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

New Study Indicates Silicon Valley’s Elite Are Not as Liberal as They Think

nymag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 68 posts

Re: New Study Indicates Silicon Valley’s Elite Are Not as Liberal as They Think

#41

Post by verbify »

lake99 wrote: post #24
zorga wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> liberal on social issues, staunchly conservative on regulation. That's what liberal actually means. To be liberal in both areas it to be a progressive.

You have it backwards. Liberal economics means fewer regulations, less federal planning, etc. In their more "socialist" phases, China and India had the government in control of a lot of manufacturing, trade, etc. After their economies were liberalized, private companies had a greater say in their own affairs (they got "liberated"). In India, the government started selling off its factories to private owners under a l…

While I agree with you in the main, many economic liberals would still support government intervention to stop oligopolies, monopolies or monopsonies. They support free markets and individual choice, not just privatisation or corporatisation for the sake of it.

Re: New Study Indicates Silicon Valley’s Elite Are Not as Liberal as They Think

#42

Post by goatlover »

proginthebox wrote: post #30
CoolGuySteve wrote: post #28

Seems like a weird juxtaposition to me that the word “liberal” is being used to imply the support of more government regulations when by definition those restrictions are restricting someone’s freedoms (sometimes for the best IMO). It reminds me of the old Norm MacDonald joke where because of abortions and the death penalty, there’s no way for him to vote for a party where nobody is killed.

Liberalism is always against an axis. As such, there are two different factors in liberalism, Social and Economic. The so-called liberals in America Liberals are socially liberal but economically conservative. While American conservatives are economically liberal but socially conservative.

So American libertarians are the true liberals?

Re: New Study Indicates Silicon Valley’s Elite Are Not as Liberal as They Think

#43

Post by geff82 »

uncle_d wrote: post #31
CoolGuySteve wrote: post #28

Seems like a weird juxtaposition to me that the word “liberal” is being used to imply the support of more government regulations when by definition those restrictions are restricting someone’s freedoms (sometimes for the best IMO). It reminds me of the old Norm MacDonald joke where because of abortions and the death penalty, there’s no way for him to vote for a party where nobody is killed.

That's how it seems to be used in the USA - someone left-leaning that may well support more government intervention in the name of fairness. Classical liberalism in contrast focuses on the liberty of the individual through limiting government.

I am a „liberal“ German and I really have a hard time to translate that correctly. I am neither conservative, liberal nor libertarian. German „liberalism“ and how it is seen in most countries is a distinct mix of all of them, but not in the extremist sense: while we european liberals like to be conservative in private, we accept and promote civil liberties (including abolishing death penalty and being allowed to smoke marijuana) and still want much less government and taxes (yet we do not hate the government as the libertarians do).

Re: New Study Indicates Silicon Valley’s Elite Are Not as Liberal as They Think

#45

Post by scarejunba »

lake99 wrote: post #24
zorga wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> liberal on social issues, staunchly conservative on regulation. That's what liberal actually means. To be liberal in both areas it to be a progressive.

You have it backwards. Liberal economics means fewer regulations, less federal planning, etc. In their more "socialist" phases, China and India had the government in control of a lot of manufacturing, trade, etc. After their economies were liberalized, private companies had a greater say in their own affairs (they got "liberated"). In India, the government started selling off its factories to private owners under a l…

Funnily enough, that person does not have it backwards. It's the _article_ and the terminology it uses from the USA that have it backwards. This is revealed by the fact that the article claims that Silicon Valley's elite are both "staunchly conservative on regulation" and have "anti-regulatory zeal".

So you're actually agreeing vigorously with the guy to whom you're responding.

Re: New Study Indicates Silicon Valley’s Elite Are Not as Liberal as They Think

#46

Post by CPLX »

icebraining wrote: post #33
CPLX wrote: post #29

If course not. It shouldn’t be a secret that the most fundamental political division of modern times is between labor and caapital, and that Silicon Valley culture is squarely on the side of capital.

Is that why they "overwhelmingly favored increased taxes on the rich and further redistribution of wealth to poor communities" ?

They could just be in favor of paying them fair wages and allowing them to organize.

Re: New Study Indicates Silicon Valley’s Elite Are Not as Liberal as They Think

#47

Post by lake99 »

scarejunba wrote: post #45
lake99 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have it backwards. Liberal economics means fewer regulations, less federal planning, etc. In their more "socialist" phases, China and India had the government in control of a lot of manufacturing, trade, etc. After their economies were liberalized, private companies had a greater say in their own affairs (they got "liberated"). In India, the government started selling off its factories to private owners under a l…

Funnily enough, that person does not have it backwards. It's the _article_ and the terminology it uses from the USA that have it backwards. This is revealed by the fact that the article claims that Silicon Valley's elite are both "staunchly conservative on regulation" and have "anti-regulatory zeal". So you're actually agreeing vigorously with the guy to whom you're responding.

Definitely not agreeing with GP. Progressives are not economic liberals. But you're right, the article has it backwards too. The phrase "staunchly conservative on regulation" seems to have a special meaning in the US that's not applicable elsewhere. In India and Pakistan, for example, "conservative" just means holding on to traditional religious values.

Re: New Study Indicates Silicon Valley’s Elite Are Not as Liberal as They Think

#48

Post by threatofrain »

fzeroracer wrote: post #40
isoskeles wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was said in a different direction. People who hold political opinion X must be from this background because they don’t understand the issue like I do. I’m from a working class background and arrived at a different conclusion in my own experience. But I get lumped in with people raised upper middle class just because I couldn’t possibly have such opinions. Granted, this is why I try not to be defensive about it: wh…

Can you define 'working class family'? Because for me, my definition of working class was living in deep poverty as the result of my family working an incredibly hard yet unrewarding career path that physically and mentally destroyed them. As I bring up often, my parents were fishermen. They could hardly afford a home and hardly afford to put food on the table or the immense medical bills we were saddled with.

Why is working class defined by this specific definition of deep poverty? And why do we need that term if we can just say deep poverty?

Re: New Study Indicates Silicon Valley’s Elite Are Not as Liberal as They Think

#50

Post by diogenescynic »

beaner wrote: post #32
ojbyrne wrote: post #2

I don’t think anybody questions the fact that the “elite” (i.e the wealthy) are conservative. The 1% generally are. But the rest of the population of Silicon Valley generally aren’t.

Maybe they should. Is this actually true or just an assumption? It seems like for every Koch there is a Soros.

Quit spreading right wing propaganda and talking points here. Hacker News isn’t for political discussion and you’re just making a false equivalency and repeating Fox News lines (college students all think the same!)

The right wing donors like Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson far outspend the left and have organizations like ALEC to which there is no left wing equivalent. Data is here so you don’t have to make shit up: https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2017/03/richest-billionaire...

>According to Open Secrets, Republicans had a larger share of the billionaires -- and their contributions to outside spending groups -- in the 2012 election cycle. Among the top 100 donors in the Open Secrets list, 33 were billionaires, and of those, 14 gave primarily to liberal groups while 19 gave to conservative groups.

>In addition, the top 100 donors of 2012 gave 41 percent of all the money collected by outside spending groups, and of their donations, 71 percent went to conservative groups.

From: https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2014/jun/23...

Another relevant source: https://billmoyers.com/2014/04/10/nothing-really-compares-to...

You can read Dark Money by Jane Meyer if you are actually interested in this.

Post reply on HN