“Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book” • Hacker News Board

Re: “Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”

#151

Post by mcantelon » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 6:19 PM UTC

nateabele wrote: post #147

mikeash wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly, yes, it is the America that America wants, as far as I can tell. I think this is where efforts to fight these problems fall down. They're almost all based on the assumption that the populace doesn't want this stuff to happen, but that the government pushes it through by abusing power, subverting democracy, etc. But from what I see, this is not the case. Most Americans want this. Whether it's gun-wielding mania…

I think the conclusion of the article nails what's at the heart of the issue. Most of the country is either left or right, and is perfectly comfortable with paramilitarized police forces being used against 'the other side'.

America's polarization is likely deliberately promoted by the elites. When a society is occupied by infighting over wedge issues it's not looking at the big picture and power can be more easily consolidated. In Rwanda, the colonialists arbitrarily split the population into Hutus and Tutsi "ethnicities" then showed favoritism to one group. They eventually got infighting which diverted energy from possible insurgence.

Re: “Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”

#152

Post by finallyposting » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 6:19 PM UTC

kevinmchugh wrote: post #127

smky80 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do not "like" it. It's just that, to be very blunt, most people are basically peasants at heart. They're going to go along with whatever the king says. Twenty years ago, on that side of the line on a map, the people believed in capitalism, while on the other side the people believed in communism. On this side of the line people believed in this god, on that side, they believe in that god. It has nothing to do wi…

This is a somewhat ugly and self-aggrandizing view. It's easy to let people you don't know and will never meet become sub-human, but it's dangerous and harmful. The relevant xkcd is of course, http://xkcd.com/610/ . I don't presume to know why most people are not particularly vocal on these matters, but it's certainly not because they lack critical thought.

The xkcd presents a straw man. Occasionally but rarely I have seen "false consciousness" and "you are not awake" type claims as presented in the comic being made on this board. However, these types of claims are rare in comparison to complaints about specific majority viewpoints that reveal a complete breakdown of abstract thinking or simply absurd thinking.

One of the strongest times I've ever been sympathetic to the "people are peasants" viewpoints was during my college years in Alabama. During that time Alabama finally voted on removing anti-miscegenation laws from its books. 3/4 of whites voted to keep them (the removal passing due only to a few whites like myself and the large voting block of blacks). The people were particularly vocal and they lacked critical thought.

If it's "ugly and self-aggrandizing" to assume that, for example, my post-doc advisor's parents should have been allowed to marry (and by extension him to exist) then I hope my ugliness runs straight to the bone and my arrogance knows no end.

Re: “Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”

#153

Post by sbornia » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 6:21 PM UTC

wheaties wrote: post #25

It could be a good story but after 3 pop up ads which were almost impossible to close on this device I gave up. What was the story, anyways? The first two paragraphs sounded interesting. I just couldn't get to the rest of the story to read it.

Yes I'm sure it takes more effort to close those ads than commenting here expecting someone will tell you all about the article...

Re: “Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”

#154

Post by axuaq » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 6:21 PM UTC

The problem is that many Americans don't see anything wrong with their government depriving people of their human rights. And if you are an American that doesn't agree with this, you might just be detained or killed. And, of course, the first group sees nothing wrong with this.

Re: “Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”

#155

Post by czr80 » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 6:24 PM UTC

endtime wrote: post #139

kevinmchugh wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a somewhat ugly and self-aggrandizing view. It's easy to let people you don't know and will never meet become sub-human, but it's dangerous and harmful. The relevant xkcd is of course, http://xkcd.com/610/ . I don't presume to know why most people are not particularly vocal on these matters, but it's certainly not because they lack critical thought.

Do you have an explanation for why OP is wrong beyond that you find his claim aesthetically displeasing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error

Re: “Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”

#156

Post by bluthru » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 6:25 PM UTC

drone wrote: post #117

It seems like every day, more and more political posts about the US are made here. It's getting to the point that it seems that 35% of the point of HN is about getting opportunities to make political statements about the US. There are so many, so so many, places to have on-going political arguments. I'm of the mind that any place that allows free commentary ultimately becomes a political discussion board, and HN is p…

It's not clear why a place called "Hacker News" might be concerned with freedom?

Re: “Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”

#157

Post by llamataboot » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 6:33 PM UTC

sophacles wrote: post #96

llamataboot wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be harrassed if you film cops, but it is plainly legal[1], and the courts have recently begun to be more aggressive about slapping down municipalities that try to restrict it.[2] Normalizing it will go a long way to keeping police from thinking they can harass activist-types that are filming cops. I have been filming cops with copwatch groups from the days we had to carry big shoulder mounted video cameras. 1…

Legality doesn't stop regular occurrences of filmers being arrested for "obstruction of justice".

Like I said, I have filmed a lot of police interactions. I have been harassed many times, but never arrested. I /have/ been arrested for obstruction of legal process once. Ironically, it was a time when I wasn't filming and just standing off to the side taking notes.

If you do get arrested, you can both win damages for yourself and often change the entire written rules of a police department by suing.

But again, normalizing this will go a long way to people not getting harassed and cops knowing that they could be being filmes in any public interaction at any time.

Re: “Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”

#158

Post by codyb » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 6:35 PM UTC

RockyMcNuts wrote: post #73

codyb wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact USPS receives training but our Police don't was astounding to me. "To serve and protect and kill you chihuahua if it barks at us wrong."

you mean aggressive dog training?

Ahh yes, I accidentally missed a few words there.

Re: “Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”

#159

Post by tolmasky » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 6:36 PM UTC

Houshalter wrote: post #142

kevinmchugh wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a somewhat ugly and self-aggrandizing view. It's easy to let people you don't know and will never meet become sub-human, but it's dangerous and harmful. The relevant xkcd is of course, http://xkcd.com/610/ . I don't presume to know why most people are not particularly vocal on these matters, but it's certainly not because they lack critical thought.

It's not wrong though. Most people don't care about politics. They don't research economics or anything like that, at best they hear the news sometimes and discuss stuff with their friends. That doesn't make them sub-human. There is no real incentive to care a lot about politics or do all the research and thinking necessary to come to correct conclusions. It's not like your vote is going to change the outcome of the…

This is precisely it: its not economically beneficial to be involved in politics, unless you basically make it your absolute sole concern. That is to say, there are clear benefits to becoming a politician, or a lobbyist, or interest group. However, just becoming "informed" generally has a lot of negatives (depression), with no real positives (as you said, its not like you can do much about it other than complain). So unless your goal is to make a living in politics in one way or another, it is completely rational to be apathetic towards politics and put your focus somewhere else.

Re: “Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”

#160

Post by rz2k » Sun, Jul 07, 2013, 6:37 PM UTC

mindstab wrote: post #148

drone wrote: post #117

It seems like every day, more and more political posts about the US are made here. It's getting to the point that it seems that 35% of the point of HN is about getting opportunities to make political statements about the US. There are so many, so so many, places to have on-going political arguments. I'm of the mind that any place that allows free commentary ultimately becomes a political discussion board, and HN is p…

I think hacker culture and freedom have always gone hand in hand. In bygone days hackers could claim apoliticalness in already "free" places which is also generally where they flourished. Now when they are realizing they are much less free than they thought they are seen/see themselves as "politicizing". But being a hacker always was a political statement, it used to just mesh more with the popular culture so they mi…

Furthermore, here in particular, you have the instincts of a entrepreneurial community.

It isn't difficult to conclude that the foundation of support for authoritarianism from the general population comes from a desire to preserve order, and a fear that unregulated or unrecorded speech and communication is more likely to enable bad changes and events than good changes.

Entrepreneurs however tend toward believing that disruptive innovation on balance does more good than bad, and believe that one of the hurdles that must be surmounted is to undermine the influence of established businesses and centers of power that have a stake in limiting innovation.