Welcome, ACLU • Hacker News Board

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#341

Post by CydeWeys » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 5:13 PM UTC

muninn_ wrote: post #158

becarefulyo wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your argument is that if you didn't do what was right before, you shouldn't do what's right now?

The other problems still exist and in my opinion are far worse. My argument is that we should prioritize problems like those over the current outcry.

A lot of people believe that we are in the midst of a fascist takeover of the United States government. The most terrifying part is that this can't simply be dismissed as a conspiracy theory, given the actions that have taken place so far.

I don't see how "the current outcry" can possibly be dismissed in this context, or how anything else could be more important.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#342

Post by chimeracoder » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 5:13 PM UTC

artmageddon wrote: post #267

jMyles wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are an unqualified, categorically "good" organization The ACLU is wonderful, no doubt about that. But I think some people do put an asterisk next to the group because of their (obviously somewhat strange) categorization of the protections of the 2nd amendment as outside the scope of American civil liberties.

The ACLU doesn't have a problem with 2A, but they see gun ownership as a collective right rather than an individual right. They have stood up for 2A rights in the past, but compared to the NRA and other 2A advocates, they have very limited resources, so they let the NRA / et. al. handle them.

> The ACLU doesn't have a problem with 2A, but they see gun ownership as a collective right rather than an individual right

To be specific - they disagree with one specific SCOTUS ruling that is less than a decade old (DC v. Heller). They do agree with the pro-gun arguments put forth by US v. Miller.

They have devoted (to my knowledge) no material resources towards fighting DC v. Heller despite their disagreement with it, and they explicitly leave most 2nd Amendment cases to other advocacy groups (namely the NRA) because those are much more well-funded and focused solely on the 2nd Amendment. The ACLU prefers to spend its much smaller and limited budget on cases which aren't really supported by many (if any) other advocacy groups.

This seems to keep coming up, and it's a rather tiresome argument: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13511964

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#343

Post by enraged_camel » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 5:13 PM UTC

bmelton wrote: post #194

laurent123456 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This logic (people should do nothing today because they did nothing yesterday) doesn't make any sense, and I don't get why it keeps coming up every time something related to Trump's policy comes up.

Not to speak for the OP, but at least for me, I'm seeing a lot of my friends all of a sudden up in arms over policies that Obama (and Bush, and in some cases earlier than that even) got crickets for. Admittedly, I'm not trying to compare apples to apples, and I'm the furthest thing from a Trump supporter, and it's absolutely amazing that the media have finally grown into their role of a check and balance against the…

People keep bringing up the Obama thing in response to the immigration ban.

Obama suspended visas from Iraq for six months, and gave plenty of warning beforehand so people could prepare.

Trump suspended all immigration from seven countries on a Friday without warning, ordered the detention of people from those countries at the border, prevented them from seeking legal representation, and deported some of them. Including green card holders.

If you don't understand the massive difference between these two things than I don't know what to tell you.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#344

Post by coldpie » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 5:13 PM UTC

TorKlingberg wrote: post #291

ErikVandeWater wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes this is somewhat dangerous for YC. I would like to see that this was planned before November and their support was not determined by who the president turned out to be. Combined with the outspoken politics of Paul Graham1, I get the feeling people who identify as conservatives may not feel welcome at YC. 1 http://twitter.com/paulg EDIT: I changed "conservatives" to "people who identify as conservatives" to clarif…

* Much of pg's writing leans libertarian or even conservative. * Many conservatives do not support Trump's policies. Conservativism is traditionally about preserving stable society and carefully evaluating changes before radically changing society. I think many took a wait-and-see approach to Trump. Sure, he was bombastic during the campaign and said a lot of bad things, but he's a screwd businessman. Surely he will…

Time for conservatives to sack up, speak out, and vote their conscious, then. They've been extremely quiet so far.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#345

Post by toast0 » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 5:14 PM UTC

cloakandswagger wrote: post #39

mcphage wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LOL at all the liberals giving money to a group that defends the constitution, how silly is that amirite?

They defend every part of the Constitution except the Second Amendment. That hypocrisy is why the ACLU will never see a penny from me.

Not defending the 2nd amendment is different than opposing it. You could consider donating to the ACLU and also to an organization that defends the 2nd amendment; assuming there's no blanket organization to your liking. There are many organizations specializing in the 2nd amendment, so it makes some amount of sense for the ACLU to let them do that work, while it's more of a generalist.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#346

Post by TorKlingberg » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 5:14 PM UTC

koolba wrote: post #328

TorKlingberg wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* Much of pg's writing leans libertarian or even conservative. * Many conservatives do not support Trump's policies. Conservativism is traditionally about preserving stable society and carefully evaluating changes before radically changing society. I think many took a wait-and-see approach to Trump. Sure, he was bombastic during the campaign and said a lot of bad things, but he's a screwd businessman. Surely he will…

(Emphasis mine) > I think many took a wait-and-see approach to Trump. Sure, he was bombastic during the campaign and said a lot of bad things, but he's a screwed businessman. Surely he will get some decent advisors and not breaks things. Intentional, typo ("shrewd"), or Freudian slip?

typo

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#347

Post by RodericDay » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 5:15 PM UTC

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 agree, but it's not just a vague sense of unease that bothers me. It's actually very real and very concrete.

I am probably in the very far left-wing on this website in many regards, and what I see in a lot of this effusive and reflexive anti-Trumpism, is a lot of dubious and easily rolled-back gains. At climax radical right-wing activity, the GOP can just throw Donald Trump under the bus, and I think this would completely destroy any of the coalitions currently being built up against him, because the agreement on everything else is vague.

A lot of people really and deeply want to believe that the problem is Donald Trump himself, not the entire institution that props him up. I've seen numerous liberals (as opposed to leftists) on the internet openly and effusively embrace John McCain in his fashionable and phony role of maverick, the man who sang "Bomb Iran" to the tune of the Beach Boys. It's bewildering.

Another example is the Women's March. A friend of mine mentioned to a fellow protestor how important it was for her to fight for reproductive rights, and this woman's response was that it wasn't even about that, it's mostly just about Trump's disrespect towards women. And if you go on the movement's website, it's true. It doesn't mention planned parenthood or reproductive rights at all. Some people see it as a virtue, I think it is a strategic error.

Moreover, I think everyone on the broad left clearly understood Donald Trump's "Make America Great Again" as a dogwhistle for bygone years largely characterized by white supremacy and a vision of the ideal normal nuclear family. The real surprising thing is that a lot of the impassioned, patriotic rallying cries against Trump today, by celebrities who describe themselves as patriots who were proud up until yesterday, are exactly the same: "Make America Great Again". It's just that they pine for the great Obama years instead.

There is almost zero mea-culpa about how it was possible that Trump got elected in the first place, and it's become so important to "stop Trump" that criticizing allies is a huge faux-pas. I don't see this building into a healthy strong movement.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#348

Post by tptacek » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 5:15 PM UTC

chimeracoder wrote: post #326

AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ACLU has been fighting the good fight for impoverished black people as well. They happen to be in the spotlight at the moment due to the Trump immigration executive order, but it's not as though 100% of the funds raised by YC will go towards fighting the immigration ban. It will support their countless other ongoing legal battles as well. They are an unqualified, categorically "good" organization that is deservin…

> They happen to be in the spotlight at the moment due to the Trump immigration executive order, but it's not as though 100% of the funds raised by YC will go towards fighting the immigration ban. It will support their countless other ongoing legal battles as well On that note - do we actually know that the YC funds are generally available to the ACLU? Oftentimes when non-profits receive large donations, the donor sp…

The amount of money the ACLU would get as a consequence of being accepted into a YC batch is a triviality compared to the amount of money they pull in from direct fundraising. Presumably, the benefit to ACLU of being directly engaged with YC is acceleration of their technical and outreach work, and perhaps improved access to wealthy donors in Silicon Valley.

Equally worth knowing: individual ACLU chapters receive funding from the national ACLU, but are also on the hook for raising some of their own funding.

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#349

Post by jaypaulynice » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 5:16 PM UTC

Come on YC, glad you're funding the ACLU and it's much needed, but where is the response to the homelessness in San Francisco for example? We care more about refugees than people who already live here?! Too many companies are taking advantage of a bad situation for PR and marketing!

Re: Welcome, ACLU

#350

Post by the_watcher » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 5:16 PM UTC

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…

> Maybe they aren't purely marketing moves, but I just have a hard time with it.

You have a hard time with companies supporting worthy causes because they don't support enough of them to the extent that you demand them to? That's what's generally known as cutting off your nose to spite your face.