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

The Autocrat's Language

nybooks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 86 posts

Re: The Autocrat's Language

#11

Post by jmcqk6 »

dropit_sphere wrote: post #7

> Witch hunts cannot actually be carried out by losers, big or small: the agent of a witch hunt must have power. Aaaaay, and now the public conversation has finally advanced. The contention of the far right is that this statement is exactly right, but not in the way the author means. That is: there is no coherent rightist opposition to the national religion of progressivism, and this can be verified by checking for w…

I've been rereading this trying to see a coherent argument, but I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say. The thing that you quote seems like it could win an award for stretching metaphors.

Re: The Autocrat's Language

#12

Post by ogre_magi »

vkou wrote: post #8
dropit_sphere wrote: post #7

> Witch hunts cannot actually be carried out by losers, big or small: the agent of a witch hunt must have power. Aaaaay, and now the public conversation has finally advanced. The contention of the far right is that this statement is exactly right, but not in the way the author means. That is: there is no coherent rightist opposition to the national religion of progressivism, and this can be verified by checking for w…

> That is: there is no coherent rightist opposition to the national religion of progressivism, and this can be verified by checking for who is doing the hunting. Just because a bunch of people can do some witch hunting on twitter doesn't make it a lucrative and safe career. Twitter slacktivists aside, who do you think currently has an easier job - people fighting for civil rights, or people who are fighting against t…

Both sides have their frame and mythology.

I get that you feel like you're doing what's right and true by advancing yours, but it's narratives and semiotics all the way down.

Re: The Autocrat's Language

#13

Post by YSFEJ4SWJUVU6 »

Regarding NPR's choice of words: it is in fact quite common to avoid very direct accusations in politics and news. I really doubt the author came about this for the first time ever, but rather wonder if he detested it as much each and every time earlier.

Re: The Autocrat's Language

#14

Post by bmcfeeley »

ogre_magi wrote: post #12
vkou wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is: there is no coherent rightist opposition to the national religion of progressivism, and this can be verified by checking for who is doing the hunting. Just because a bunch of people can do some witch hunting on twitter doesn't make it a lucrative and safe career. Twitter slacktivists aside, who do you think currently has an easier job - people fighting for civil rights, or people who are fighting against t…

Both sides have their frame and mythology. I get that you feel like you're doing what's right and true by advancing yours, but it's narratives and semiotics all the way down.

Is there a grand realization i'm missing in the observation that all people's belief systems are composed of data points that lead to those beliefs? This seems tautologically true to me, and mostly irrelevant.

Re: The Autocrat's Language

#15

Post by dguest »

tacon wrote: post #9

I don't speak German, so it was somewhat surprising to me when I learned that Führer means "leader" (or "guide", according to Wikipedia). And that that word is essentially dead in modern German speech. So how do you refer to the "leader" now?, I asked. I didn't get a good answer to that question, but it would probably take more understanding of German as to how they get by without the obvious word. I wonder if "news"…

Führer isn't dead in modern german unless you're talking about a person who leads. Most guide books are still called Reiseführer, and most germans have a Führerschein (driver's licence) etc.

Re: The Autocrat's Language

#16

Post by ogre_magi »

jmcqk6 wrote: post #11
dropit_sphere wrote: post #7

> Witch hunts cannot actually be carried out by losers, big or small: the agent of a witch hunt must have power. Aaaaay, and now the public conversation has finally advanced. The contention of the far right is that this statement is exactly right, but not in the way the author means. That is: there is no coherent rightist opposition to the national religion of progressivism, and this can be verified by checking for w…

I've been rereading this trying to see a coherent argument, but I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say. The thing that you quote seems like it could win an award for stretching metaphors.

It's part of the charm.

The issue of course is that if you don't flit in a distant metaphor, you tread disrespectfully upon _sacred ground_.

To toe the line a little for you, the witch-hunters are activists (good, noble ones) looking for sinners (bad, evil ones) and preaching about a world where the sinners have all the power.

In such a world, why would there be so many successful witch-hunters?

Re: The Autocrat's Language

#17

Post by roenxi »

That was a pleasure to read. Pushing the politics to one side; there is a call here to use words correctly and to use clear and unambiguous descriptions. That is a coherent and entirely reasonable expectation on any political dialog.

Doubly rewarding was that the writing style, while not pro-Trump, avoids the bile and hysteria that has been common since the last American election. Limiting criticism to unclear language does the author a lot of credit. Limited changes are needed to apply this article to many political statements.

Trumps pronouncements are particularly entertaining examples though. His speech can make it so clear that he isn't using specific facts. Watching his opponents trying to deal with something so audacious can be very entertaining.

Re: The Autocrat's Language

#18

Post by rdtsc »

adrianratnapala wrote: post #4

Then something cannot be described, it does not become a fact of shared reality. Hundreds of millions of Soviet citizens had an experience of the thing that could not be described, but I would argue that they did not share that experience, because they had no language for doing so. This is a very good point, but is I think a bit obscured because it seems to mistake the map for the territory. I think what the writer i…

> It also means that they all know everyone knows it, and know that everyone knows everyone knows it, ad infinitum.

Well not ad-infinitum. Just 3 levels needed:

1. I know (think of a graph with one node A)

2. I know that the other knows (A -> B)

3. I know that the other knows, that I know (A B).

That's basically how common sense works, and it helps groups of people work as a group (solve problems, achieve a common goal). But first this bootstrapping is necessary.

Anyway, in this particular case it is like political or ideological common sense ("the emperor doesn't have clothes"). That's why large gathering of people were looked at with suspicion or were outright illegal, because it might start this bootstrapping process. Then before you know it, people start to act.

This is probably one reason that gatherings protests are useful to -- achieve this effect. It can be done online, but a lot of communication is non-verbal, it's how people say things, how they act, dress, tone of voice, etc.

Re: The Autocrat's Language

#19

Post by ogre_magi »

bmcfeeley wrote: post #14
ogre_magi wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both sides have their frame and mythology. I get that you feel like you're doing what's right and true by advancing yours, but it's narratives and semiotics all the way down.

Is there a grand realization i'm missing in the observation that all people's belief systems are composed of data points that lead to those beliefs? This seems tautologically true to me, and mostly irrelevant.

"Data points"

That feels like a charitable euphemism but I suppose it is literally true in a way.

My point was simply: "We can tell when you're preaching."

I think HN functions well when it talks about topics where the community is roughly on the same side.

Re: The Autocrat's Language

#20

Post by [deleted] »

dropit_sphere wrote: post #7

> Witch hunts cannot actually be carried out by losers, big or small: the agent of a witch hunt must have power. Aaaaay, and now the public conversation has finally advanced. The contention of the far right is that this statement is exactly right, but not in the way the author means. That is: there is no coherent rightist opposition to the national religion of progressivism, and this can be verified by checking for w…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN