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

The Problem at Yale Is Not Free Speech

palladiummag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 182 posts

Re: The Problem at Yale Is Not Free Speech

#141

Post by goatinaboat »

ikeyany wrote: post #130
goatinaboat wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That particular example resonated with me. I'm not super-rich, far from it, I certainly wasn't even earning much in that time-frame. And I did a similar thing because it was the last ticket left and I had to get to a funeral. There must have been other clues that lead to the conclusion that they were trust fund kids!

The last ticket left was a first class ticket?

Yes. It was about $2000. But what was I going to do, just not be there? Took me a bit of work to pay it off but I would have regretted not going so much more.

Re: The Problem at Yale Is Not Free Speech

#142

Post by goatinaboat »

mnky9800n wrote: post #102
parsimo2010 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The leather is a product, not a byproduct, just not the sole product. I fail to see the logic that killing a mink for its fur is wrong, but killing a cow is okay because we get meat along with the leather. You can also make arguments about how it’s okay because cows are raised specifically to be killed, but the fact remains that we kill orders of magnitude more cows than we ever have minks. My previous argument stand…

Not to mention cows are a major contribution to global warming.

So are datacenters. And cows were here first.

Re: The Problem at Yale Is Not Free Speech

#143

Post by buboard »

ikeyany wrote: post #132
taneq wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is the first time I’ve ever seen those words used together in that order.

I think "virtuous" would've been more appropriate than "meaningful".

Apart and separately from virtue signalling, i believe the demotion to a life of more struggle, even artificial, gives more purpose and meaning, and thus is pleasant.

Re: The Problem at Yale Is Not Free Speech

#144

Post by BaronSamedi »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #77
nyxxie wrote: post #48

I think the author is ascribing too much intent to a simple economy of shame that’s omnipresent in all classes; if people find out you have more than they do, they hate you. The author herself appears to be biased by this. She believes that the “rich elites” have a great burden of responsibility towards the world, which she justifies with shaky zero sum logic that suggests that because they have more, they necessaril…

> She believes that the “rich elites” have a great burden of responsibility towards the world, which she justifies with shaky zero sum logic... " Noblesse oblige "? " With great power comes great responsibility "†? " To whom much has been given, much is expected "? The belief that the wealthy and powerful have a duty to use that power to improve the welfare of the society in which they live has been around for a long…

The point that struck me was the assertion that American elites have become dysfunctional. And, that wokeness is more of a symptom rather than cause of that dysfunction. That is a very interesting idea and worthy of consideration. Historically, crises among elites are dangerous. Elites losing the confidence of the people, for example, is destabilizing. Severe conflict among elite factions (sometimes during a loss of confidence period, sometimes not) can also produce instability or worse.

Re: The Problem at Yale Is Not Free Speech

#145

Post by yardie »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #70
jatmataz wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if the rich parents aren't injecting a huge cash flow, that student still has the safety net to fall back on.

I came from a rich family. My parents let me flounder on my own in college. Never gave me a dime and I had earn everything I ever had. When I was 25 and my GF got pregnant, my parents said, “Well, you’re a responsible adult, you’ll figure it out.” For me? There was no safety net. A year on food stamps, paying child support, working three jobs and being clinically depressed was me “figuring it out.” At no time did the…

I’ve got to ask. But did you consider your parents rich or just just upper middle class. I have a few rich friends and nothing like what happened to you would ever happen to them. First, they would not need to ask for money. That comes from a trust where they get an allowance.

I had one friend who feigned being broke because he would spend all his allowance before the next disbursement arrived. And would borrow money from friends.

In each case their job was assured. they were graduating into the family business or to manage its wealth. Or start their own business with financial help from the trust.

Re: The Problem at Yale Is Not Free Speech

#146

Post by neilv »

rossdavidh wrote: post #52
neilv wrote: post #14

One thing that struck me from the piece (what I could read, before switching to skimming) was the implicit acceptance of the outsized power of Yale people. It sounded like the concern was that they acknowledge and wield this power well. I didn't see a question of whether they should have this power.

No doubt they should not, but that would be a different topic, one which has been (and will continue to be) abundantly addressed, in this era and every other. Yet, there is always a ruling class, and their children don't always act this way. So, it is a worthy topic to consider: why this way, and why now? To the question of "why does the ruling elite have so much power?", one could answer, "it was ever thus", which i…

I've seen "it was ever thus" serve as a rationalization. I'd have liked to see an acknowledgement of the question of rightness of power; otherwise, I think it just reinforces the default. Even (in so many words): "perhaps it's neither fair nor optimal for society that you have so much power over others, but, given that you do [then all the stuff about responsibility]"

Re: The Problem at Yale Is Not Free Speech

#147

Post by marcus_holmes »

I went to an English boarding school long enough ago for the intent of that system to still be to train the officer class of the British Empire. But not so long ago that it was actually practical for any of us to realistically be colonial administrators.

This piece reminds me of that education. We were in the middle of the feminist and multi-cultural ideological revolutions. Being culturally aware; not insisting that British culture is superior to everyone else's, was both socially mandatory and against the dominant narrative of the school's educational message. It made for interesting confrontations between the institution and the students and staff

Britain had lost its empire, and the institutions that were set up to administer that empire, and train the administrators of that empire, were failing. Are still failing; though the UK's latest PM is an archetypal product of that system, he is being parodied for it rather than respected for it.

I wonder if America is going through the same thing? For decades the USA has been utterly, unshakably confident that its values, its culture, are superior to the everyone else's. Now... not so much?

Re: The Problem at Yale Is Not Free Speech

#148

Post by taneq »

buboard wrote: post #143
ikeyany wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think "virtuous" would've been more appropriate than "meaningful".

Apart and separately from virtue signalling, i believe the demotion to a life of more struggle, even artificial, gives more purpose and meaning, and thus is pleasant.

I think purpose is important, and creates meaning. I don't know if struggle creates purpose, but maybe it does in the sense that purpose comes from wanting reality to be different than it is, and I guess any way in which reality isn't perfect for you would count as some kind of struggle.

Re: The Problem at Yale Is Not Free Speech

#150

Post by chongli »

nyxxie wrote: post #48

I think the author is ascribing too much intent to a simple economy of shame that’s omnipresent in all classes; if people find out you have more than they do, they hate you. The author herself appears to be biased by this. She believes that the “rich elites” have a great burden of responsibility towards the world, which she justifies with shaky zero sum logic that suggests that because they have more, they necessaril…

If you only look at wealth as a bunch of numbers on account statements, then yes, it's pretty unfair to feel responsibility thrust upon you for having a bigger number.

But that's an abstraction and a distraction from the truth of the matter: wealth is capital. It's access to means and it's ownership of resources and property and everything else. It's one thing to be bullied because you drive an expensive car (as a teenager) and take luxury vacations to private islands. It's another thing entirely to be heir to a huge corporation, let alone a petro-state like Saudi Arabia.

With the twin spectres of climate change and trade war (escalating into armed conflict), there is a hell of a lot of responsibility placed upon the elite. Frankly, I'm not shocked at all that people are overwhelmed enough to abdicate. The question is who will step and take charge? The current crop of candidates do not inspire confidence.

Post reply on HN