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

A university president makes a case against cowardice

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

821–830 of 934 posts

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#821

Post by jhbadger »

lmm wrote: post #221
jhbadger wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how society progresses though. Before 1865, slavery was mainstream and abolitionists were weird radical crazies. Before 1965, "Jim Crow" laws that said non-whites had to use different bathrooms and drinking fountains were mainstream, and people who opposed them were seen as unreasonable.

And back in the 1960s a planned economy was normal and reasonable, and many progressives openly called for normalisation of sex with teenagers. Sometimes shifts in attitudes are progress. Sometimes they're just a random walk. Sometimes the left is right, sometimes the right is.

I'm not sure either of those are particularly progressive -- the current president seems to be a fan of tariffs, a form of planned economy popular in the 19th century (and condemned by most economists since, who favor free trade). And child brides are a common feature of many right-wing religious groups, argued on the grounds that that people (particularly female) traditionally married in their teen years.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#822

Post by lelanthran »

anigbrowl wrote: post #667
lelanthran wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's because the extent of the illiberal behavior of the radical left was yelling and "cancel culture" while the present behavior of the illiberal right is abductions and overseas slave camps. You can see why people might find having the two equated a little ridiculous, right? You are correct - one is objectively worse than the other. The unfortunate truth is that, also, one is a consequence of the other. Trump i…

The unfortunate truth is that, also, one is a consequence of the other. This is just the 'you made me do it' defense argued by every abuser ever. Someone is behaving as an ass, they get told 'you're an ass, stop that' and then they escalate and say 'you made me do this'. It happens in families, it happens in schoolyards, it happens on streets, it happens in business, it happens in dictatorships. Just yesterday, the p…

> This is just the 'you made me do it' defense argued by every abuser ever.

Meh. You can say that about every consequence ever if you determine a priori, like you have, that consequences are only performed by abusers.

In any case, it's not a defense when many many people were saying this before it happened.

IOW, it was a prediction before the fact, not a defense after the fact.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#823

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

settrans wrote: post #732
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #723

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody is talking about ceding land, we're talking about re-establishing a nation in the historic homeland of the Jewish people You're saying the same thing with different words. In order to "re-establish" that nation, they had to take over control of Palestine, against the will of the people who actually lived there. > no Zionist demanded land or induced anyone to cede their land prior to 1947 anyway That's not tr…

It sounds like you're against the idea of national self determination altogether. Can you think of an example of a successful assertion of the right to self determinism which didn't involve a national entity asserting sovereignty over a body of land populated by a diverse group of people? As we have already established, the population in the land of the historical mandate has exploded, including a manifold increase o…

> If the Zionist pioneers had managed to achieve a 99% majority of Jewish population in Palestine through legal immigration before asserting sovereignty, would that pass your test?

The whole enterprise was illegitimate, because it was carried out against the will of the population of Palestine. The population did not want a foreign group of people to come in, settle the land and take over. The British colonial rulers forced Zionism on the Palestinian population undemocratically.

You keep on appealing to self-determination, but you completely ignore the Palestinians' right to self-determination on the land they had inhabited for centuries.

> Or would you just prefer to see the European Jewry perish in toto under the Holocaust and Eastern European pogroms?

The way to avert the Holocaust would have been to prevent the rise of fascism in Europe. The vast majority of Jews were anti-Zionist, and did not want to leave their home countries. The idea that Polish Jews would have all left Poland for the Middle East before WWII is just fanciful. Only a small percentage of them wanted to pack up and go to Palestine, a far-away place they knew nothing about.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#824

Post by concordDance »

Aeolun wrote: post #806
concordDance wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I probably have a skewed sample, but in my observations those with the best reasoning skills tended to have a mix of views that would be labelled "left" and "right". The better the reasoning skills the less likely they were to just agree with things like "trans women are women" or "capitalism is the best economic system" and the more likely they were to dissect the statement and terms.

Sure, but you are picking things that are debatable. I’m thinking more of (somehow) controversial things like ‘climate change is bad’.

Actually, even there there would be caveats. E.g. maybe Russia would benefit from climate change? Maybe the cost benefit curve with my time discounting and likely tech advancement means its not worth doing anything about now?

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#825

Post by nielsbot »

snapetom wrote: post #759
nielsbot wrote: post #726

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is SPLC? What have they done? I'm also wondering why the ADL would defend Musk at all . Can someone explain their motivation for that?

[flagged]

Maybe just explain what it is instead of avoiding my point?

Those who defend Israeli colonialism actually increase anti-semitism in the world and no amount of intentional conflation of Judaism and Zionism will erase that. Maybe you'll realize that one day.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#826

Post by snapetom »

nielsbot wrote: post #825
snapetom wrote: post #759

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Maybe just explain what it is instead of avoiding my point? Those who defend Israeli colonialism actually increase anti-semitism in the world and no amount of intentional conflation of Judaism and Zionism will erase that. Maybe you'll realize that one day.

[flagged]

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#827

Post by low_tech_love »

Telemakhos wrote: post #716
low_tech_love wrote: post #425

Some personal highlights: "They’re excellent schools, and they have excellent scientists, and if one of Vice-President Vance’s kids is sick, he’s going to want the doctor to have gone to one of these schools; he’s not going to want them to have gone to Viktor Orbán’s university." "People have said to me, “Well, you take all that money from the government, why don’t you listen to them?” The answer is, because the mone…

> "They’re excellent schools, and they have excellent scientists, and if one of Vice-President Vance’s kids is sick, he’s going to want the doctor to have gone to one of these schools; he’s not going to want them to have gone to Viktor Orbán’s university." I'm not sure I understand. If I want a medical doctor, I'm not looking for someone based on his political views or spirited independence from the Hungarian governm…

In that specific quote he’s talking about Ivy League universities, not Wesleyan, but the quote would be too long. I thought it was clear, sorry for the misunderstanding.

Regardless, I absolutely agree with you, except for one thing: I would have no problem being under care of a Hungarian, but I doubt you’d ever see a MAGA enthusiast saying he prefers that than an American doctor.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#828

Post by low_tech_love »

nradov wrote: post #702
KittenInABox wrote: post #676

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are US citizens who want to shoot gays, kill people different in creed or heritage, and bomb people for religious reasons. We had the gay panic defense (the legal defense to kill gay people just because you found out they were gay, and the shock justified you killing them). We had people shooting sikhs assuming they're muslim. We had folks bombing abortion clinics. There are US citizens who have done far more,…

Those situations aren't comparable. While I oppose bigoted behavior by US citizens, for better or worse they have an absolute and inviolable right to remain in this country. Aliens generally have no such right. Entering and remaining in the country is a privilege . I oppose arbitrary arrests and deportations conducted without due process, but in principle there's nothing wrong with holding aliens to a different stand…

Are “freedom of speech” and “due process” not American fundamental values? It seems to me that the people hostile to fundamental values are the masked ICE officers kidnapping random, harmless people from the street and moving them to a different state before the judge had the chance to order them to not do that.

Or did Trump add “disregard for human decency” and “imposing widespread fear through arbitrary state violence” to the list of fundamental values with one of his executive decisions?

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#829

Post by immibis »

nradov wrote: post #590
wat10000 wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a free country, private employers should be allowed to choose who they employ, with very narrow exceptions for discrimination based on race, religion, etc. In a free country, citizens should be allowed to read what other citizens write in public. Those both seem pretty obvious, but put the two of them together and it means people can lose their jobs or not be hired for stuff they tweet. How do you resolve that? IM…

Why should we make an exception based on religion but not on political viewpoint? That is logically inconsistent. There's nothing special about religion.

There is, however, something special about political viewpoint.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#830

Post by immibis »

thyristan wrote: post #712
megous wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-citizens in Germany have no free speech rights period. You get banned and deported even for making lectures about unfavorable topics, as it seems. That's quite different from protesting, since you're not making anyone listen to you. Lecture/conference is an offer, that Germans and others may take out of their own interest to learn about what you have to say. That also infringes on the German citizens, because you…

> Non-citizens in Germany have no free speech rights period. You get banned and deported even for making lectures about unfavorable topics, as it seems. No, the right to utter your opinion in Germany applies to everyone, not only Germans. The constitution has two categories of people, Germans and Everyone, some rights apply only to Germans, some to Everyone. The right to assembly and public protests is one just for G…

So in other words,

> Non-citizens in Germany have no free speech rights period. You get banned and deported even for making lectures about unfavorable topics, as it seems.

and neither do citizens, who get fined and imprisoned instead of banned and deported.

Some restrictions on speech are reasonable, including the ones Germany claims to have, but not the ones it actually has.

Post reply on HN