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

Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

nationalreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 110 posts

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#81

Post by robotron »

mtgp1000 wrote: post #31
montagg wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're absolutely doing things that future generations will find abhorrent. And as our thinking as humans evolves, I hope we'll also change our behavior. But let's not make the perfect the enemy of the good. When we are aware that behaviors and symbols are hurtful to other humans, and we genuinely believe that other people should be able to live without fear, then we should change both. We're not going to get it 100%…

>When we are aware that behaviors and symbols are hurtful to other humans, and we genuinely believe that other people should be able to live without fear, then we should change both. Some of us believe that the answer to a world which is chock full of scary things beyond our control is to learn to live internally without fear, not to impose our personal delicate sensibilities on upon others. This isn't cowardice and…

Again, I ask. How do you think people of color have felt for the entirety of this nation? WE the people are tired of the bullshit. Enough is enough.

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#82

Post by tandr »

sigsergv wrote: post #68
rich_sasha wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weeeell... do people keep packed bags by the door, for when political police comes to deport them to Siberia (Alaska?), or maybe shoot them in the head and dump in a ditch? That’s still a stretch.

USSR existed for over 70 years and people there have seen a lot of varieties of oppression. “Silence is Violence” is one of them. “Kitchen Talks” too (you cannot say anything to random people and only to closest friends/relatives at home). Be ready for a new life, comrade.

Now that you have mention that... Add some unquestionable 3-letter agencies, "national security concerns" and "spies and outside-funded agitators are everywhere", and we are getting quite closely to what I remember from end of 70s/beginning of 80s. sigh

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#83

Post by robotron »

asdfman123 wrote: post #69
mtgp1000 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'd rather have imperfect progress than no progress Progress for the sake of progress is not progress. The fact that there is a problem doesn't mean that someone has to do something when there's nothing productive to be done. People are apparently unaware that we are living in an unprecedented globalist diversity experiment, and there's no reason to believe that forcing disparate cultures to live in such close proxi…

> Progress for the sake of progress is not progress In our current moment, it's progress for the sake of not letting police get away with murder. What part of the unprecedented peace we find ourselves in makes you uncomfortable?

His "people" weren't getting murdered, obviously, so this is all inconvenient.

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#84

Post by robotron »

padseeker wrote: post #35

I'm all for diversity in thought - typically though this kind of thing gets flagged on HN. After 9/11, invasion of Afghanistan and both Iraq wars there were songs banned from the radio and people were thrown out of malls for wearing t-shirts that were anti-war. Conservatives were all for that or had little to say about stifling free speech concerns. The argument was its private property and companies can do what they…

Oh and look - you're downvoted for this opinion! Conservatives are not even hypocrites, this stuff is just talking points in an attempt to get one over on "the left".

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#86

Post by happytoexplain »

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #72
sammaeliam wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been a moderate in 1995. At no point did I buy into ideology that we currently associate with the alt-reich.

> At no point did I buy into ideology that we currently associate with the alt-reich. With phrasing like that you've certainly bought into some ideology.

The alt-right has a strong relationship to Nazi ideologies, "ironic" or not, and the parent is therefore reasonable in pointing out that it's an inappropriate comparison to 1995 moderate politics, regardless of left vs right opinions. The GP could have just said "far right". Now, if the parent was accusing a specific person of being alt-right, you could absolutely have a case against him based on how reasonably the label was being applied.

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#88

Post by asdfman123 »

robotron wrote: post #83
asdfman123 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Progress for the sake of progress is not progress In our current moment, it's progress for the sake of not letting police get away with murder. What part of the unprecedented peace we find ourselves in makes you uncomfortable?

His "people" weren't getting murdered, obviously, so this is all inconvenient.

"I'm all about change, but this is heading in the wrong direction!"

- Conservatives at every step of the way as the rest of us have been busy correcting society's worst injustices

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#89

Post by happytoexplain »

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #71
codq wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely did not say that. You seem to think the bar for being beaten for an opinion is so low that it's anything that goes against mainstream opinion. Of course people should disagree, experience dialectics, have conversations, debate, spar, parry, and enjoy rigorous conversation. But then there are sentiments that are beyond the pale. Should NAMBLA be allowed a late night talk show, or an NYT editorial to espouse…

> Should Richard Spencer be punched in the face for being a bigoted piece of human garbage? No? I'm not sure why you're advocating violence. If we start allowing violence against bad people, where do we stop?

This line of thinking is almost always a less-than-useful simplification.

Should punching Richard Spencer be punishable by the law?

Yes.

Is punching Richard Spencer "moral"?

No.

"Should" you punch Richard Spencer?

No.

Is punching Richard Spencer "understandable"?

... this is grey. However, if you have a sufficient ideological motivation in a certain direction, the argument essentially makes itself: Violence! It's bad. If you're not motivated in the opposite direction, it's the easiest thing in the world to stop there. If you're motivated enough, you can tack on some extra easy hops in logic: "You're advocating violence! You're evil!"

Yet if somebody drives a car into a group of fellow citizens whom you know or identify with, killing one of them, and a news outlet puts out a story calling the dead a whore, you'll quickly find yourself willing to meditate on the scenario more thoroughly.

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#90

Post by jeffreyrogers »

happytoexplain wrote: post #86
jeffreyrogers wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At no point did I buy into ideology that we currently associate with the alt-reich. With phrasing like that you've certainly bought into some ideology.

The alt-right has a strong relationship to Nazi ideologies, "ironic" or not, and the parent is therefore reasonable in pointing out that it's an inappropriate comparison to 1995 moderate politics, regardless of left vs right opinions. The GP could have just said "far right". Now, if the parent was accusing a specific person of being alt-right, you could absolutely have a case against him based on how reasonably the l…

You're using the term "alt-right" like it is a monolithic thing, but it's not. The person I was replying to obviously wasn't using the term "alt-reich" as a nuanced description. It was a bad-faith smear.

Edit: policies that were once held by people like Bernie Sanders on immigration or Bill Clinton on crime are now considered "alt-right", but would have been considered well within the mainstream in 1995.

Post reply on HN