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

901–910 of 934 posts

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#901

Post by stale2002 »

immibis wrote: post #864
stale2002 wrote: post #791

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No actually. It is never just that. The question was about "to get a social media frenzy going". And this is never just an employer randomly looking at a tweet, for which they are almost never going to do anything about it. Most employers don't care. Instead, the much more likely scenario is mass points of harassment, stalking, and death threats targeted at people's friends and family, when such a "social media frenz…

The topic was someone telling your employer about something bad that you did.

All of this stuff goes hand in hand. If you are getting a "social media frenzy going", to get someone fired, you are also response for when that social media targets someone's friends and family with stalking, harassment, and death threats.

You cannot pick and chose the consequences of your social media frenzy. It all happens at once, and you don't control the mob. And you are at fault for all of the consequences of that hate mob.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#902

Post by settrans »

DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #885
settrans wrote: post #875

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you're dodging the point. You're basically saying Jews deserved self-determination only if they could pull off the impossible: either magically prevent fascism, or create a homeland without upsetting anyone. That's not how history works. Zionism wasn't a luxury ideology, it was a response to existential threat. Jews didn't have the option to stay in Europe: Europe made that brutally clear. And yes, the land was i…

Actually, I've never said that Jews deserved self-determination in a separate country specifically created for Jews. Jews lived (and still live today) in many countries. They deserve equal rights in their home countries. > The alternative you're proposing amounts to telling the Jews: stay stateless, stay vulnerable Jews were not stateless. They were Polish, German, French, Russian, English, American, etc. You mean to…

Let me just summarize your position: European Jews, facing extermination, should have tried harder to stop Hitler, trusted the same governments that sold them out, stayed put in countries that were turning into slaughterhouses and politely avoided seeking refuge in the only place in the world that would take them just because it might offend your sensibilities. And now, after a few of them survived the industrial attempt to wipe them out, you want to tell them they were wrong to have escaped.

You dress up your objection to Zionism behind a pseudomoralistic veneer of Palestinian rights, but your real position is that Jewish survival was a problem because it confuses your personal narrative of Palestinian nationalism. That’s not a serious moral argument. That’s historical cruelty crudely disguised as moral purity.

And no, I never insulted you, but the position that European Jews should have just tried harder against the Nazis is a laughably sadistic viewpoint regardless of who holds it.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#903

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

settrans wrote: post #902
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #885

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, I've never said that Jews deserved self-determination in a separate country specifically created for Jews. Jews lived (and still live today) in many countries. They deserve equal rights in their home countries. > The alternative you're proposing amounts to telling the Jews: stay stateless, stay vulnerable Jews were not stateless. They were Polish, German, French, Russian, English, American, etc. You mean to…

Let me just summarize your position: European Jews, facing extermination, should have tried harder to stop Hitler, trusted the same governments that sold them out, stayed put in countries that were turning into slaughterhouses and politely avoided seeking refuge in the only place in the world that would take them just because it might offend your sensibilities. And now, after a few of them survived the industrial att…

You did a terrible job of summarizing my position.

> the position that European Jews should have just tried harder against the Nazis

If you think I wrote anything like that, you have a serious lack of reading comprehension.

> your real position is that Jewish survival was a problem because it confuses your personal narrative of Palestinian nationalism.

Oh gee, thanks for informing me that my "real" position is that I shouldn't survive.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#904

Post by _carbyau_ »

jart wrote: post #228
bobthepanda wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also to some degree there is anti-elitist backlash after being told you need to have a bachelor's, which is very expensive at these universities, but also it's basically impossible to get an entry-level white collar job without one these days; and for a while the economy bifurcated with different outcomes for white-collar knowledge vs. blue-collar workers.

60% of the US workforce these days is white collar, and it's one of the great illusions of our time. Most of these jobs only exist to keep busy the 60% of the US workforce that has a degree. In the 1940's about 30% of the US workforce was white collar and only 5% had degrees. What caused this change? It's probably because blue collar workers made so much money and had so much leverage that businesses shipped all thei…

One of the reasons white collar is desirable is the physical toll that work over a lifetime can take on a persons body. So, in one sense, it could be perceived as a better deal. Whether it actually is or not is another thing.

Chinese industry is not known for caring overly much about the long term effects on the bodies of their workers. They have more.

And yes, I find it scary to think of what the world is competing with in China. It is hard to compete with their brutal workforce ethics (or lack thereof) and as they seem to be getting well on top of technology too the future is theirs it seems.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#905

Post by mmooss »

defrost wrote: post #881
mmooss wrote: post #879

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's false. Everything comes down to good leadership. Monarchies with good leadership very well might have incredibly effective anti-corruption techniques and competency. China is managing a billion people and their infrastructure and tech is incredible. Can you name a monarchy that is nearly as free, safe, and prosperous as advanced democracies? That is less corrupt? Is China? (No.) > These things are a result o…

> Can you name a monarchy that is nearly as free, safe, and prosperous as advanced democracies? Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom. Andorra, Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and Sweden. Liechtenstein and Monaco.

As you have listed advanced democracies with figurehead relics of monarchy, we agree!

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#906

Post by jart »

eszed wrote: post #894
jart wrote: post #775

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of white collar work is just larping as the 1%. It's due to the over-manufacturing of elites. Roles that exist to keep people busy while confering illusory social status aren't very useful to society. Freedom and usefulness comes from humility and devotion to others. For example, you don't need to be in the 1% to have financial independence. You just have to not spend money on things that cargo cult the 1% like…

I agree with everything you say about elite over-production, chasing social status, and cargo-culting material goods. It is indeed, bullshit, that makes many exploitable - which, of course, is the whole point, from the "system's" point of view. On an individual level, for those of us in sufficiently privileged positions, breaking that dynamic is as you say. However, I don't think you can ignore politics! "Changing wh…

Sorry I believe in collective giving, not collective taking.

I live my life palms down, not palms up.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#907

Post by altacc »

mathgradthrow wrote: post #690
altacc wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only politics was limited to affecting those who opted in. But mostly government shouldn't be the whims of one individual, it should be much more considered than that.

These do not represent the whims of one person. Donald Trump was elected.

He was elected as president of a constitutional republic. He's acting like an emperor, enacting control through cronyism, threats and targeting of individuals and private companies via executive power. You could counter that he was elected by people who wanted to disrupt the system but that's a massive assumption and even many of his political base seem to be surprised by the extent of his actions. There is constantly political alignment behind his actions, with aligned politicians & media noticeably readjusting their opinions, politics and bills and revising history to align with the latest demagoguery to appear from this one person.

The constitutional republic was designed to protect from one person's whims but that ideal seems to have crumbled when the rest of the republic has been co-opted, controlled or simply ignored. In Europe we always knew that US claims to have the best democratic system were hubristic nonsense, no maybe more in the US realise the fragility of government.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#908

Post by eszed »

jart wrote: post #906
eszed wrote: post #894

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with everything you say about elite over-production, chasing social status, and cargo-culting material goods. It is indeed, bullshit, that makes many exploitable - which, of course, is the whole point, from the "system's" point of view. On an individual level, for those of us in sufficiently privileged positions, breaking that dynamic is as you say. However, I don't think you can ignore politics! "Changing wh…

Sorry I believe in collective giving, not collective taking. I live my life palms down, not palms up.

Difference in perspective, man. I practice "collective giving" by donating money and time to help those less blessed than I have been, and by voting for measures I believe will strengthen society, even if they're against to my (narrowly defined) economic self-interest. We're all part of the collective, and owe each other that.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#909

Post by immibis »

stale2002 wrote: post #901
immibis wrote: post #864

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The topic was someone telling your employer about something bad that you did.

All of this stuff goes hand in hand. If you are getting a "social media frenzy going", to get someone fired, you are also response for when that social media targets someone's friends and family with stalking, harassment, and death threats. You cannot pick and chose the consequences of your social media frenzy. It all happens at once, and you don't control the mob. And you are at fault for all of the consequences of…

The topic was someone telling your employer about something bad that you did.

Re: A university president makes a case against cowardice

#910

Post by lelanthran »

kubb wrote: post #840
lelanthran wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They'll make it through if they bend the knee. Otherwise the regime will destroy them, and the conclusion will be that it's all because of these darned radical leftists. Well, it is , isn't it? They required complete loyalty to the ideology before accepting any faculty: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/us/ucla-dei-statement.htm... They shouldn't have gone that far.

> University of Toronto I understand you’re fighting for what you believe in. Keep going, you’re almost there.

> I understand you’re fighting for what you believe in.

In your mind, what do you think I believe in?

I ask this because the only point I made in that message was in response to the "bend the knee" comment.

The one side required "bend the knee". Now the other side requires it. Why be surprised?

Post reply on HN