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

Can Things Be Both Popular and Silenced?

slatestarcodex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 79 posts

Re: Can Things Be Both Popular and Silenced?

#51

Post by Density »

silveroriole wrote: post #28

I think the ludicrousness that people really MEAN to point out is not that they have viewership yet claim to be silenced - it’s that the views of these people are often exactly that of the mainstream, yet they claim to be silenced. For example, Peterson explicitly represents ‘common sense’ and a return to the supposedly natural values we’re all familiar with. And the (obviously somewhat generalised, here) views that…

I remember a certain Google employee who lost his job for having those non-taboo opinions.

Re: Can Things Be Both Popular and Silenced?

#52

Post by lr4444lr »

guelo wrote: post #45

It's ridiculous because they are incredibly powerful, have won the debate, and continue winning. I mean, social justice is now considered a bad thing. Your evil has won, congratulations.

Social justice has been a "bad thing" for a few hundred years now. That's why our courts try every case on its individual merits, and sentencing is taken under consideration of the convicted's own past record. We no longer have a justice system wherein certain classes of citizens are de iure above the law by virtue of their class membership. That abhorrent idea has been willfully confused by many loudmouths who might otherwise have a few good points about systemic social problems into seeking a flat-out unacceptable violation of core principles of equal treatment under the law.

Re: Can Things Be Both Popular and Silenced?

#53

Post by BlackFly »

roenxi wrote: post #43

It takes a bit of reading to get there, but the article resolves in the affirmative; yes things can be both popular and silenced. The absurdist scenario to show how at the end rather catches my fancy. That little gem captures quite a complicated interaction about how society orders itself: that the enforcement of conformity shouldn't be so strong that opposition cannot form against it. I suppose the flip side of this…

I like the distinction between silencing and censorship, since it just lets you focus on the reality of the situation instead of focusing on the legal meaning.

Instead of "I don't care for what you are saying but I will fight to death for your right to say it," you really do have a lot of people behaving in the manner of "I don't care for what you are saying and I will go out of my way to stop you from saying it," while they may be legally consistent, they don't seem to be consistent in ideal.

Re: Can Things Be Both Popular and Silenced?

#54

Post by macspoofing »

catawbasam wrote: post #49
macspoofing wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The reason you're passive aggressive isn't clear to me. The alt-right is a white nationalist/Nazi movement. You flippantly labeled half the country as Nazis, and you're surprised someone would call this out? >I used the "alt" prefix to reinforce the irony of the name "alternative" right being the mainstream right movement. Doubling down eh?

After Charlottesville, I checked reddit conservative, which has a variety of conservative viewpoints, and found mostly what-aboutism. When I presented my own moderate Dem perspective, I was shouted down and then banned. 100% agree most conservatives are not racists or fascists -- but in their tribalism, they have allowed themselves to become complicit fellow travellers.

It's not a conservative thing. "Fan" subreddits are places where like-minded people congregate to talk about the thing they are fans of. Those kinds of subreddits are usually purposely setup to discourage debate against the central idea because otherwise it would just be noise and detract for talking about the thing. So a Conservative subreddit is there for Conservative discussions, not to field anti-Conservative arguments from a Dem perspective. Try going to a left-wing or a progressive subreddit and putting forth an argument against what the subreddit advocates (e.g. post anti-feminist arguments in a feminist subreddit, or anti-Democrat arguments in a Democratic subreddit) and you'll get similar treatment.

It's not even a political thing. If you find a subreddit for trumpet aficionados and try to start a debate on why trumpets are terrible, you may get banned as well.

>100% agree most conservatives are not racists or fascists -- but in their tribalism, they have allowed themselves to become complicit fellow travellers.

"They" say the EXACT same thing about left-wing and progressive circles. And "they" aren't wrong either with the additional bonus of lefties being very liberal about placing a Nazi label on anybody they disagree with - case in point: OP.

Re: Can Things Be Both Popular and Silenced?

#55

Post by swebs »

croon wrote: post #21
thriway wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I do feel like my ideas/community are the underdog and I'm not even all that rightwing (I'm pro stuff like basic income, but also against minimum wage). The thing about underdog is this. Our culture as produced in books/film/tv/music is dominated by left leaning beliefs. If your conservate the media that naturally surrounds you does not reflect or celebrate your values. Though I'm not saying they don't exist.…

> Our culture as produced in books/film/tv/music is dominated by left leaning beliefs. This could either be a conspiracy comprising of every author of every medium... OR It's because stories need sympathetic characters, and current Republican values aren't sympathetic. I'm not trying to be divisive or flippant, though I'm sure this will be the effect. But success in media is driven by believable sympathetic character…

>and current Republican values aren't sympathetic

Tell that to the electoral college.

Re: Can Things Be Both Popular and Silenced?

#56

Post by guelo »

lr4444lr wrote: post #52
guelo wrote: post #45

It's ridiculous because they are incredibly powerful, have won the debate, and continue winning. I mean, social justice is now considered a bad thing. Your evil has won, congratulations.

Social justice has been a "bad thing" for a few hundred years now. That's why our courts try every case on its individual merits, and sentencing is taken under consideration of the convicted's own past record. We no longer have a justice system wherein certain classes of citizens are de iure above the law by virtue of their class membership. That abhorrent idea has been willfully confused by many loudmouths who might…

You speak as if the law is always neutral and just.

Re: Can Things Be Both Popular and Silenced?

#57

Post by guelo »

jacobmoe wrote: post #48
mpweiher wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already did. https://www.change.org/p/ask-patreon-to-pull-the-plug-on-pet... Didn't go very far. I dimly remember a direct attempt to get Patreon to pull the plug, but that could have been somebody else.

Ah a change.org petition. The PC left is out of control! This is a great example of what bugs me about this crowd. They seemlessly move from actual problematic behavior (like a few famous examples of deplatforming at a few elite college campuses) to Twitter mobs and not entirely supportive op-ed pieces, as if it's all of a kind. Every public person gets Twitter mobbed, but they talk about mean people on Twitter as if…

In so many cases, including in this article, they refuse to look at data and just point to anecdotes on top of anecdotes to pretend they're uniquely aggrieved.

Re: Can Things Be Both Popular and Silenced?

#58

Post by Density »

jacobmoe wrote: post #48
mpweiher wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already did. https://www.change.org/p/ask-patreon-to-pull-the-plug-on-pet... Didn't go very far. I dimly remember a direct attempt to get Patreon to pull the plug, but that could have been somebody else.

Ah a change.org petition. The PC left is out of control! This is a great example of what bugs me about this crowd. They seemlessly move from actual problematic behavior (like a few famous examples of deplatforming at a few elite college campuses) to Twitter mobs and not entirely supportive op-ed pieces, as if it's all of a kind. Every public person gets Twitter mobbed, but they talk about mean people on Twitter as if…

What are you saying hacker? Are you saying there's no deplatforming and it's a totally made up concern?

Re: Can Things Be Both Popular and Silenced?

#59

Post by silveroriole »

Density wrote: post #51
silveroriole wrote: post #28

I think the ludicrousness that people really MEAN to point out is not that they have viewership yet claim to be silenced - it’s that the views of these people are often exactly that of the mainstream, yet they claim to be silenced. For example, Peterson explicitly represents ‘common sense’ and a return to the supposedly natural values we’re all familiar with. And the (obviously somewhat generalised, here) views that…

I remember a certain Google employee who lost his job for having those non-taboo opinions.

Partly for openly and tactlessly disagreeing with company hiring policies! Still, he found rather widespread dissemination and some amount of support for his views. Is that silencing? And can “women are naturally uninterested in/poorer at science” really, over the recent course of human history, be regarded as NOT a common or mainstream opinion? I remember a Feynman quote where he was amazed that women could understand graphs in sewing patterns!

Re: Can Things Be Both Popular and Silenced?

#60

Post by soundwave106 »

coldtea wrote: post #19

> But shutting up is of course is the exact opposite of what the people involved are doing – as the Times points out, several IDW members have audiences in the millions, monthly Patreon revenue in the five to six figures, and (with a big enough security detail) regular college speaking engagements. That's beside the point though, as I don't think the complain/claim is that they are silenced from everywhere and have n…

Is there really such a thing as "mainstream" anymore? What I think the Internet has done is allowed many, many microcosms to exist -- and exist in ways that are often unknown to the vast majority, even if they are extremely big in their own sphere.

In music, I have heard "who?" reactions from folks reacting to news about artists as well known as Avicii and One Direction. And it's true: if you don't follow any of the worlds they represent (stadium-style EDM and teen pop), you wouldn't have a clue who they are.

This, I feel, is more of how entertainment choice has expanded so rapidly. You are no longer limited to three channels of TV and a handful of radio programs. People thus gravitate to more specific niches that suite them. Therefore, you can both be enormously popular in your own niche and be quite unknown outside of it.

I would argue that the "true mainstream media" of the Internet has nothing to do with politics at all (eg, it's funny memes, cute pics, music and other general entertainment, etc.), and even within this mainstream, there's a lot of microdivisions. So is it surprising that specific right-wing political commentary is just another niche? (Political commentary as a whole is a niche.)

That's not really non-representation and silencing. It's more like we live in a world of niches, and increasingly you don't hear much of the niches beyond your sphere, because there's already an overwhelming amount of material in the niches you like already.

Post reply on HN