The culture war is killing us [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: The culture war is killing us [video]

#151

Post by marcusverus » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 5:58 PM UTC

speedplane wrote: post #88

bad_username wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wealth inequality is not a problem in itself. Poverty or theft is.

> Wealth inequality is not a problem in itself. Poverty or theft is. Inequality leads to power centers. Power centers lead to systemic corruption. Systemic corruption is a problem. So yes, extreme inequality is itself a problem.

Why focus on a politically fraught issue like taxes/wealth redistribution as a path to addressing issues which are are not constrained by party politics? Surely it would be easier to gain a broad base of bipartisan support for legislation addressing corruption, if corruption is the problem, or concentration of power, if that's the problem.

It seems to me that wealth equality is nothing more than a handy wedge issue. The concept of 'fairness' is baked into our monkey brains[0], which makes it easy mechanism for engendering anger, in the hopes of turning anger into votes.

[0] https://www.pnas.org/content/110/6/2070

Re: The culture war is killing us [video]

#152

Post by dang » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 6:02 PM UTC

Pfhreak wrote: post #77

dang wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would! Thanks for the kind reply.

No problem. I assume the last sentence of the parent comment is likewise over the line for similar reasons? "So I guess you must think they didn't suffer?"

Yes, that was also a swipe and should also have been omitted. Especially because it clearly broke this guideline:

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

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

Re: The culture war is killing us [video]

#153

Post by dang » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 6:04 PM UTC

jancsika wrote: post #117

dang wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just the same when the topic is ML models. HN readers shouldn't be making pejorative comments about each other in those conversations either, and when we see it we moderate it the same way. There's no need to comment pejoratively on the other person. The post is stronger without it, and the expected value of such swipes, in terms of the impact they have on subsequent discussion, is sharply negative.

> HN readers shouldn't be making pejorative comments about each other in those conversations either, and when we see it we moderate it the same way. Moderation appears highly selective. E.g., "This argument is clownish and we should be embarrassed it's on the front page."[1] That is the top comment for that post, but I don't notice your reminder there about pejorative comments. If I had to rankly speculate, I'd say m…

Moderation always appears highly selective no matter what - this is a psychological inevitability (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...).

The truth is far more boring than your speculation, which I suppose is a consistent problem with speculation. We moderate guideline breakage when we see it. Moderation is inconsistent because we don't see everything (as pvg already pointed out). https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

There's also some selection involved, but it's more along the lines of "do I have the energy to make a post about this one", "am I prepared to deal with howls of protest in this case", and "is it borderline enough to just let go".

Re: The culture war is killing us [video]

#154

Post by wegs2 » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 6:05 PM UTC

jfengel wrote: post #140

teekert wrote: post #93

I see it in the smartest people I know. I live in the Netherlands but I have a "CNN addicted" colleague. And I like to tease her and say things like: "You know people want to carry guns so the government does not have a monopoly on violence, so when you feel like you got a leader (as you do now [this was Trump era]) that really does not have the consent of the governed anymore, you may not be powerless." Sure, societ…

I won't froth, but I won't have dinner with a Republican either. Their last Presidential candidate was deliberately insulting. We're not just talking about a media figure or fringe candidate, but a person they actually voted for. I came to this conclusion before 2016; 2016 merely marks the point where it became so obvious that no reasonable person could deny it. Even if they didn't pull the lever for him, he was mere…

I'll have dinner with virtually anyone, and I'll try to understand them. I also have a lot of historical books, including one written by a genocidal dictator who killed a lot of my countrymen. I try to understand him too.

If you're expecting to convince people, it sounds like you're putting in the wrong effort. The goal of a conversation is understanding, not agreement.

"Here, let us rationally discuss the issues, but regardless of what you say I'm going to go back and vote for [their candidate]" is exactly how a conversation ought to go. If your expectation is different, it's not them. It's you.

If I fly to Japan, my goal is to understand Japanese culture. My goal isn't to Americanize it. And vice-versa. It's no different here. You're not going to successfully impose your values on other people.

"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the results of a hundred battles" - Sun Tzu

Re: The culture war is killing us [video]

#155

Post by jollybean » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 6:14 PM UTC

Traster wrote: post #109

anonymoushn wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either my children will be rejected from universities even if they have perfect SATs and grades on the basis of their race or they will not. There is not much to misunderstand here.

Think you're focused on the wrong issue there. The most likely reason your child is unlikely to get into a good university is because good universities have consistently chosen not to increase class sizes in line with the number of qualified students apply, as a result your child is way less likely due to pure statistics to get in. That's because the schools are social institutions not academic ones.

The ratio of qualified students to good uni seats has always been overloaded. In the context of 'culture wars', the 'number of seats added' is not really a culture war issue. Also, there are tons of great universities in the US.

In 'culture wars' we have to have some way of allocating sets to 'the top schools', and it could be just 'SAT', family connections, entrance exam, race, class, etc.. Some groups feel slots should be allocated base on race, some feel otherwise. That one is actually a little bit complicated because although SATs do provide some basis of objective rigour, it's probably the most easily 'gamed' thing and to the extent it's 'gamed' it has little meaning. Do we really want to limit top uni entrance to the 0.1% of HS students spend all of their time preparing for 'A Big Test'? That might be a little bit counterproductive ... but then that 'test' was also one of the more objective metrics.

So it's complicated and a ripe area for 'culture war'.

Re: The culture war is killing us [video]

#156

Post by teekert » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 6:20 PM UTC

jfengel wrote: post #140

teekert wrote: post #93

I see it in the smartest people I know. I live in the Netherlands but I have a "CNN addicted" colleague. And I like to tease her and say things like: "You know people want to carry guns so the government does not have a monopoly on violence, so when you feel like you got a leader (as you do now [this was Trump era]) that really does not have the consent of the governed anymore, you may not be powerless." Sure, societ…

I won't froth, but I won't have dinner with a Republican either. Their last Presidential candidate was deliberately insulting. We're not just talking about a media figure or fringe candidate, but a person they actually voted for. I came to this conclusion before 2016; 2016 merely marks the point where it became so obvious that no reasonable person could deny it. Even if they didn't pull the lever for him, he was mere…

Well you made my point. Your country is not going downhill because of one or the other, it's because both can't stand each other any more. A republican will write a similar story about Hillary. Have a nice life over there people, I hope sincerely that things will change.

Re: The culture war is killing us [video]

#157

Post by jollybean » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 6:25 PM UTC

pmoriarty wrote: post #26

anigbrowl wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The media didn't create divisiveness, although significant parts of it exploit the divisiveness for commercial purposes. We have objective evidence of severe legislative polarization at the federal level going back to the 1980s: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...

"We have objective evidence of severe legislative polarization at the federal level going back to the 1980s" Political divisiveness in the US goes back much further than that. In the "you think it's bad now" department, I remember reading about the case of, I think it was in the 1800's, of a congressman assaulting another congressman with a cane over some political issue. Of course the most infamous case of political…

Yes but in the 1880's punching someone wasn't that big of a deal. They could have gone to the bar later and got drunk together and made legislation the next day.

Underneath the House of Commons (and I believe somewhere in US Congress) was a bar, and after arguing in the Commons, everyone would go downstairs and get wasted. The 1st PM of Canada drank 12 ounces a day minimum. Imagine that. 12 hard drinks a day (!).

What definitely has increased is the use of procedural tactics and such manoeuvring, the filibusterer, executive statements, congressman never taking the position of the other side. Also, the Republican/Democrat situation was not divided into urban/rural camps so much until recently, and that's a big kind of divide. 'Everyone' (quotation marks) used to be Christian, at least nominally. The Catholic/Protestant divide was big, but largely due to culture (i.e. Italian vs. English). I feel that the 'Evangelical / Atheist' divide even much wider. African Americans have a voice now (thankfully) and their presence as an active piece on the board can very easily be inflamed either in good faith or sometimes not. The Latino community is massive and they seem to be a 'behind the scenes', silent force, a the MSM doesn't give them the time of day, but they are voting, although pragmatically I don't their presence adds to any negative confrontational dynamic. But those are new vectors for division.

So we are in a new divisive situation there's no doubt about it.

Re: The culture war is killing us [video]

#158

Post by sangnoir » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 6:30 PM UTC

fighterpilot wrote: post #144

8bitsrule wrote: post #141

Check the history. There's nothing new about divisiveness in America. Nothing. Culture wars? A lot of mounds have gone missing since 1494. So some of us are more conscious of it. Are they feeling uneasy about what used to be easy to willfully ignore? What's the price of justice? "All created equal"? Fancy words. "I got mine." Ain't that grand.

Regarding just recent history, 2015-2021 is more divisive the 2000-2015, don't you think?

No - I think there's a class of people who weren't exposed to the divisions who're only now aware of it. In roughly chronological order: Anti-"war on terror" demonstrations, The Dixie Chicks being canceled, freedom fries, the handling of Katrina, the divisive 2008 presidential campaign season, the backlash to Obama's presidency, the rise of the Tea Party, the Benghazi investigation, Sandy Hook, birtherism.

I probably missed a bunch of other partisan clashes.

edit: I don't know how I forgot Bush v. Gore. That was way up there in terms of divisiveness.

Re: The culture war is killing us [video]

#159

Post by jfengel » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 6:32 PM UTC

stuaxo wrote: post #138

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Even the act of people writing debunking articles like "Is shocking X actually true? No." is still doing a little bit of work to inject that idea into your psyche. I get a chuckle every time I see a social media post about that's some minor mishap and OP is pretending to be repentant ("if only I had this wouldn't have happend") and all the commenters virtue signaling to each other along those same lines. Little do t…

This is pretty meta, since "virtue signaling" is just as real as "the culture war" and other myths like the tooth fairy.

It's interesting that you put it that way. I see the term "virtue signaling" as one aspect of the culture war. It's a blanket ad hominem attack: "They don't really believe X. They just want everybody else to believe that they believe X. X is actually so bad that nobody really believes it." Thus allowing them to sidestep any discussion of the validity of X; they just assume it's false and attack the person.

In practice, I find that the term is mostly just used as "vice signalling". It's not really an argument at all, but rather a call to other subscribers to their ideology that they're all in this together, as indicated by the use of the common buzzword.

The term is used only along ideological lines, and I do believe that those ideological lines are turning increasingly hostile. Calling it a "war" is always going to have weird connotations, but the terminology used for hostility is always subject to escalation.

I do believe the divisions are growing louder and more angry, if not always violent (though there's a good case to be made that they have gotten more violent over the last 40 years or so). Is that where your disagreement is, or is it elsewhere?

Re: The culture war is killing us [video]

#160

Post by blaser-waffle » Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 6:35 PM UTC

nradov wrote: post #46

salimmadjd wrote: post #7

Have many of us have become the useful idiots of the corporate media overloads? I know it's fashionable to blame Facebook for the divisiveness, but I'm old enough to recall Obama's 2004 DNC speech that got him his first national attention. Before there was Facebook, Obama was talking about divisiveness. I firmly believe anger and anxiety is constantly injected into the mainstream corporate media to increase eyeballs…

It's well known that foreign intelligence services are active on social media trying to foment divisiveness. They're not even necessarily pushing a specific political goal, just getting Americans to hate each other. The Russians appear to be the most active but other countries play the same game. So before you get drawn into an online argument, ask yourself am I dealing with an authentic person or a paid foreign trol…

Well before even the Cold War. The USSR was pumping lots of propaganda into the US as far back as the Red Scares of the 1920s.

A Clockwork Orange uses Russian slang ("nadsat") based on the aggressive propaganda that was blasted at the West. There are some uncomfortable comparisons to be made with modern times there, e.g. Q-Anon and aggressive propaganda aimed at the survivalist types...