties Union is incredibly valuable and I'm glad they have a lot more money now to fight for the American people, I'm questioning all of this. Where was the outpouring of funding when black people were being gunned down by cops from West Coast organizations? Where has YCombinator been as our own impoverished African-Americans are getting slaughtered in the streets of Chicago? Wh…

I share your sentiment. It seems to me (I'm European) that bashing Trump is just a fancy, hipster thing to do.

Perhaps it is, to some extent. Unfortunately, it sometimes it takes a direct threat to get people motivated.

But that's human nature. Trump has done an awful lot to raise the ACLU's profile recently and ultimately this will be for a better good.

The ACLU has long been a strong advocate against police abuse (one web link of many: https://action.aclu.org/secure/stop-police-killing-communiti...), and the ACLU is participated in combating opiate abuse that emphasize treatment over jail (example: http://www.aclu-wa.org/story/task-force-issues-ground-breaki...). So while Silicon Valley may be reacting mainly to the executive order, support for the ACLU will help address these issues as well.

One other comment: I'll add that criticism of Trump is not just coming from the "hipster" left. I've noticed, for instance, that the Cato Institute, a very well notable libertarian think tank, is taking a hostile stance towards the Trump EO (https://www.cato.org/). This isn't a surprising stance frankly, but in a nation where politics is often thought of as binary (Cato is sometimes incorrectly generalized in this binary as "right wing"), sometimes the subtle nuances are missed.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#232

Post by koolba »

cosinetau wrote: post #67
muninn_ wrote: post #41

Although I think the American Civil Liberties Union is incredibly valuable and I'm glad they have a lot more money now to fight for the American people, I'm questioning all of this. Where was the outpouring of funding when black people were being gunned down by cops from West Coast organizations? Where has YCombinator been as our own impoverished African-Americans are getting slaughtered in the streets of Chicago? Wh…

The best time to plant a tree was yesterday. I can personally forgive them, but we need to hold these players accountable in the future. If marketing moves is what incentives them, we need to make it impossible to move us without extended action. Edit: Ya'll are cynical Jedis.

> The best time to plant a tree was yesterday. I can personally forgive them, but we need to hold these players accountable in the future. If marketing moves is what incentives them, we need to make it impossible to move us without extended action.

I feel like I hear that line on a daily basis but it doesn't factor in reality.

To stretch the metaphor further (for illustration), if the lot where you'll be planting the tree is being bulldozed today, yesterday is the worst day to plant a tree.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#233

Post by 6stringmerc »

koolba wrote: post #209

So when did YC decide to do this? Was it in the works for a while or purely knee jerk response to the past week?

As a wise man was once rumored to say, "In the Start Up World, be nimble and never miss a bandwagon that fits in your vertical."

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#234

Post by lowmagnet »

tdkl wrote: post #117
wavefunction wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why were Saudi Arabia and Egypt left off the list? That's where most of the 9/11 hijackers and planners hailed from. I think you're hearing echoes in your "sound mind."

You might want to ask Obama why he left them out in 2011. But considering the existing bullshit rollercoaster, you ask why MORE countries weren't banned ? This video presents all points of hypocrisy : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNu4xU9qOEM

Why should anyone ask President Obama why he left them out in 2011? The list was a list of countries that wouldn't or couldn't provide the enhanced background data we requested. People on those listed countries were scrutinized more, absent extra information from their home countries.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#235

Post by becarefulyo »

chickenfries wrote: post #16

Peter Thiel insists that the immigration EO is does not constitute a religious ban [1], but Rudy Giuliani says this is exactly what the President asked for [2] (Also, we heard him say as much many, many times). [1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2017/01/28/peter-thiel-s... [2] http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316726-giuliani-t...

I don't understand why it's even controversial to call this a Muslim ban. It's a ban on people from Muslim majority countries, except for religious minorities in those countries.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#236

Post by matt_wulfeck »

tghw wrote: post #205
matt_wulfeck wrote: post #166

I used to be an ACLU supporter, but stopped after their main objectives switched to more of what I describe as matters of feelings , E.g., whether a man who identifies as a women can use a women's bathroom in Georgia, or whether the term man or women can ever be used at all. In my opinion most the ACLU LGBT agenda has been a useless war on words , yet it's taking on a greater and greater importance in the organizatio…

That's hardly their main focus. Go to https://www.aclu.org/ and click Issues. LGBT Rights are just one of 18 top level issues (many broken down into many more related issues). I love the EFF, but they don't cover voting rights, disability rights, immigration rights, racial justice, etc.

They have a lot of pokers in the civil liberty fire, and I really do wish them success in all of them. However as you (and probably many others here) are now supporters you'll start receiving the newsletter which outlines your local chapters focus, recent successes, and new battles. You can make a decision to continue supporting the organization or switch to something you believe personally is more important.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#237

Post by wtvanhest »

dang wrote: post #57
wtvanhest wrote: post #3

I remember when HN did not have a political agenda. Right or wrong, this used to be mainly about startups. Now its become a highly political message board

No, it hasn't. The rule has been the same for years: most politics are off topic. Check it out: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . The difference between "most" and "all" is significant. HN can't be immune to what's going on in the outside world and we've learned from years of experience that it doesn't make sense to try. At the same time, we're not going to let politics overwhelm the site, since that…

I used the word 'mainly' because I understand that HN has always had some political conversation in the background. I have personally learned about immigration issues, digital privacy, etc. etc. on HN. Those are valuable things to understand, and I enjoyed reading about them.

Now, it is clear that YC leadership has taken a highly liberal stand. I won't make a judgement on liberal or republican, but it feels more and more extreme. When an organization leans either direction too hard, it loses its purity. YC is becoming the liberal version of the Koche Brothers. HN is reflecting that in YC's movement.

I'm sure that Sam Altman and the rest of your team feel that it is worth it, but in my opinion, overt political support by an organization feels like a losing long-term strategy.

I guess we will see

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#238

Post by mrtron »

muninn_ wrote: post #135
CydeWeys wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe I'm too cynical and look at these moves (AirBnB, Uber, Google, etc...) as marketing moves. I strongly disagree that this is purely for marketing. As someone working for one of the aforementioned companies, we are all aghast at how quickly this administration has jumped to eroding everything we believe in. These companies' moves are motivated by very real horror at the US going down a dark path. The worst you…

"This temporary hold on people entering the country from one of 7 countries for 90 days affects a lot of my coworkers" And then "I don't care about the dozens of black people gunned down every day" Seems a little selfish no? This is exactly the same mentality that Trump supporters had, just exchange Americans with coworkers and refugees with black people. Maybe they aren't purely marketing moves, but I just have a ha…

One of those is the direct result of an executive order. There is a clear path to fighting it.

They both are causes people care about.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#239

Post by GeneralMayhem »

striking wrote: post #129
chickenfries wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think Indonesia doesn't have problems with terrorism? (Edit: also, Pakistan?). The idea that this is a reasonable counterterrorism measure by any means is a farce that doesn't stand up to the lightest of scrutiny. It's a test of executive power, perhaps for something more sinister [1]. [1] https://medium.com/@yonatanzunger/trial-balloon-for-a-coup-e...

It's a list inherited from the Obama administration. The best time to argue about whether this list stands up to scrutiny or not was years ago. Edit: I'm not making comments about Trump's actions (specifically, I'm not defending what he did). As for whether this particular list stands up to scrutiny, that question should have been asked a long time ago.

Well, sort of. Obama was president when the list was created, but it was forced through by a Republican-majority Congress.

http://www.snopes.com/trump-immigration-order-obama/

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#240

Post by ajamesm »

geofft wrote: post #131
ra1n85 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's virtue signalling. Nevermind that Chicago had more murders in 2016 than New York and Los Angeles combined, or that there's a rampant opiate epidemic across wide swaths of the country - this is a cause with visibility among the well heeled coastal elites. Where were these same people when we undermined and bombed the governments of the countries these immigrants are fleeing from?

I thought "virtue signaling" meant loudly expressing sentiments to enhance your perceived moral standing. If you actually put your money where you mouth is, a) is it still virtue signaling, and b) what's wrong with it?

seems like the meaning is shifting from "non-sacrificial action taken solely to signify virtue" with "any action taken in the name of virtues I don't embrace"
Post reply on HN