Live data from Hacker News

/r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

tracingwoodgrains.medium.com

471–480 of 566 posts

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#471
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subreddit's changing their spots isn't uncommon, it's the norm for reddit. The author has a very clear agenda here, and while they're welcome to construct a case for that view, they've left out inconvenient details while attempting to appear neutral. The core issue is that the subreddit already had an agreement that no one would attempt to represent the movement or do interviews. The forethought there was that a redd…

> It's deeply disingenuous to suggest that the work reform principles of the subreddit are moot because a mod started the original subreddit as a protest against work. This point might stand better using a word other than "principle," from principium (beginning), from princeps (initiator).

Usage intended as per https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/principle

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#472
post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The reality is that there aren't enough upper class people to generate sufficient tax revenue for a meaningful UBI. What makes you think so? There are a lot of discussion online about the costs/benefits of UBI. This article has an US-centric view on how this could be afforded https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/14/budget-neutral-universal-bas...

Interesting. Sounds like it axes Medicare, SS, and a large number of tax deductions (which is how the US implements a lot of policy). I'd love a simplified tax code, but unsure of the SS and Medicare removal. I wonder how that would look for people who are currently collecting, paying in at various stages, etc. That would be a massive windfall for most if the money paid-in was returned. I'm not sure which veteran ben…

> Sounds like it axes Medicare, SS, and a large number of tax deductions…

… as well various special-purpose programs including housing benefits, SSI, SNAP, TANF, veteran's benefits, WIC, Medicaid, SS Disability, and disaster relief. I'm sure those currently receiving these benefits will be thrilled to find out that they're being replaced by a flat UBI payment of $15k/yr (minus taxes) with no allowance for special circumstances or hardship.

> [SS and Medicare removal] would be a massive windfall for most if the money paid-in was returned.

Undoubtedly, but what are the odds of that happening?

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#473
post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct, but that's just how the country is. If people want cultural changes, they've gotta address the causes of the divides in the US and understand that they'll have massive negative consequences too, not just positive ones. Or they can move to a country that is already more in line with what they want out of society.

US police kill too many people (including many innocents and especially of lower socioeconomic classes)-- easy solution, move somewhere else!

exactly—like one of the other 49 states!

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are already many countries with generous welfare states where one does not have to work and could theoretically live off the government, yet they manage just fine. Even if universal basic income was a pipe dream (which I vehemently disagree with, and again point to the examples above as evidence that not needing to work does not lead to societal collapse), I don't see why enabling everyone the freedom to work o…

> There are already many countries with generous welfare states where one does not have to work and could theoretically live off the government, yet they manage just fine. I didn’t know there were any countries like this? Would you please link to a few?

Probably alluding to the Scandinavian countries. One or two of them tried out UI for a limited time. In France they have very generous unemployment benefits, but you pay for them with heavy taxation which has its own problems .

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#475
The sanewashing post linked in the article is hilariously ironic:

https://old.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/js84tu/how_did_...

> So with all that explained - I think it's pretty simple. Mainstream progressives 'sanewashed' the "Defund The Police" position because they'd acquired the position through social spaces that imply anyone who doesn't hold those positions are guilty. If you exist in social spaces like that primarily, you almost don't have the option to dissent. The incentives against it are too strong. And that's how and why people will continually push for completely dumb slogans and ideas like that, even when it makes no sense - and sometimes, especially when it makes no sense. Because they assume it has to, and will rationalize their own reasons why it does.

This is a post in r/neoliberal which itself is a subculture with its own rationalizations. It assumes that their positions are "right" and default because they've thought "rationally" about them. But ironically, all social spaces and especially social media spaces are subject to this same pressure. Look at this thread where the poster has negative votes and the reddit OP is responding to:

https://old.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/js84tu/how_did_...

This is the exact same pressures the reddit OP is decrying in left spaces. This is such a perfect encapsulation of liberals acting in left spaces, co-opting the space and making it moderate rather than listening and helping amplify left ideas and solutions.

> It's not devoid of argument, but the key call to action is "Listen to trans people" - in other words, really, an appeal to "you should be a good person", a condemnation of people who don't "Listen to trans people", and the implication that if you're a Good Cis Perosn, you will Listen To Trans People like the one in the thread. "SJW" spaces spread their desired information and views to sympathetic people by appealing to the morality, empathy, and fairness of the situation, but with a strong serving of 'those who do not adapt to these views and positions are inherently guilty'.

Left spaces have to appeal to emotion because "logic" and rational thinking itself are co-opted by everyone to the right who have made it this grey space where "logic" == moral correctness == my opinion. Maybe when people say "listen" they actually mean listen and stop trying to apply logic and rationalization to everything. Maybe you need to actually need to do emotional work and sympathize to understand where leftists are coming from. And really maybe you do have to internalize at least a shred of guilt to understand your position in the world and how you might be impacting someone's ability to be heard.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Sounds like it axes Medicare, SS, and a large number of tax deductions (which is how the US implements a lot of policy). I'd love a simplified tax code, but unsure of the SS and Medicare removal. I wonder how that would look for people who are currently collecting, paying in at various stages, etc. That would be a massive windfall for most if the money paid-in was returned. I'm not sure which veteran ben…

> Sounds like it axes Medicare, SS, and a large number of tax deductions… … as well various special-purpose programs including housing benefits, SSI, SNAP, TANF, veteran's benefits, WIC, Medicaid, SS Disability, and disaster relief. I'm sure those currently receiving these benefits will be thrilled to find out that they're being replaced by a flat UBI payment of $15k/yr (minus taxes) with no allowance for special cir…

It sounds like you’re being sarcastic, but it will be vastly preferable to avoid the bureaucracy that comes with all those programs. Not to mention the cognitive burden that comes from constantly being means tested.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This has made my life so much better. When I hear something someone says to me now I have an extra filter to run it through. It's no longer a choice just between the person being dishonest about the facts or being dishonest about the facts. They could mean it in a different way. I'm with you, but to me, this is just operationalized dishonesty, assuming it's not a significant cognitive deficit relative to those who…

This is a great comment. And of course you're aware that I largely agree with it. So with that proviso, all I will say in response is that I think it would be helpful to consider the opposing view point: If the goal is to elicit an emotional or political response that one desires through one's actions, why should perfect, literal truth be in the way of achieving those goals? My answer to that is that it destroys good…

Yea, agreed. In the distinction I was highlighting, the women I've dated were all operating in good faith, which is what made it possible for us to work together to overcome their temporary lapses of the ability to think clearly.

I didn't see this as implying anything about their character or intelligence other than the fact that they weren't perfect. It felt like exactly the same thing as the lapses of compassion that I tend towards when arguing, where the focus on truth makes me choose my words less carefully and casually say hurtful things (this was also something we worked on together in those relationships).

This is in stark contrast to the people for whom dishonesty is core to their being, who literally can't comprehend the level of honesty you and I expect from (and deliver to) those we're close with. It sounds like you're saying that your experience with that gf was closer to that than she was to the good-faith-but-imperfect type of person I was referring to. In that case, good call.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#479
post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The radical position is, if nobody wants to mine coal, then we will need to either not use coal (great idea, saves a lot of Co2), or make the coal mining job better. Of course nobody wants the dirty, unhealthy and dangerous job that capitalism designed, but that does not imply that it is impossible to design a job that extracts coal and people genuinely enjoy.

The challenge is who "designs" the job to make coal mining more enjoyable in a specialized economy. In Capitalism, you raise pay until there is incentive to do the work. In a communist command economy, some authority decides if more coal miners are needed and takes from some people to gives to coal workers until there are enough workers. In a cashless anarchists society, I guess you hope that someone invents somethin…

Presumably whoever thinks that it is important to mine coal.

Re: /r/antiwork: A tragedy of sanewashing and social gentrification

#480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sounds like it axes Medicare, SS, and a large number of tax deductions… … as well various special-purpose programs including housing benefits, SSI, SNAP, TANF, veteran's benefits, WIC, Medicaid, SS Disability, and disaster relief. I'm sure those currently receiving these benefits will be thrilled to find out that they're being replaced by a flat UBI payment of $15k/yr (minus taxes) with no allowance for special cir…

It sounds like you’re being sarcastic, but it will be vastly preferable to avoid the bureaucracy that comes with all those programs. Not to mention the cognitive burden that comes from constantly being means tested.

"but it will be vastly preferable"

To whom? The government, sure. The individuals using those programs, probably not. Healthcare costs alone would likely wipe that out (for the demographics using Medicare). Rent in many areas would eat more than half.

Post reply on HN