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

181–190 of 313 posts

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#181

Post by fiblye »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #128

Just speculating here... The Russian playbook in 2016 wasn't just to get Trump elected. It was to divide America. Now, we seem to be doing pretty well at that all on our own, but I wonder if some of their work would be to divide online communities, especially one where people from different tribes could talk reasonably with each other. And, reading the article, it seems like this could easily have been an orchestrate…

Americans hating Americans is part of our culture. There were people who didn't want to leave England. 100 years later, half the country up and split off and both sides went and killed each other trying to decide who was right. Then 100 years after that, half the country freaked out about the mere concept of equal rights for all and the North-South/Dem-Rep/urban-rural divide became solidified once more and hasn't really changed to this day.

I find it hard to blame it all on a few paid Russians commenting on twitter or reddit. If a few guys can get paid to completely divide a nation of 300+million through internet comments, either they're the most persuasive people to ever exist, or the divide was already there. It's not even hard just to read some American news and see how literally every single site that covers mainstream events or political topics makes every single thing into an us vs. them situation. There's no escaping it, and it drives clicks, so there's no motivation to stop.

And it's absolutely bizarre how certain parts of the internet are absolutely flooded with hatred for Russians as a whole, with someone always coming in to scream about them. It reminds me of hearing people's ramblings after 9/11, except this time it's primarily "young and informed" individuals.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#182

Post by dnautics »

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…

A similar argument was made about television, and the printing press too. Quality of life over the arc of history - and the discourse - has gotten much better. Why do you suspect the internet will be any different? It's still the early days. Remember yellow journalism? Or Jefferson calling Adams a hermaphroditical character?

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#183

Post by yesenadam »

dnautics wrote: post #182
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…

A similar argument was made about television, and the printing press too. Quality of life over the arc of history - and the discourse - has gotten much better. Why do you suspect the internet will be any different? It's still the early days. Remember yellow journalism? Or Jefferson calling Adams a hermaphroditical character?

I recently read about some of the things that were printed about Lincoln in the newspapers of his day! Unbelievable. (Sorry, don't have a link)

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#184

Post by rayiner »

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…

> 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.

Who is “we?” Who envisioned that? And who gave those people the right to speak for the rest of us?

Free speech exists within the framework of social norms. You can think and say what you want, but that doesn’t mean that you get to think and say what you want in your places of work, community, etc., without social consequences from other people. That’s a central part of the freedom of association—nobody has to let you say what you want in their spaces. Ostracizarion, shaming, and exclusion over speech, actions, and beliefs is a central and important part of constructing and maintaining the social fabric.

All that happened to the Internet is that it became civilized. And like every other area of civilized society, people imposed their social norms on it. Free speech still exists. Nothing is stopping you from setting up a web server and posting whatever (legal) thing you want. But nobody has to accommodate you and your thoughts in their spaces. And they are free to ostracize you for the things you believe or say.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#185

Post by AnimalMuppet »

fiblye wrote: post #181
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #128

Just speculating here... The Russian playbook in 2016 wasn't just to get Trump elected. It was to divide America. Now, we seem to be doing pretty well at that all on our own, but I wonder if some of their work would be to divide online communities, especially one where people from different tribes could talk reasonably with each other. And, reading the article, it seems like this could easily have been an orchestrate…

Americans hating Americans is part of our culture. There were people who didn't want to leave England. 100 years later, half the country up and split off and both sides went and killed each other trying to decide who was right. Then 100 years after that, half the country freaked out about the mere concept of equal rights for all and the North-South/Dem-Rep/urban-rural divide became solidified once more and hasn't rea…

Oh, absolutely the divide was already there. But, well, let me put it this way: We know that the Russians' goal was not just a Trump win, but American division. They'd be idiots if they weren't trying to exacerbate these divisions.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#186

Post by wvenable »

manfredo wrote: post #133
komali2 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear what you're saying, and as a Texan, I feel like I understand your viewpoint. I've got thoughts on the issue too, having lived in the Bay area for a couple years now. Mostly they revolve around this point: >half the country. I disagree that half the country is conservative. I was put onto this idea by Michael Moore actually, who argued that if you run the surveys, turns out most Americans support liberal values…

You're essentially trying to say, "we're tolerant of all views except for those that are morally wrong." There's nothing tolerant about that. If that's your definition of tolerance, then Saudi Arabia and mainland China are tolerant countries - they just have different views of morality.

"In order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#187

Post by Simon_says »

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…

> libertarians don't have any personal gripe against the discriminated

It's worth pointing out that 'the discriminated' refers to both the hated and the hateful. And in fact, the hateful are hated themselves for being hateful.

The law generally doesn't change on an issue until there's at least a sizable minority of people in favor of the change. So when the law does change, it's more of a lagging indicator, anyways.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#188

Post by kadendogthing »

yourbandsucks wrote: post #179
kadendogthing wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean it was immediately set as [dead]. Not even 30 seconds after posting. Is that characteristic of a moderator action?

Possibly. Can you honestly complain? You're upset that the SSC guy didn't aggressively moderate others, after all, when it wasn't even his job.. maybe there's a lesson here.

Nah I don't think a technolibertarian heavy site really has any lessons to offer on moderation or discussion. But you can't really go from [dead] to being able to view the post without moderator intervention in such a sort timespan I would think.

It's two separate things. Sorry to confuse the issues.

I know some of you desperately want there to be some moralistic lesson here. But it will never happen.

And to be perfectly clear, I'm never upset about moderation as long as it can be discussed. So don't get confused with generic talking points that no one is presenting.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#189

Post by closeparen »

rayiner wrote: post #184
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…

> 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. Who is “we?” Who envisioned that? And who gave those people the right to speak for the rest of us? Free speech exists within the framewor…

The social norm under discussion here is exactly when and to what degree those ostracism campaigns ought to be waged.

If the answer is “never” we are going to see a lot of pedophilia, Nazism, and spam. If the answer is “whenever people disagree” then we are going to be a world of mutually unintelligible and isolated factions. The correct setpoint is an interesting and non-obvious question, and the limited scope of the First Amendment doesn’t answer it.

Re: RIP Culture War Thread

#190

Post by komali2 »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #172
komali2 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Conversely I've also been called a racist/bigot for claiming white people didn't invent racism/slavery, or that statistical differences in social groups shouldn't automatically be attributed to oppression, Hmm. That sounds like it can be frustrating, but I can see how it can happen. For example - what's the point of claiming "white people didn't invent slavery?" I can't think of any reason that doesn't involve a bla…

> what's the point of claiming "white people didn't invent slavery?" I can't think of any reason that doesn't involve a blanket statement about either white people or some other race I could easily say that in response to a claim that white people invented slavery, in total innocence that somebody would read me as racist. I am somewhat naive, in my defense.

I would agree with you. There's no point in the statement I can see unless one is about to make a prejudiced remark. I'm happy to be shown why I may be wrong.
Post reply on HN