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

Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 964 posts

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#771

Post by phkahler »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #51
phkahler wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> It would be refreshing if more mainstream fictional media featured them in realistic, three-dimensional portrayals rather than as faceless stereotypes Yes and no. First, so much media has fallen down when it comes to character development. Then there's the problem of big companies like Disney that are deliberately secular in their content.

> First, so much media has fallen down when it comes to character development. That's the handy thing about essentialism, you don't need an individual character when you have pre-packaged narratives about their race, gender, etc. Rather than a complex character, we get a canned Black character or a canned White character or a canned Female character or a canned Male character. What do you need to know about a person…

I recently read that the main character in "They Live" had an entire backstory that was never told in the movie. Someone (producer, director, ???) Told Roddy Piper to create a backstory for his character and he did, and he played that part even though it was never shared with anyone. I'd thought about that myself for writing - if you define each character ahead of time and keep their character in mind it will aid writing their parts so they are seamless and self-consistent.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#772

Post by vorpalhex »

watwut wrote: post #696
vorpalhex wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If you aren't for us, you are against us." This is a great tool for crusades and other holy wars. You can paint inconvenient bystanders who don't come over to your side as enemy combatants and justify attacking them. Also fantastic for reinforcing in-group identity, forcing group members to stay loyal or lose their entire friend group.

What does that have to do with what I said? Nothing. Political center are not passive bystanders. They are people who are active in politics and either actively stop or actively push for real policies. That then affect how country operates. It is set of ideologies as much as any other political group is. They make aliances or refuse to make them too.

A random example policy position: "We should vote for the immediate shutdown of coal plants and demand their replacement with large scale nuclear reactors."

There are lots of good objections available here, from pointing out that blackouts kill people and coal is an important part of energy capacity, to jobs arguments, to arguments about micro-reactors and the lifespan of nuclear plants.

If you're going to sit on one side of the debate and say anyone who isn't fully aligned is wrong/a liar/etc, then you are both doomed for failure and have started at a maximally partisan position.

Political positions have little to do with objective truths and instead tend to fall on value arguments.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#773

Post by rayiner »

fancyfish wrote: post #287

The elephant in the room is that this sort of enlightened centrism, while it sounds noble, rests on several ill-formed assumptions. The first is that, by reading from both sides, they’ll balance and you’ll arrive at an enlightened center. This assumes the Overton Window is balanced, stationary, and not tilted to one side or the other. You’re beholden to the good judgement of each side to not move themselves further l…

No, those aren’t the assumptions at all. The assumption is not that “the truth is likely to lie between the two poles” but rather that, in a democracy, you have to pay attention to what the other half of the country thinks.

Democracy isn’t about “finding the truth.” It’s not really even about “truth” anyway. Most disputes are about differing moral judgments not disagreements about facts. For example, liberals I’ve talked to are often a bit surprised to learn that a fetus stops being “just a bundle of cells” very soon, and by 12-13 weeks has all its parts, a face, etc. That doesn’t cause them to go “oh, now my view of abortion is totally the opposite!” Views on what stage of development entitled a human to a right to life isn’t about truth finding, it’s about differing moral judgments. In a democracy, the most important thing is accommodating those disparate world views so we can live together productively.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#774

Post by myfavoritedog »

Impassionata wrote: post #730
myko wrote: post #700

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that's frustrating.

Once you only care about silencing those who would point out fascism, it becomes easy enough. Watchful moderation willing to act is necessary. I'm unsurprised that HN is being exploited this way, but I am pleasantly surprised that there are people seeing them in operation like yourself and the others speaking up. The truth gets buried, ultimately, not by these bad-faith arguments, but by the giant thread above consis…

Once the party has turned fascist

Says the supporter of the party that literally used impeachment twice to try to get rid of a President they didn't like.

Says the supporter of the party that is big into political correctness in order to control what people say and how they say it.

Says the supporter of the party that is canceling people who don't toe the party line.

Says the supporter of the party that controls academia, the mainstream media, and social media - where censorship abuses are an ever-increasing problem.

Says the supporter of the party that did billions of dollars of damage to cities across the country last year in looting, rioting, arson, and vandalism.

Says the supporter of the party that is actively trying to prosecute the most recent opposition party leader. No charges, just hunting for a crime.

Says the supporter of the party that raided the private attorney of the most recent opposition party leader to seize privileged attorney-client communications, based upon normally ignored FARA accusations.

If there is a political party in the USA flirting with fascism, it's the Democratic party.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#775

Post by gremlinsinc »

anm89 wrote: post #346
fancyfish wrote: post #287

The elephant in the room is that this sort of enlightened centrism, while it sounds noble, rests on several ill-formed assumptions. The first is that, by reading from both sides, they’ll balance and you’ll arrive at an enlightened center. This assumes the Overton Window is balanced, stationary, and not tilted to one side or the other. You’re beholden to the good judgement of each side to not move themselves further l…

Attacking the center is always the craziest narrative to me. It's saying: not only is it not okay to disagree with me and be on the other side, it's also not okay to not passionately agree with my exact side. The only right way to view these complex issues is to sign your name to join my party and then hold the party line, and everything else is unethical. I can't imagine a more obnoxious political viewpoint than tha…

[flagged]

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#776

Post by reedjosh »

Impassionata wrote: post #692
reedjosh wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a large bit of conservative viewpoint today is that the government shouldn't even be involved in marriage. I don't at all care what you do with your life, and really I'd like it if you gave me the same courtesy. But, if you believe that because I consider myself more conservative than not, I must then hate your lifestyle, how can we ever come to a happy coexistence?

> I think a large bit of conservative viewpoint today is that the government shouldn't even be involved in marriage. How is it you think that your viewpoint connects to conservative viewpoints at large? At some point you have to admit and understand: you aren't conservative. You aren't what most people think of when they think of conservatives.

I'm for small and lesser government and anti-war. I also like freedoms including gun rights.

I think less taxation is great and believe in the free market.

I believe in a nuclear family and traditional marriage for a healthy society, but not to the point that I'd ever try to force it on someone else, but in that I think it's proven to be the best way for people to rise from poverty and build a healthy community.

I don't think abortion is okay, but I won't stop you from having one.

I don't want the government to provide welfare though I do think that minorities have been hurt by our current system. I think welfare has if anything propagated said system.

I'm skeptical of big pharma and in particular the systems that both hyped COVID's danger and provided the vaccine.

I'm not anti-science, but anti-scientism.

My point is, I'm mostly conservative--to the point I get downvoted a lot when I express my opinions and I identify with a lot of opinions that are removed from twitter and youtube.

I think global governance only leads to more inscrutable bureaucracies and less freedom and privacy.

I believe that governments everywhere are doing their damnedest to scare everyone into believing more governmental control is the only way to protect you from `the other`.

I'm pretty clearly in the conservative camp. That said, I don't wish to control you, simply not to be controlled.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#777

Post by tjs8rj »

slumdev wrote: post #513
laputan_machine wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give an example of the second type? I see this kind of strawman argument against centrism all the time, yet I rarely see "worst of both worlds" outcomes in a political sense

Most Americans support an abortion ban, but they also support exceptions for rape or incest. If the fetus is a human person with rights, there should be no exception. If the fetus is not a human person with rights, then restrictions of any kind are unjust. The provenance of the fetus has no effect on the moral liceity of killing it. It's a lazy opinion formed by appeals to emotion.

Very few people decide the value of a fetus on a binary. Some leftists say it’s always just a clump of cells, some rightists say it’s always a human life.

Most people just don’t know. Immediately after conception it’s clearly just a clump of cells, immediately before birth it’s clearly a baby. Hence why most Americans are between lots of exceptions and few exceptions.

In general, if lots of people feel a certain way, and your conclusion is completely contradictory, you should assume you’re wrong until strong evidence says otherwise. You’re essentially assuming you know better than everyone.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#778

Post by slumdev »

tjs8rj wrote: post #777
slumdev wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most Americans support an abortion ban, but they also support exceptions for rape or incest. If the fetus is a human person with rights, there should be no exception. If the fetus is not a human person with rights, then restrictions of any kind are unjust. The provenance of the fetus has no effect on the moral liceity of killing it. It's a lazy opinion formed by appeals to emotion.

Very few people decide the value of a fetus on a binary. Some leftists say it’s always just a clump of cells, some rightists say it’s always a human life. Most people just don’t know. Immediately after conception it’s clearly just a clump of cells, immediately before birth it’s clearly a baby. Hence why most Americans are between lots of exceptions and few exceptions. In general, if lots of people feel a certain way,…

> In general, if lots of people feel a certain way, and your conclusion is completely contradictory, you should assume you’re wrong until strong evidence says otherwise.

This is a useful heuristic for becoming popular but not for making moral decisions. It is the worst possible approach to forming one's conscience.

> You’re essentially assuming you know better than everyone.

You're assuming everyone else formed a reasoned opinion rather than following the loudest existing herd.

Re: Some Americans are breaking out of political echo chambers

#779

Post by smitty1e »

rayiner wrote: post #773
fancyfish wrote: post #287

The elephant in the room is that this sort of enlightened centrism, while it sounds noble, rests on several ill-formed assumptions. The first is that, by reading from both sides, they’ll balance and you’ll arrive at an enlightened center. This assumes the Overton Window is balanced, stationary, and not tilted to one side or the other. You’re beholden to the good judgement of each side to not move themselves further l…

No, those aren’t the assumptions at all. The assumption is not that “the truth is likely to lie between the two poles” but rather that, in a democracy, you have to pay attention to what the other half of the country thinks. Democracy isn’t about “finding the truth.” It’s not really even about “truth” anyway. Most disputes are about differing moral judgments not disagreements about facts. For example, liberals I’ve ta…

> it’s about differing moral judgments

I submit that it's less about moral judgements--no one comes out in favor of, say, chattel slavery--than it is about controlling people via cognitive dissonance[1].

After a life-altering act, e.g. aborting a pregnancy, or having a gender reassignment surgery, it is cheaper for the mind to fall in with a re-enforcement group than to realize the decision was wrong.

Not to judge these wrong calls as worse than my own wrong calls. Merely being descriptive.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

Post reply on HN