841–850 of 934 posts
[flagged]
How has this happened? What are your concrete examples of this having happened? I suspect all of the example(s) you might have are going to be overblown news storie(s) But if there are decades of this, I'd love to see the evidence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For those who disagree with this, when was the last time you thanked your boss for your paycheck?
But, I bet many have thanked their boss for the opportunity given to them. This statement of gratitude is a tacit acknowledgement of salary.
I literally don't know anybody who has any desire of expressing gratitude to their boss for the "opportunity" given to them. What kind of servile lapdogs do consider their work an "opportunity"? How about the bosses realize that without workers, their businesses will implode, and thank their workers for the "opportunity" to have a working business instead?
Jobs are an exchange of a worker's time and skills for a wage. If you expect workers with a touch servility on top, I suggest you go back to the medieval times of lords and servants.
Oh hey, Wesleyan on HN! I’m an alumnus (matriculated a year or two after Roth became president). Wesleyan has a rich history of activism and protest, and not always entirely peaceful (Roth’s predecessor, Doug Bennet, had his office firebombed at one point). I’ve had a few opportunities to speak with Roth since the Gaza war started, and I’ve always found him particularly thoughtful about balancing freedom of expressio…
> Wesleyan has a rich history of activism and protest, and not always entirely peaceful (Roth’s predecessor, Doug Bennet, had his office firebombed at one point). Arson is not protest. Arson is a VIOLENT type of activism, which is legally classified as terrorism. Trump (or anybody) shouldn't be allowed to punish folks for speech or peaceful protest. Unfortunately, folks are calling VIOLENT acts like arson and battery…
Good that the free-speech absolutist Musk is there to ban everyone on Twitter who calls him out on his lies, trying to buy democratic elections, and do nazi salutes.
> Arson is a VIOLENT type of activism, which is legally classified as terrorism.
Lithium-ion batteries in badly made cars are prone to ...combustion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I live in Berlin, I've visited some protests, I constantly see police arrest people. I visited a camp in front of the Reichstag building. The organizers told me about ridiculous police behaviour. Then I saw some ridiculous police behaviour at that camp. Arrests and intimidation tactics. The police banned speaking any language other than German or English. I saw them take away some people in handcuffs for the crime of…
> The police banned speaking any language other than German or English. Incorrect. That was a court order, because people were quite obviously subverting the prohibition of calling for genocide by using languages law enforcement does not understand. > I don't actually know any Jews (or Muslims), I know both Jews and Muslins: you are incredibly wrong.
My rebuttal to your rebuttal: You are incredibly wrong.
(And who cares if it was the police or the courts? Both are branches of the government. And if the court order was as you described, then why did the police march someone off in handcuffs for speaking Arabic privately to another person who spoke Arabic?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Billionaires shifted the overton window by pouring money into extreme right-wing media outlets and social media platforms. Every other existing institution now appears "left-wing" by comparison. That's not universities' fault.
Not true, at least on social issues, which is what the universities are getting burned for. Policy positions that were mainstream in 2000 are now painted as far-right.
Painted? Historically, there is a bunch of groups that were opposed to homosexual rights. I wonder how do you think those organization are "painted" on the political spectrum?
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_homosexuals_in_...
- https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9780230294158_9
- https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-00994-6
> Policy positions that were mainstream in 2000 are now painted as far-right.
Maybe that speaks something about a country that still has the KKK, and allowed its African American population to vote in 1965, not even 40 years before 2000.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregation
- https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/white-supremacist-ideals-o...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How has this happened? What are your concrete examples of this having happened? I suspect all of the example(s) you might have are going to be overblown news storie(s) But if there are decades of this, I'd love to see the evidence.
I was a university student myself not too long ago. I experienced it personally.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh, I’ve railed quite a bit against the left. But looking back, we should have fired and deplatformed more aggressively. The social menaces who weren’t fired or arrested went on to become a plague.
Good grief man, deplatforming, chilling speech and all that is how we got into this mess to begin with. Have you learned nothing from the past 10 years? edit: Holy mackarel, I am this close to accepting the argument that the people on 'the left' need to be treated that exact way you described just so that they can understand why 'the right' feel aggrevied. I simply cannot accept Soviet Union style 'do not employ this…
Yup, I’ve lost patience with the far left as well. This is in practice happening with e.g. nutters who openly supported Hamas, though as these things always go, the only people actually willing to do this to people go too far both in their metric and treatment. (The left, to its credit, was never deporting people for their views.)
> Have you learned nothing from the past 10 years?
Yes. I spent too much time treating everyone’s views as valid. The paradox of tolerance is real, and if someone insists on being an idiot I’m basically at the point of taking them at their word.
> cannot accept Soviet Union style 'do not employ this man' brand
It’s not. It’s do not put this person in a position of responsibility or visibility. They can make a livelihood. It just shouldn’t be one from which they do harm.
America has done an absolutely terrible job of teaching people about rights. If governments granted rights then they would be privileges not rights. In western tradition governments exist to protect rights, such as the freedom of expression, not to grant them. If you believe these are human rights, rather than your privilege as an American, then you must protect their rights to seek justice too. People are already be…
> In western tradition governments exist to protect rights, such as the freedom of expression, not to grant them. You may be overgeneralizing here, only the US has enshrined freedom of expression in their constitution. Pretty much in any other western government such protections do not exist and freedom of expression has been under attack for a long time
Sounds very progressive considering voting for the African American population came about in 1965, and having McCarthyism in the 50s (which was basically persecution of free speech and freedom of expression, the same thing the Trump administration is doing atm).
Freedom of expression being "enshrined" in the Constitution sounds good, but if it comes with no voting if I am black, and with being persecuted for leaning left, maybe that's not exactly "freedom of expression".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights is enshrined in legislation in the UK and Ireland, and offers protections for signatories of the convention. (Edit: Oh, and the Bill of Rights gives parliamentarians quite an extreme version)
> Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights is enshrined in legislation in the UK and Ireland, and offers protections for signatories of the convention. it's enforced nowhere, since the European Convention on Human Rights has never attacked any of its members for putting people in jail or fining them for what they posted online. So, you can have all the laws on paper that you want, if nobody respects them…
Are you talking about the US at the moment?
- https://www.context.news/big-tech/us-prison-social-media-cra...
- https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3rnzp4ye5zo
- https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/04/un-human-rig...
Basically freedom of expression is fine, as long as you don't:
- criticize the genocide that the US government is partial to (and funds) in Palestine
- criticize the US government for backing out of all climate deals
- criticize Trump for being orange and weird and Musk for being a robot?
I wonder if in recent political history we can find a parallel with some parties in Germany and Italy in the past century.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you think this?
Because it's a transcation and there are two parties to the transaction. And for these transaction to occur in a repeated fashion neither side should feel they are being taken advantage of.
You’re applying social norms that exist between humans, based on feelings, to a completely different relationship that includes no feelings at all. Would you like another government, with another political direction opposed to yours, to start asking you for appreciation?