Heresy • Hacker News Board

Re: Heresy

#741

Post by bendbro » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 9:19 PM UTC

UnpossibleJim wrote: post #355

Beltalowda wrote: post #155

I think this is an important part: "Fortunately in western countries the suppression of heresies is nothing like as bad as it used to be. Though the window of opinions you can express publicly has narrowed in the last decade, it's still much wider than it was a few hundred years ago. The problem is the derivative. Up till about 1985 the window had been growing ever wider. Anyone looking into the future in 1985 would…

I think the problem with this argument is the free speech "is at an all time high if you zoom out a bit". This is much like the argument, "gun violence is at an all time low if you zoom out a bit" argument. Both of these statements are true in the macro, but if you look at the trends, they point to a very disturbing line. The call for the restriction of free speech on the right(1) and the left (2) have increased in v…

If I said:

1. "Fuck Jesus, fuck America, kill all men."

2. "Fuck BLM, fuck diversity."

Which one do you think would get me cancelled?

Conservatives have comically little social power. Further, you can basically say anything you want around them, while conversations with the average liberal are a careful affair.

Perhaps though I am blind. Are there contemporary instances of conservative driven cancellations? The definition I like of cancellation is: removing privileges from a person when their qualities do not predict harmful use of those privileges.

For example, in the CBS article you linked, with regard to the parents, schools, CRT issue: I acknowledge the parents are restricting speech, but I don't think it violates the spirit of free speech. Teachers can say whatever they like, and parents are free choose what their kids listen to. On the same note, I think it is fine for schools to be forced to omit creationism when discussing evolution.

On defining cancellation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30770206

My personal axe to grind on left driven cancel culture: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25977399

Re: Heresy

#742

Post by alanlammiman » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 9:22 PM UTC

jacobolus wrote: post #513

NoraCodes wrote: post #498

> The reason the current wave of intolerance comes from the left is simply because the new unifying ideology happened to come from the left. The next one might come from the right. Imagine what that would be like. I'm curious how Mr. Graham can look at a country that is in the process of reversing much of the last half-century's progress on women's rights, LGBTQ+ rights, and disability rights, and _not_ see a politic…

Paul Graham grew up in a time when rich middle-aged white men with no relevant experience or credential could spout off about whatever topic they wanted, including pseudo-intellectual racism/misogyny, and everyone would be forced to listen to their nonsense unable to respond with more than an eye-roll for fear of reprisals. (For that matter, when Graham grew up those powerful white dudes could beat people up, sexuall…

I am a 35 year old straight married white male homeowner and businessowner who identifies as reasonably right-wing and I endorse this comment.

Re: Heresy

#743

Post by hansoolo » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 9:23 PM UTC

fassssst wrote: post #675

derevaunseraun wrote: post #672

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can avoid the whole thing by just not participating. Except when people don't participate they get nothing out of the exchange and there's no discussion or progress

Progress happens offline.

Totally agree. I even think, that the radicalisation everywhere directly derives from the all huge social media bubbles.

Re: Heresy

#744

Post by hansoolo » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 9:25 PM UTC

derevaunseraun wrote: post #672

fassssst wrote: post #635

This is an essay about what is largely a social media phenomenon. You can avoid the whole thing by just not participating. Seems like a waste of energy to even discuss vs just realizing that arguing publicly on a global scale is not a good use of your limited time on Earth.

> You can avoid the whole thing by just not participating. Except when people don't participate they get nothing out of the exchange and there's no discussion or progress

But participating in a Twitter flame war or something related mostly just hardens opinions. Everything happening online is behind the anonymous mask.

Re: Heresy

#745

Post by CJefferson » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 9:25 PM UTC

bendbro wrote: post #741

UnpossibleJim wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem with this argument is the free speech "is at an all time high if you zoom out a bit". This is much like the argument, "gun violence is at an all time low if you zoom out a bit" argument. Both of these statements are true in the macro, but if you look at the trends, they point to a very disturbing line. The call for the restriction of free speech on the right(1) and the left (2) have increased in v…

If I said: 1. "Fuck Jesus, fuck America, kill all men." 2. "Fuck BLM, fuck diversity." Which one do you think would get me cancelled? Conservatives have comically little social power. Further, you can basically say anything you want around them, while conversations with the average liberal are a careful affair. Perhaps though I am blind. Are there contemporary instances of conservative driven cancellations? The defin…

The problem with this kind of argument is that it's very hard to be sure you aren't trapped in your "bubble".

Fox is comfortably the most popular cable news network in America -- and that lends it a lot of social power among people who get most of their news from cable. They don't care what idiots on Twitter are saying, except as filtered through the news they consume.

I talk to conservatives who get furious at the suggestion that Joe Biden isn't a pedophile, or trans-women are women and not also pedophiles.

However, this is my bubble --I don't know which is "real".

Re: Heresy

#746

Post by temp8964 » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 9:27 PM UTC

amalcon wrote: post #568

Beltalowda wrote: post #155

I think this is an important part: "Fortunately in western countries the suppression of heresies is nothing like as bad as it used to be. Though the window of opinions you can express publicly has narrowed in the last decade, it's still much wider than it was a few hundred years ago. The problem is the derivative. Up till about 1985 the window had been growing ever wider. Anyone looking into the future in 1985 would…

I like to point out the Sedition Act of 1918 here. About 100 years ago, a law that literally made it a crime to criticize the government was not only enacted, but upheld by the courts. Can you even imagine that today? What people are finally noticing now is that non-government entities can also have negative impacts on free speech. They're not noticing because it just started -- e.g. lots of folks lost their jobs for…

> lots of folks lost their jobs for vocally opposing the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in the early 2000's

I am not aware of this history. Is there any data or document? What kind of jobs, private? governmental? academic?

Re: Heresy

#747

Post by daenz » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 9:29 PM UTC

chasing wrote: post #522

I’ll point out that saying true statements but framing them in a racist or sexist way is an extremely common tactic. In fact, it’s the preferred tactic of many bad actors because it’s very easy to hide behind the “but it’s true!” defence. Something can be true and also presented with racist or sexist intent.

>intent

assuming you know someone's intent suggests a bias against the part that you disagree with. give me an example of a truth that can be perceived as racist or sexist, and i'll show you how easy it is to ascribe intent to it.

Re: Heresy

#748

Post by alanlammiman » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 9:30 PM UTC

rilezg wrote: post #577

NoraCodes wrote: post #498

> The reason the current wave of intolerance comes from the left is simply because the new unifying ideology happened to come from the left. The next one might come from the right. Imagine what that would be like. I'm curious how Mr. Graham can look at a country that is in the process of reversing much of the last half-century's progress on women's rights, LGBTQ+ rights, and disability rights, and _not_ see a politic…

Great points. I would also highlight the following: > The clearest evidence of this is that whether a statement is considered x-ist often depends on who said it. Truth doesn't work that way. The same statement can't be true when one person says it, but x-ist, and therefore false, when another person does. I would offer the analogy of a broken (analog) clock. If a broken clock says the time is ten o’clock, and the tim…

Thank you - I was familiar with 'a broken clock is right twice a day', but hadn't considered the analogy with prejudiced statements before. Useful

Re: Heresy

#749

Post by zimpenfish » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 9:34 PM UTC

bendbro wrote: post #741

UnpossibleJim wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem with this argument is the free speech "is at an all time high if you zoom out a bit". This is much like the argument, "gun violence is at an all time low if you zoom out a bit" argument. Both of these statements are true in the macro, but if you look at the trends, they point to a very disturbing line. The call for the restriction of free speech on the right(1) and the left (2) have increased in v…

If I said: 1. "Fuck Jesus, fuck America, kill all men." 2. "Fuck BLM, fuck diversity." Which one do you think would get me cancelled? Conservatives have comically little social power. Further, you can basically say anything you want around them, while conversations with the average liberal are a careful affair. Perhaps though I am blind. Are there contemporary instances of conservative driven cancellations? The defin…

> Are there contemporary instances of conservative driven cancellations?

Would teachers being fired merely for being gay count?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/gay-teache...

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2021/10/27/gay-...

https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/opinion-teacher-i-was...

(three different ones there, there's more in the googles.)

> Teachers can say whatever they like

Except to say that they're gay, it seems.

Re: Heresy

#750

Post by titzer » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 9:34 PM UTC

I was nodding along up until this:

> The clearest evidence of this is that whether a statement is considered x-ist often depends on who said it. Truth doesn't work that way. The same statement can't be true when one person says it, but x-ist, and therefore false, when another person does. [2]

I think there is a ton of nuance that contradicts this. For example, a white, upper-middleclass college graduate could proclaim:

"College graduation rates are lower for black people. It must be difficult for them to finish."

And a black person with a low income background who has failed to finish college can utter the exact same words and it means something totally different.

The first might be considered subtly racist, depending on how its delivered, who it is delivered to--maybe even flagrantly racist under the right circumstances. The second might be considered exactly the opposite, alleging racism while not itself being racist.

The context and speaker matter a lot for these value judgments, not to mention tone, implication, insinuation, etc. Paul is bordering on socially crippled here.