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

Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

money.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 138 posts

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#111

Post by erik_seaberg »

sumeno wrote: post #26
camelNotation wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reduction of conservative beliefs to "discrimination of others" is a lot of the problem here. Conservative politics is a broad space. Sure, there are racists and misogynists among them and they get a lot of publicity, but there are also people who believe that all human beings are equal and that something like laissez-faire capitalism leads to a more just and prosperous society for everyone. They might be mistake…

While it is true that there are economic conservatives who are not racists and misogynists, the Republican party platform is pretty discriminatory against several groups. Someone can certainly vote for a candidate like Trump and not be pro-discrimination, but that person is saying they are willing to accept discrimination for the sake of the policies they do agree with. That is certainly their right, but you can't ac…

As Clinton put it,

> that "other" basket of people are people who feel the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures; and they’re just desperate for change.

That's not a voter who has the luxury of setting aside their own livelihood and making discrimination (against strangers) a deal-breaker.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#112

Post by justin66 »

notconservative wrote: post #105
justin66 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But, what about the concept of engaging with and challenging people who have different beliefs? What about not doing it at work, since that is not what anybody is there for?

That'd be fine with me if it was enforced equally. I haven't worked anywhere that attempted to do that, so not sure if it'd work or not. But, I'm skeptical. I think what may happen is that it'd go underground. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not. It may be a kind of secret reason to cause strife between employees. It would have to be supported as a broader part of the company culture. No discussing things that…

It is very odd that you assumed I was talking about setting a company policy. When I wrote "What about not doing it at work," I was talking about a social and behavioral norm.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#113

Post by edanm »

gonehome wrote: post #9

"John: If I walked into work with a "Make America Great Again" hat, there would be repercussions. Quite a few people would take it as a personal affront, and I would expect to be out of the company within weeks, if not a month." If someone walked in with a young earth creationist hat I would similarly question their ability to think critically (and have a hard time not just categorizing them as stupid). Is this reall…

If you assume that anyone who reached different conclusions than you is stupid by definition, then you'll quite literally never be able to change your mind.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#114

Post by leereeves »

lj3 wrote: post #76
Upvoter33 wrote: post #49

Honestly, why don't people keep their politics out of the workplace entirely? Unless you are working at a lobbying firm or whatever, work should be about work, not about being a place to discuss gun rights, abortion, or immigration.

> Honestly, why don't people keep their politics out of the workplace entirely? Because the US is in the middle of a cold civil war that's heating up fast. Denying your enemy employment and therefore bankrupting them is remarkably effective.

> Denying your enemy employment and therefore bankrupting them is remarkably effective.

Bankrupting your enemy is mostly effective at further radicalizing them and inspiring violence.

That attitude would make this "cold civil war" a hot war.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#115

Post by lj3 »

leereeves wrote: post #114
lj3 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Honestly, why don't people keep their politics out of the workplace entirely? Because the US is in the middle of a cold civil war that's heating up fast. Denying your enemy employment and therefore bankrupting them is remarkably effective.

> Denying your enemy employment and therefore bankrupting them is remarkably effective. Bankrupting your enemy is mostly effective at further radicalizing them and inspiring violence. That attitude would make this "cold civil war" a hot war.

I completely agree, which is why I said it's heating up fast and also why I believe violence is unavoidable now. "That attitude" has been prevalent on both sides since Trump was elected and it continues to spread.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#116

Post by notacoward »

Nice little plug for Quora there. Probably tells us something about who "John" really is. For the record, Quora is a very poor place to have such debates. It's a very strict question and answer format, with many "why did Obama kill a hundred babies and drink their blood" questions on every political topic. Just about any other place, including here, is better for a political debate.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#117

Post by leereeves »

lj3 wrote: post #115
leereeves wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Denying your enemy employment and therefore bankrupting them is remarkably effective. Bankrupting your enemy is mostly effective at further radicalizing them and inspiring violence. That attitude would make this "cold civil war" a hot war.

I completely agree, which is why I said it's heating up fast and also why I believe violence is unavoidable now. "That attitude" has been prevalent on both sides since Trump was elected and it continues to spread.

That attitude became prevalent long before the Presidential election. SJWs were calling for people to be fired back in 2013, perhaps earlier. I might also argue that that attitude has been prevalent in some circles - particularly academia - for decades, and spread from academics to their students (the SJWs) to Republican backlash against the SJWs to widespread Democratic backlash against the Republican backlash.

Still, I'm optimistic, because I have seen softening after the recent incidents of violence, and some mainstream rejection of leftist extremism.

For example, this CNN article treating the plight of their ideological opponents with sympathy rather than gloating.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#118

Post by notconservative »

justin66 wrote: post #112
notconservative wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That'd be fine with me if it was enforced equally. I haven't worked anywhere that attempted to do that, so not sure if it'd work or not. But, I'm skeptical. I think what may happen is that it'd go underground. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not. It may be a kind of secret reason to cause strife between employees. It would have to be supported as a broader part of the company culture. No discussing things that…

It is very odd that you assumed I was talking about setting a company policy. When I wrote "What about not doing it at work," I was talking about a social and behavioral norm.

I don't think it's that odd. This norm doesn't really exist currently. How do you think a company could encourage their employees to not talk politics at work?

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#119

Post by justin66 »

notconservative wrote: post #118
justin66 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is very odd that you assumed I was talking about setting a company policy. When I wrote "What about not doing it at work," I was talking about a social and behavioral norm.

I don't think it's that odd. This norm doesn't really exist currently. How do you think a company could encourage their employees to not talk politics at work?

This varies depending on the community you're a part of. I don't have any exposure to what Silicon Valley is currently like, so I can't speak to that. (other than to question how these people who are supposedly giving 110% have so much time to discuss politics...)

When I lived in Berkeley everyone felt very free to start a conversation about politics with any random person they happened to encounter. Nice people, but that can cause fatigue. My current Midwestern corporate work environment is basically the opposite of that: someone can talk about politics but if they're speaking in a group or to someone they're not very close to, they're going to get a funny look and they'll generally take the hint and drop it.

I don't know what our employee handbook says about all that but it's being handled at a different, social level. It's not perfect (my boss's boss occasionally makes bizarre political jokes which would cause a little trouble if they made people feel stepped on, instead of amused) but I suspect we should regard actual company policy as just a fallback for dealing with this sort of thing. Mostly, people just need to exercise some social discretion as part of the corporate culture.

Re: Divided We Code: Undercover Conservatives

#120

Post by api »

CalChris wrote: post #63
api wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Libertarians aren't conservatives. Libertarianism is a different branch of the same tree as other forms of liberalism. The goal is maximization of individual human well being and potential. The disagreement is over how best to achieve that.

Libertarians are also not libertarians. They're just disaffected Republicans. Ron Paul. Gary Johnson. Bob Barr. Et cetera.

Libertarianism is a big tent. There are right-libertarians (like the ones you describe), left-libertarians, anarchist-leaning libertarians, Randian Objectivists, etc. These camps differ in numerous ways but there's a general undercurrent and large areas of agreement.
Post reply on HN