Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

washingtonpost.com

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. The general election in 2022 had 84,2% of eligible voters in Sweden.

Italy had 64% for the parliamentary elections in 2022, which is the lowest ever but it's pretty far from 30%.

just to note that if “30% voted for this” participation was roughly 60%

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#272
post #247
post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority that did vote, voted for this. The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Given the standards of media literacy and civics education, there's no evidence that a higher participation rate would have changed the outcome.

There’s also no evidence that increased turnout would have had the same result. What seems to be overlooked in these conversations is the skill with which American voters have been disenfranchised by partisan forces. It’s easy to blame people for not voting if you ignore the real difficulties in actually casting a vote for many Americans.

In fact there was an extensive analysis of the election by Democrat pollster David Shor, who found that 100% turnout would have resulted in an even larger Trump win, by 4.8 points: https://www.vox.com/politics/403364/tik-tok-young-voters-202...

This has been the pattern for awhile now. The pool of politically unengaged people are especially Trumpy compared to regular voters: https://abcnews.go.com/538/vote-back-trump/story?id=10909062...

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I know that Harris put up zero fight about it. I infer that she believed it to be legitimate. That's not definitive, to be sure. But it's sufficient for me to believe that we did this to ourselves. Now all we can do is figure out how we're going to get through it.

[deleted]

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#274
post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean yes? Democracy is a pretty poor model for governance. IMO peak enlightenment happened circa the 17th or 18th century when classical liberalism decided government should be based on individual liberties and anything outside of that is decided democratically not because it is a good system but because votes are roughly a tally of who would win if we all pull knives on each other because we didn't like the vote.

Democracy is not 2 parties doing voter suppression and gerrymandering as a filter to pass the result to an electoral college. The US system was never designed to be fair to individuals in the first place, pointing at it as a failure of democracy is IMHO pulling the actual issues under the rug.

It’s basically impossible to engage in meaningful voter suppression in a country where election results can be cross-checked against high-quality polling.

“Gerrymandering” also has no effect on Presidential elections. And in 2024, Republicans won a larger share of the House popular vote than their share of House seats.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#275
post #216
post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority that did vote, voted for this. The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Given the standards of media literacy and civics education, there's no evidence that a higher participation rate would have changed the outcome.

> The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Australia has entered the chat.

You can't bring them up without including that voting is compulsory there.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't you making their point though? The ADL and other Jewish organizations have pointed out that aside from articles about Israel that articles about or mention Jewish topics generally have been editing with disinformation or that made Jews out to be the aggressors. I agree with you that in order to believe in the ideals of liberal democracy that we must have a core belief in truth. And it's absolutely true that th…

I agree 100%. It's exhausting fighting against antisemitic bias, and it feels like it's everywhere these days. My problem with Ed Martin is that what he is doing is clearly wrong. Hannah Arendt wrote a book about people like him.

At a time when students are having their visas revoked merely for writing Op-Eds critical of Israel, it's rather ridiculous to see the pro-Israel side acting like you're the ones being persecuted everywhere.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#277
post #215

Serious question, after the past few months, how can anyone deny that America is heading in a totalitarian direction? Those of you who believe that all of the many actions that have happened in the past few weeks are "okay", please explain your perspective without resorting to "whataboutism" or cherry picking only one or two of the things that have occurred lately. Because from what I'm sitting, this is not behavior…

[flagged]

Dems and republicans both do their political corruption, Trump is something else.

https://commonslibrary.org/authoritarianism-how-you-know-it-...

What are the Top 10 Elements of the Authoritarian Playbook?

1. Divide and rule: Foment mistrust and fear in the population.

2. Spread lies and conspiracies: Undermine the public’s belief in truth.

3. Destroy checks and balances: Quietly use legal or pseudo-legal rationales to gut institutions, weaken opposition, and/or declare national emergencies to seize unconstitutional powers.

4. Demonize opponents and independent media: Undermine the public’s trust in those actors and institutions that hold the state accountable.

5. Undermine civil and political rights for the unaligned: Actively suppress free speech, the right to assembly and protest and the rights of women and minority groups.

6. Blame minorities, immigrants, and “outsiders” for a country’s problems: Exploit national humiliation while promising to restore national glory.

7. Reward loyalists and punish defectors: Make in-group members fearful to voice dissension.

8. Encourage or condone violence to advance political goals: Dehumanize opposition and/or out-groups to justify violence against them.

9. Organize mass rallies to keep supporters mobilized against made-up threats: Use fearmongering and hate speech to consolidate in-group identity and solidarity.

10. Make people feel like they are powerless to change things: Solutions will only come from the top.

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#278
post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Less than 30% of voter age Americans voted for this

The majority that did vote, voted for this. The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Given the standards of media literacy and civics education, there's no evidence that a higher participation rate would have changed the outcome.

Not majority, under 50%

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#279
post #216
post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority that did vote, voted for this. The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Given the standards of media literacy and civics education, there's no evidence that a higher participation rate would have changed the outcome.

> The participation rate has always been low in rich western countries. Australia has entered the chat.

For reference, informal votes were around 5% in our last federal election:

https://results.aec.gov.au/27966/website/HouseInformalByStat...

This article contains a fun breakdown of the types of informal votes including a category for "the usual anatomical drawings" (0.7% of informal votes):

https://www.crikey.com.au/2025/04/22/2025-federal-election-p...

Re: Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

#280
post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RT is not legit. It is Russian propaganda. When those people participated they were collaborators.

[flagged]

Not who you are responding to, but given that as rational humans, we have the capacity to make non-binary comparisons, Kremlin propaganda is indeed far worse than most. I say this as a European who sees clear flaws in the US system, but that does not make the Russian system good, or even a little good. It is objectively horrible. The Russian people, for one, deserve far better.

It is important to point out that Russian propaganda is actually excellent propaganda. However, their message is the at the very bottom:

There is no truth, up is down, nothing matters, the invader is the victim, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_propaganda_in_the_Russia...

Post reply on HN