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

RIP Culture War Thread

slatestarcodex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 313 posts

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#111

Post by Nasrudith »

wbxrs wrote: post #15

Looking at those charts, why are libertarians considered right-wing? They may be so economically, but they definitely are to the left (or even the far left) socially. Giving that this post talks about social stuff, and not economical stuff, I believe that 51%/49% chart to be simply wrong.

While it may be theoretically true there is a small linguistic hint at the bias - you hear "left-libertarian" as its own distinct term as opposed to right-libertarian implying a default of the term as right leaning.

Not going to get into any messier qualitatives like no trur scotsman/libertarian in name only or crypto-politicals.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#112

Post by AnimalMuppet »

eschaton wrote: post #57
haberman wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem, as described in this article, is that some people have good faith beliefs, respectfully expressed, that are nevertheless so repugnant to others that you will be tarred for not censoring them.

I don’t understand why people think giving space and respect to odious beliefs is somehow virtuous. What it does is normalize those beliefs and enable them to propagate while simultaneously exhausting those who oppose them. See Sarte’s comments on Anti-Semitism; the holders of odious beliefs are generally not “playing the same game” as those who oppose them, and giving space to all ideas, no matter how awful, is actu…

The counterargument is: Odious as defined by who? By me? Heh, eschaton, your beliefs might not come out so well by that measure.

Defined by you? No thank you.

Defined by society? Twenty years ago, homosexual marriage was an odious belief by that standard. Today, it's not (instead, opposing it is now considered odious). Same with racism sixty years ago. Same with slavery 160 years ago. "Odious" is a moving target. But for your argument to have any force, "odious" has to have some real moral weight to it, not just be society's current consensus.

That leaves odious as defined by a group of right-thinking people. Problem is, there are many candidates proclaiming themselves as being the right-thinking group, and they all contradict each other. How are you going to pick one? By what you most agree with? Again, no thank you.

(Note well: This is not "no thank you" specifically to eschaton. It's "no thank you" to any individual who wants to set themself up as the arbiter of what is "odious". I don't want anybody to have that power - unless it's me, of course.)

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#113

Post by mikeash »

thaeli wrote: post #67
logfromblammo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have determined that I am far too liberal for Alabama, yet too conservative for California_SFO. The feedback loop of exclusion works for a lot of monocultures. They just have to be offensively fanatic about something , and the zeal will drive out anyone foolishly moderate enough to disagree. If you wouldn't enjoy assigning the Christian apostles to football team positions, you will feel like an alien somewhere. If…

This is one of my favorite things about living in a (literally) inside-the-Beltway suburb of DC. The local governments are far enough left that I'm afforded civil rights protections, but the overall culture is accepting of a range of viewpoints. It helps that most of the zealots (of all stripes) are inherently political transients here, who come and go with the electoral cycle.

I’m also inside the beltway, and indeed, my first reaction to that comment was “come to the DC area!”

As a bonus, a lot of the people are actually involved in the process somehow, so the discussion is a lot less abstract and theoretical than usual.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#114

Post by [deleted] »

komali2 wrote: post #85
TeMPOraL wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go visit the Culture War threads then. The article states that the CW threads were full of these kinds of arguments, so if you want to see examples, you know where to go.

Yea, that's what I'm trying right now, nothing good yet though. I'll keep scanning here and there though.

[deleted]

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#115

Post by ufmace »

kadendogthing wrote: post #50
ufmace wrote: post #14

This highlights some very troublesome trends on the internet these days. We once envisioned the internet as a place of revolutionarily open discourse, where any idea under the sun could get posted somewhere and read, no matter how crazy or bad it seemed, with the worst ridiculed and dismissed, but still able to be read, and the best rising to the top. It seems like we're moving in the opposite direction these days, w…

>It seems like we're moving in the opposite direction these days Good. >with the internet as a means to control, oppress, and indoctrinate. No, we're just not allowing "information anarchy." Not all information is beneficial, useful, or constructive. Some of it has net negatives. Stop assuming there are enough rational/good actors to counter act the bad/ignorant actors who propagate bad information. We don't have the…

> Stop assuming there are enough rational/good actors to counter act the bad/ignorant actors who propagate bad information.

It took me a few minutes to think of what really bothered me about this line of thinking, and I think it comes down to this sentence. If you believe that this is true, why should it stop with just the internet? Why not all of life? This is exactly the line of thinking that, when applied to real life, translates to "We must have a dictatorship of the enlightened because people are not smart enough to function in a Democracy".

This philosophy has been put forth a great many times by a great many people. The end result of it is typically not very pleasant for anyone. Particularly for those who thought that they were one of the smarter ones who were too well-educated and enlightened to fall for anything really bad.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#116

Post by goatlover »

kerbalspacepro wrote: post #48
wbxrs wrote: post #15

Looking at those charts, why are libertarians considered right-wing? They may be so economically, but they definitely are to the left (or even the far left) socially. Giving that this post talks about social stuff, and not economical stuff, I believe that 51%/49% chart to be simply wrong.

Libertarians are considered right-wing because the left-right axis is simply, "How much do you think the government should be involved in the issues?" When it comes to economics, the answer "more" is left and the answer "less" is right-leaning. When it comes to social issues, the answer "more" is left and the answer "less" is right-leaning. How can this be? Well, the answer is that while social conservatives sound ve…

> and libertarians want less involvement, just like their more "socially conservative" counterparts.

That's not what I observer from social conservatives when it comes to their beliefs. The majority want to use government to force their values on society, like having prayer in public school, fighting the drug war or banning abortion.

Also a majority tend to be rather hawkish and in favor of intervention abroad. Libertarians are in favor of none of those things.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#117

Post by eli_gottlieb »

labster wrote: post #16
ufmace wrote: post #14

This highlights some very troublesome trends on the internet these days. We once envisioned the internet as a place of revolutionarily open discourse, where any idea under the sun could get posted somewhere and read, no matter how crazy or bad it seemed, with the worst ridiculed and dismissed, but still able to be read, and the best rising to the top. It seems like we're moving in the opposite direction these days, w…

It sounds like you wanted a revolutionary open discourse, and are surprised that the discourse is full of revolutionaries. I really don't know how to fix the human empathy problem, though.

>It sounds like you wanted a revolutionary open discourse, and are surprised that the discourse is full of revolutionaries.

That sounds nicely quotable.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#118

Post by iron0013 »

sigstoat wrote: post #100
iron0013 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That hasn't been my experience. On most conservative forums, most people--clearly conservative--describe themselves as "libertarian". Look at elected officials: who's more likely to describe themselves as a "libertarian", Republican politicians or Democratic politicians?

you're talking about self-description. i wasn't.

What? I don't follow. Why would conservatives, who describe themselves as "libertarians", call libertarians "dope-smoking lefty hippies"? I'm saying your account of how conservatives describe libertarians rings false.

Conservatives don't consider libertarians to be "them", they consider libertarians to be "us"--that is, they don't make a distinction between conservatives and libertarians.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#119

Post by malvosenior »

mikeash wrote: post #106
komali2 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>is that some people have good faith beliefs, respectfully expressed, that are nevertheless so repugnant to others that you will be tarred for not censoring them. I'm skeptical of this - I've never seen a polite racist argument, for example, or a polite homophobic one. The closest I've seen is a post riddled with condescension - something along the lines of "you don't understand, I'm trying to save your soul from the…

Part of the problem is that too many people think “polite” just means “no profanity or name-calling.” It is impossible to respectfully argue for a racist or homophobic position. The very nature of what you’re arguing for is that some people are inherently less than others, which is the opposite of respect. But if you state such an argument without using naughty words, a lot of people will misinterpret that as respect…

A lot of people will extend the definition of "racist" to include things they don't like but would not be considered racist by most people. For instance there are still people who think the Covington teens are racist even after the additional footage became available. I've seen plenty of accusations of racism against people who say the teens are innocent.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#120

Post by [deleted] »

komali2 wrote: post #55
haberman wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem, as described in this article, is that some people have good faith beliefs, respectfully expressed, that are nevertheless so repugnant to others that you will be tarred for not censoring them.

>is that some people have good faith beliefs, respectfully expressed, that are nevertheless so repugnant to others that you will be tarred for not censoring them. I'm skeptical of this - I've never seen a polite racist argument, for example, or a polite homophobic one. The closest I've seen is a post riddled with condescension - something along the lines of "you don't understand, I'm trying to save your soul from the…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN