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

Yes, It's Fascism

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 439 posts

Re: Yes, It's Fascism

#401

Post by jacquesm »

zahlman wrote: post #375
jacquesm wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main reason to avoid flamewars is to protect the atmosphere on HN but you can't make the case that if the world is on fire we can just sit here and pretend it isn't happening and discuss the latest tweak to react as though it is the most important thing in the world. I've long argued for a 'other' category as one overflow method or a homepage that is generic and subject specific pages for those that only want LLM…

[flagged]

You've spent enough words defending the indefensible I think. That you now paint yourself the victim is disingenuous.

Re: Yes, It's Fascism

#402

Post by comfysocks »

nicbou wrote: post #300
DeusExMachina wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That can be said about any post that goes against the guidelines. At that point, why even have guidelines in the first place?

If you don't like my constant screaming, just get ear plugs

If someone screams at you, they are actively invading your space.

On the other hand, if you actively click on an article, read it, and make multiple posts on it, well that’s on you.

Re: Yes, It's Fascism

#403

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

ezst wrote: post #58
azakai wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this interested you, here is another detailed and precise article by a historian, on the same topic: https://acoup.blog/2024/10/25/new-acquisitions-1933-and-the-...

…and another one, much less academic in style and substance, but no less informative and relevant: https://scribe.rip/@carmitage/i-researched-every-attempt-to-...

To be honest I didn't find the historical parallels as convincing in this article. I'm glad the author did recognize that we are in uncharted waters, but I think another potential reason to believe that our current fascist government is a little bit more restrained than earlier ones is due to the same forces that allowed it to rise in the first place - that is, social media and instantly viral videos.

What has happened since the Alex Pretti shooting was simply impossible in previous fascist governments. The administration can tell all the lies they want about it, but most of us have eyeballs, and we can see the multiple videos with frame-by-frame analysis. In the past, government propaganda would have been more effective in cases like this - it would have been a case of "who do you believe, team A or team B?" I don't have to believe either team, I just have to believe my own eyes.

Re: Yes, It's Fascism

#404

Post by comfysocks »

nicbou wrote: post #252
datsci_est_2015 wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You will be affected by the (hypothetical) fall of American hegemony, whether it’s increased aggression in spheres of influence (Russia, China, India), market failures, or even a fracturing or collapse of digital services (Azure, AWS). I don’t understand the insistence that this isn’t on topic. Hard not to paint it as anything but willfully ignorant.

I'm not ignorant. I just don't want it in my morning cereal when it's also everywhere else. Awareness of your country's politics definitely isn't the issue here. I am keenly aware of the US presidents' threats to invade my country. The issue is the insistence that it has to be discussed in every community, all the time, and that the importance transcends categorisation. Every website just becomes another dumping grou…

To be fair, “guidelines” and “rules” are two different things. There’s no strict prohibition on politics in the guidelines. If you read the whole thing in context, it’s trying to discourage topics that are mundane, frivolous, or vacuous — not to prohibit all politics.

“MOST stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.”

Emphasis mine

Re: Yes, It's Fascism

#405

Post by comfysocks »

Jensson wrote: post #396
ezst wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

…and another one, much less academic in style and substance, but no less informative and relevant: https://scribe.rip/@carmitage/i-researched-every-attempt-to-...

> I researched every Democratic attempt to stop fascism in history. the success rate after fascists were elected was 0%. Ergo Trump isn't fascist since he already was elected and democracy removed him once before. Otherwise they have to say that there has been one successful attempt for democracy to remove a fascist. Only reason Trump won the last election was that the democrats failed so hard at coming up with good…

Well he did try to overturn that election, but he failed. So I guess that makes him a failed fascist last time around. This time he’s trying much harder. Let’s make sure he fails again.

Re: Yes, It's Fascism

#407

Post by croon »

derangedHorse wrote: post #321
ModernMech wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's nice but also endlessly frustrating and very very late, because what he regards as overuse of the term is really just people who were applying the term correctly for the past 10 years as people like the author refused to call a spade a spade. If the nascent fascist were discarded, people would have stopped saying it so much. The problem for people like the author is that other more astute individuals [1] correct…

> The correct framing is that the first insurrection succeeded If you redefine success to whatever you want, then sure. > In 2029 every Republican will go along with plan A If you treat people as enemies, they’ll become one. The arrogance in the assumption that every Republican will allow Trump to get elected for a 3rd term might spite them into it.

If Republicans are as easy to manipulate as you state, the original statements is correct regardless, just through separate causation.

Re: Yes, It's Fascism

#408

Post by croon »

belorn wrote: post #379
messe wrote: post #112

This should not have been flagged off the front page. I really worry for the people in the US, but I'm hopeful it's hegemony is ending.

Can we have a discussion that improves in quality if people dissent to the view of the article, agree with the article, or hold a view that is something in between? If the answer is no then the risk that someone will flag the article increases dramatically. If the discussion environment isn't open and peaceful then how much more likely isn't it that people will just disengage, flag, and then move on.

Open and peaceful isn't the same as accepting an objectively incorrect viewpoint as equally valid. But I agree that what you describe as how some people read it is likely what is happening.

Re: Yes, It's Fascism

#409

Post by tstrimple »

mindslight wrote: post #290
tstrimple wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It must just be a coincidence that literally everyone supporting this is on the right politically. Isn't this sort of weasel wording part of the problem? Conservative voters are the problem. Full stop. Without them, there is no Trump.

nit: Fascist voters who think of themselves as "conservative" are the problem. Actual conservatives wouldn't support Trump attacking institution after institution, both domestic and international. My point isn't to defend the behavior of the people who have called themselves conservative for the past ~forty years. Rather it's meant to reclaim the term for what has now clearly become the middle of the Overton window.…

> Actual conservatives wouldn't support Trump

It's quite honestly amazing how much conservative propaganda has warped the liberal mind. So many liberals actually believe that conservatives just want a slow measured pace of change and to balance budgets, but that's literally never been what they have actually legislated for or accomplished. Liberals are the only people in my lifetime who have actually held those values. They are also the only ones who believe conservatives hold those values. Conservative's know better. And they demonstrated it with their vote. You can no-true-Scotsman until you're blue. There has literally never been a time in this nations history when that was an accurate depiction of conservatives.

Consistently throughout this country's history, conservatives rally to oppose rights being shared with a broader group of people. Conservatives fought a civil war to maintain slavery. They fought for Jim Crow laws. They fought against anti-miscegenation laws. They fought against women's right to vote. They fought and are still fighting against gay rights and recognizing trans people as humans. Literally every single time there is a minority "at risk" of having a better lot in life, there are conservatives turning out to fight against it. When the fuck will you give up the benefit of the doubt on conservatives?

Post reply on HN