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

Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share

cato.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 294 posts

Re: Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share

#241

Post by throwaway3699 »

pas wrote: post #218
fareesh wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A high profile executive working for a corporation in Iran will be fired and possibly arrested if they start talking about the government's stance on women's rights. Likewise in the USA if some executive talks about babies' rights they'll probably be fired and some smear campaign will be launched against them. Likewise in China vocal criticism of the CCP will probably lead to bad consequences. I would encourage Ameri…

Constructive conversations are good. A shouting match is not a conversation. Obviously it's a lot harder to allow just one and not the other. And again, it's exactly the nuance that's needed to separate these that are needed when one compares China, Iran, and the USA. Executives ought to be able to express their views freely, also companies/shareholders ought to be able to freely replace executives they deem unfit (a…

> companies/shareholders ought to be able to freely replace executives they deem unfit (a bad fit for society)

"A bad fit for society"

Seriously. This reads like something straight out of the playbook towards a fascist state.

Re: Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share

#242

Post by dang »

mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #210
ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've been around here long enough to know that personal attacks aren't permitted on HN.

That’s why it was critical to respond. The comment I responded to is overtly and unequivocally expressing arrogant repression (“no politics” and “no religion” discussed at work because “most people” can’t rationally talk about it). If you think my comment is a personal attack, that’s wildly unreasonable. The parent comment is the one behaving that way and it is absolutely fair and uncontroversial to point out their o…

Please stop using HN for political battle and flamewar. You've been doing it a ton lately, it's not what this site is for, and as you know, we ban accounts that keep doing it. We've had to warn you several times already.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share

#243

Post by akvadrako »

frob wrote: post #96
nautilus12 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you support straight up socialism, as the article points out.

Socialism is not mentioned once in this article.

It says those with views most liberal, by which they mean left-wing, are the only ones who feel it's safe to express their opinions.

Re: Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share

#244

Post by pas »

throwaway3699 wrote: post #241
pas wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Constructive conversations are good. A shouting match is not a conversation. Obviously it's a lot harder to allow just one and not the other. And again, it's exactly the nuance that's needed to separate these that are needed when one compares China, Iran, and the USA. Executives ought to be able to express their views freely, also companies/shareholders ought to be able to freely replace executives they deem unfit (a…

> companies/shareholders ought to be able to freely replace executives they deem unfit (a bad fit for society) "A bad fit for society" Seriously. This reads like something straight out of the playbook towards a fascist state.

Yet it's also part of the liberal, libertarian, conservative, etc. playbooks too. The difference is protected classes. Libertarian? Nothing is protected. Liberal? Race, gender, other things you can't change are protected. (Disabilities.) Conservative? Traditions are protected.

Re: Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share

#245

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

another_sock wrote: post #214
mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “ Most humans can't discuss those topics rationally. It's not arrogant to say this, it's just basic truth.” No, this is a deeply arrogant and harmful thing to say. When it comes to beliefs, nearly anything that tries to generalize to “most humans” is at best arrogant ignorance and at worst actively repressive.

Trying to redefine work from something it has been for all of human history (a place where you do work) into some sort of personal self expression is what is arrogant and harmful. Things are the way they are for reasons. Don't remove a fence until you know why it's there, and we know why the fence of no politics or religion is there (most humans aren't good at compartmentalizing their personal feelings on subjective…

No, you are very wrong here. Societal progress has tended to move away from repressing personal identity in the workplace. Just a generation ago this conversation would have been about whether gay people are allowed to be open about their sexual orientation or if they should just not allow any expression of their sexual identity to be present at work. Lots of people would respond with extreme homophobic comparisons like saying, “but I don’t bring my heterosexual identity to the workplace” and there would be comparisons with the military “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

As a society we’ve mostly progressed past that bigoted point of view, but now we face similar battles about trans people being able to just be themselves and let their natural identity exist in the workplace. It is similar with many aspects of religious identity or political identity. Inclusiveness does not mean “we all equally avoid any reference to unique identity” rather it means “unique identity is encouraged and allowed to openly flourish.”

This attitude you express:

> “ Trying to redefine work from something it has been for all of human history (a place where you do work) into some sort of personal self expression is what is arrogant and harmful.”

is repressive and frankly anti-human. “Why can’t we just go back to the good old days when all the snowflakes would just shut up and do their jobs” - that is 100% not hyperbole - that is literally the level of regressive attitude you are endorsing under the disingenuous guise of “workplace professionalism.”

Re: Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share

#246

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

julianmarq wrote: post #216
mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s why it was critical to respond. The comment I responded to is overtly and unequivocally expressing arrogant repression (“no politics” and “no religion” discussed at work because “most people” can’t rationally talk about it). If you think my comment is a personal attack, that’s wildly unreasonable. The parent comment is the one behaving that way and it is absolutely fair and uncontroversial to point out their o…

> That’s why it was critical to respond. The comment I responded to is overtly and unequivocally expressing arrogant repression No, it isn't: It wasn't critical for you to respond (particularly with insults) nor was the comment "repression". > If you think my comment is a personal attack Your first comment is a personal attack, and so is this one. You continue calling the first commenter you replied to a "thug". Ther…

> “ Your first comment is a personal attack, and so is this one. You continue calling the first commenter you replied to a "thug".”

No, you are wrong. The parent commenter expressed thuggish ideas - they did that and it is critical to hold them to account for it.

I didn’t make them state awful thuggish repressive comments like completely voiding out core personal identities of coworkers. I am not putting any spin or embellishment on their comment - they chose to write it. Calling it thuggish or arrogant is not unfair or insulting whatsoever - that is unequivocally what they chose to express.

It deserves to be called out and for people to stand against that type of repressive attitude. It is absolutely not insulting or personally attacking to do so. The commenter’s words simply have these consequences, regardless of you using completely unsubstantiated gainsaying to reply to me.

The original comment is deeply uncivil, and it highlights extremely broken community norms if you or others think that a reply which calls out that lack of civility (where calling it thuggish or arrogant is absolutely fair and not an insult at all based on the comment’s own terms) is somehow itself uncivil.

Re: Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share

#247

Post by feralimal »

ghthor wrote: post #124
feralimal wrote: post #68

That's an interesting stat, though its political in nature. I suspect that the disconnect is far wider in scope. Most people are totally perplexed by the disparity between their own reality and what is portrayed in the news. For 3 years we had evidence-free but unrelenting Russia/Trump hate. This seemed insane, but it turns out that was just the warm up act to coronavirus! The reality of what people see around them i…

Sorry for the downvotes, but your opinion is pretty much spot on. People dont like hearing truth about the situation.

Win some, lose some! I cracked a couple of sarcastic 'jokes' in previous threads which got upvoted, so I've got points to burn!

Re: Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share

#248

Post by akvadrako »

morelisp wrote: post #105
morelisp wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cato's leadership struggle in 2012 took it from a strongly-right-leaning but fundamentally intelligent and rational policy organization, to one step above the John Birch Society and a bare GOP stump organization. I don't care one way or another about banning, but yeah, people really should not put any weight into what comes out of it today.

I'm not complaining about the downvotes but given that my comment contains significant substance about the Cato Institute, I would appreciate more feedback. Are you downvoting because you think the leadership struggle in 2012 didn't affect it, or because you also think the JBS is a serious policy organization?

I think it was an interesting factoid and I upvoted you, though a little more evidence would have been welcome.

Though I do think their opinions may be skewed, I don't doubt the facts they are presenting in this article.

Re: Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share

#249

Post by cycomanic »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #230
ethanbond wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without implying a defense of the behavior you listed: Maybe you should read more about the other side.

I know what their views are but thank you for your kind suggestion. However, I also know where rhetoric about " society’s ability and justification to categorize beliefs into respectable or not " leads. I stand by my opinion.

So are you OK with Isis advertising videos on YouTube? I'm asking because pretty much everyone has limits to what they say is acceptable free speech. Also the US (like many other nations, they are just the biggest kid on the block atm) has been constantly categorising what people in other countries are allowed to say, under the very real threat of violence. Is it OK if a country is doing it?

Re: Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They’re Afraid to Share

#250

Post by cycomanic »

brigandish wrote: post #132
atoav wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Do we have to show tolerance to the intolerant?" is not the newest question in the book, and historians will probably tell you that in fact free societies stay free if they draw a clear line what is unaccepted behaviour. Liberty is always a balance act, because if you give bad actors freedom in the name of tolerance they will use it to reduce the freedom of weaker actors within society. If you live in a "survival of…

> "Do we have to show tolerance to the intolerant?" is not the newest question in the book Lately it seems to be the most misrepresented part of Popper's "paradox of intolerance", where he defines intolerance as those who resort to violence instead of speech, and the would be censors of this age who bring up the paradox - without seeming to have read it - tell us that the intolerant are those we disagree with. "we" b…

So are you proposing that the US should become part of the British Empire again? Because quite literally the founding of the US is based on protesters resorting to violence.
Post reply on HN