The case against crisis-mongering • Hacker News Board

Re: The case against crisis-mongering

#111

Post by mythrwy » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 7:59 PM UTC

_ykl9 wrote: post #109

mythrwy wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you up until "and then attacked the United States with intent to violently usurp control of the government". That isn't what happened and is exactly the type of inaccurate and unfair characterization you mention previously.

It absolutely is not. Unless you're claiming that the 1/6 footage was all deepfaked and/or an Antifa false flag operation, the issue seems pretty unambiguous.

Agreed, absolutely is not what happened. I don't deny a riot happened that day. Which is the kind of thing people are actually being charged with. As they should be. I'm not in favor of riots.

But where do you see "intent to violently usurp" in that footage? That's inaccurate and over the top rhetoric of exactly the kind you call out earlier.

I don't believe false flag. There may (or may not) have been agitators who were other then Trump supporters, but if so it wasn't too hard to do and a large number of Trump supporters behaved criminally. No argument with that. But it was not an "attempt to violently usurp the government" by any reasonable definition.

Re: The case against crisis-mongering

#112

Post by _ykl9 » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 8:07 PM UTC

mythrwy wrote: post #111

_ykl9 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It absolutely is not. Unless you're claiming that the 1/6 footage was all deepfaked and/or an Antifa false flag operation, the issue seems pretty unambiguous.

Agreed, absolutely is not what happened. I don't deny a riot happened that day. Which is the kind of thing people are actually being charged with. As they should be. I'm not in favor of riots. But where do you see "intent to violently usurp" in that footage? That's inaccurate and over the top rhetoric of exactly the kind you call out earlier. I don't believe false flag. There may (or may not) have been agitators who…

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/hang-mike-pe...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/nancy-pelosi-...

https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters...

If it's "over the top", it's because what happened was over the top. The language I used is literal and accurate.

Re: The case against crisis-mongering

#113

Post by mythrwy » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 8:13 PM UTC

_ykl9 wrote: post #112

mythrwy wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, absolutely is not what happened. I don't deny a riot happened that day. Which is the kind of thing people are actually being charged with. As they should be. I'm not in favor of riots. But where do you see "intent to violently usurp" in that footage? That's inaccurate and over the top rhetoric of exactly the kind you call out earlier. I don't believe false flag. There may (or may not) have been agitators who…

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/hang-mike-pe... https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/nancy-pelosi-... https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters... If it's "over the top", it's because what happened was over the top. The language I used is literal and accurate.

A guy in a viking suit with bear spray was out to take over the government? NPR and Washington Post say so (after 4 years of claiming Trump was the antichrist).

They are grasping at straws trying to build an (unreasonable) narrative.

Where are the insurrection charges in court?

No, what happened was a bunch of people were upset about an election they perceived as fraudulent and wanted certification stopped until an investigation was performed (also not reasonable, the electors had been certified at that point and it was done deal). Also Trump didn't help matters. Once the state electors were in it was over for him, fraud or no fraud. There wasn't reasonable time to audit anything and he did no one any favors by getting the crowd whipped into a frenzy.

Re: The case against crisis-mongering

#114

Post by _ykl9 » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 8:15 PM UTC

mythrwy wrote: post #113

_ykl9 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/hang-mike-pe... https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/nancy-pelosi-... https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters... If it's "over the top", it's because what happened was over the top. The language I used is literal and accurate.

A guy in a viking suit with bear spray was out to take over the government? NPR and Washington Post say so (after 4 years of claiming Trump was the antichrist). They are grasping at straws trying to build an (unreasonable) narrative. Where are the insurrection charges in court? No, what happened was a bunch of people were upset about an election they perceived as fraudulent and wanted certification stopped until an i…

Being an idiot in a viking suit justifies attempting to assassinate multiple acting government officials for the purpose of interrupting the certification of the election. OK.

Re: The case against crisis-mongering

#115

Post by mythrwy » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 8:17 PM UTC

_ykl9 wrote: post #112

mythrwy wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, absolutely is not what happened. I don't deny a riot happened that day. Which is the kind of thing people are actually being charged with. As they should be. I'm not in favor of riots. But where do you see "intent to violently usurp" in that footage? That's inaccurate and over the top rhetoric of exactly the kind you call out earlier. I don't believe false flag. There may (or may not) have been agitators who…

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/10/hang-mike-pe... https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/nancy-pelosi-... https://www.npr.org/2021/03/19/977879589/yes-capitol-rioters... If it's "over the top", it's because what happened was over the top. The language I used is literal and accurate.

I'm sorry I strongly disagree your language is either literal or accurate.

Re: The case against crisis-mongering

#116

Post by rdiddly » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 8:36 PM UTC

While nothing lately has made me "doubt the basic tenets of liberalism," quite a bit of public speech has made me doubt that the given speaker understands said tenets. Not necessarily this writer, but then again he doesn't state them either, so there is at least room for doubt. "There oughtta be a law" that anybody who uses the word 'liberal' or 'conservative' must take a quick detour to define what they mean by that. Suddenly we would all know what we were talking about. I think it would be eye-opening. Deception thrives in an environment of code-words, shorthand and oversimplification. That's what Newspeak was supposed to be all about, right?

Re: The case against crisis-mongering

#117

Post by tomjakubowski » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 9:34 PM UTC

h2odragon wrote: post #21

Humans are built to survive adversity. We got so good at it, we took over the planet. Now there's lots of humans who haven't ever faced serious challenges (by previous standards of everyday survival), and they need to feel the drama and triumph humans are programmed for even without the actual life threatening events that used to prompt those feelings. So for many, there's always going to be an imminent apocalypse th…

> We got so good at it, we took over the planet.

C. Elegans would like a word!

Re: The case against crisis-mongering

#118

Post by OrvalWintermute » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 9:47 PM UTC

namdnay wrote: post #98

leereeves wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good example. Opposing "law as a living construct" doesn't mean the law shouldn't be amended or "we should drop the other amendments", it means the courts should follow the law as written (including amendments) and not redefine it as they choose.

So a civil law system, rather than common law? Yeah they have that in France, it comes with its own issues (very slow to adapt - women only got the vote in the 60s, and the death penalty was still there until the 80s if I remember correctly)

Not civil law vs common law, or, common law vs continental law [1]

In using the Constitution as a living document which can be interpreted by an activist judge, rather than the constitution as written [2], as passed by the states/amendment (originalism), interpreted by precedents from the collection of rulings, and caselaw.

[1] https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/constitutional-la...

[2] https://www.swindlelaw.com/2017/10/originalism-living-consti...

Re: The case against crisis-mongering

#119

Post by DenisM » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 9:55 PM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #15

Guthur wrote: post #8

Honestly it seems no one really understands what fascism actually is. What fascism used to be was ultra nationalistic, non democratic, centralised control of people's lives and the economy for the greater good of the state. And I means these to the most extreme you can possibly take these ideas, that's fascism. The word has no meaning when you throw it around against anyone with slightly conservative view points.

I'm not sure people care. The median pundit seems to have an unshakeable belief that they aren't going to bear the big-picture consequences for bringing back failed 1900s political ideologies. Given the absolutely absurd number of real-world experiments run over the last 2,000 years the ultra-short-term view people have of political history is a bit silly. Eg, I don't even know what the whipping boy was before facism…

> I don't even know what the whipping boy was before facism. Possibly Bonapartism

It depends on the time and place. The favorite boogeyman of the Bolsheviks were the bourgeoisie at first, followed by the Mensheviks (communists of slightly wrong persuasion), and then counterrevolutionaries. The boogeyman for the royal regimes of the 19th century Europe was the French revolution, anything not sufficiently orthodox was automatically suspect.

Re: The case against crisis-mongering

#120

Post by lixtra » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 10:26 PM UTC

cblconfederate wrote: post #77

lixtra wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the Rwandan genocide https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_genocide

things in africa and israel are not better today. The yugoslav wars were kind of to-be-expected since yugoslavia split at that time and they largely ended in the 90s. There 's more war today than in the 90s https://ourworldindata.org/war-and-peace

The >500k bump from the Rwandan genocide is not in their battle related graph. If you scroll further down, you see it in “Other forms of large-scale violence”. Taking the up to date death toll of Syria you could say that the situation is as bad as in the ‘90.