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

“A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

s3.amazonaws.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 443 posts

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#121

Post by theorique »

ncallaway wrote: post #27
topynate wrote: post #11

Kicking people from your tech conference because they were racist outside of it hands veto power to whoever determines what racism is and when something is 'too racist'. The same goes for the other beyond-the-pale isms like sexism, fascism, etc. I commented on a flagged post on why this is an issue for me personally: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9674958

> it hands veto power to whoever determines what racism is and when something is 'too racist' This sounds like the function of the free marketplace of ideas. One is allowed to espouse any ideology that you wish. However, other people are allowed to respond with their own speech. They can call the idea racist if they want. They can take away speaking platforms if they want. Whether a statement is "racist" is a determi…

This sounds like the function of the free marketplace of ideas. One is allowed to espouse any ideology that you wish. However, other people are allowed to respond with their own speech. They can call the idea racist if they want. They can take away speaking platforms if they want.

Ideally, it operates like the free market of ideas.

In practice, it tends to offer a disproportionate amount of power to those who are most easily offended, and provides them with a de facto "hecklers' veto" over people with views outside the mainstream.

In the Moldbug case, some people wre "so genuinely offended" by the prospect of him speaking (or even being present at the conference) that they were willing to request that his talk offer be revoked. This was the case even when the subject of his talk is completely unrelated to his controversial politics. (Most people would probably agree that a technical conference is the wrong venue for him to speak about his controversial politics.)

Would most people attending the conference have known about his politics if there weren't this outcry to bring publicity? Unlikely. This was a deliberate message to alienate and exclude those with conservative politics from the tech industry.

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#122

Post by k_brother »

lukev wrote: post #116
k_brother wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you provide citations for those posts? This is the first I have heard of either Curtis or Moldbug, and I'm having trouble seeing the connection you're drawing. However, it seems to be the consensus. [edit: I see that there are secondary sources — but I'm curious about a primary source. Shouldn't that be the most important?]

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.fr/2009/07/why-carl... Relevant obnoxious quote, in a sea of drivel: In all these relationships, the structure of obligation is the same. The subject, serf, or slave is obliged to obey the government, lord, or master, and work for the benefit of same. In return, the government, lord or master must care for and guide the subject, serf, or slave. We see these same relationship p…

Right, I think I saw this one pulled elsewhere. It's still not clear to me that the author holds that view, or that he's just putting forth a weak analysis. Considering the response, I thought there would be something explicitly aggressive.

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#123

Post by emjr »

lukev wrote: post #116
k_brother wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you provide citations for those posts? This is the first I have heard of either Curtis or Moldbug, and I'm having trouble seeing the connection you're drawing. However, it seems to be the consensus. [edit: I see that there are secondary sources — but I'm curious about a primary source. Shouldn't that be the most important?]

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.fr/2009/07/why-carl... Relevant obnoxious quote, in a sea of drivel: In all these relationships, the structure of obligation is the same. The subject, serf, or slave is obliged to obey the government, lord, or master, and work for the benefit of same. In return, the government, lord or master must care for and guide the subject, serf, or slave. We see these same relationship p…

"Natives did not make good slaves, and so Africans were imported." That alone is so innocuous as to appear in elementary school textbooks. Is this really what the whole row is about?

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#124

Post by ZanyProgrammer »

lkrubner wrote: post #100

An analogy can be made here to the famous case of Michael Servetus. Please note that I am not saying that Curtis Yarvin is the most important scientist of our era. I'm not suggesting that Curtis Yarvin is necessarily of unusual brilliance. He could easily be wrong regarding all of his political writing. This is just an analogy. Servetus had a lot of unusual ideas. He was a fantastic medical researcher, and, in 1533,…

I don't think Curits Yarvin is going to be put to death for his rather far right political beliefs. That you'd compare him to Servetus is...well, rather ridiculous TBH.

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#125

Post by steveklabnik »

paxdickinson wrote: post #44
pixelperfect wrote: post #39

I am curious, could someone link to the most objectionable content by Curtis Yarvin? I don't think prohibiting someone from speaking at a private tech conference due to offensive views is necessarily a bad thing (e.g. prohibiting a KKK member from speaking), however without seeing his objectionable content I don't know if it's appropriate in this circumstance. Alex Miller said he made his decision without reading any…

Those calling for his removal from the conference cited this six-year-old blog post about Thomas Carlyle as their only specific complaint. http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/07/why-car...

This is factually not true, and since you claim to have read my complaints, this comment appears disingenuous.

More specifically, I linked http://www.thebaffler.com/blog/mouthbreathing-machiavellis/ and http://techcrunch.com/2013/11/22/geeks-for-monarchy/ as a brief introduction if you don't want to wade through the torrent of Dark Enlightenment shenanigans.

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#126

Post by ossreality »

obstinate wrote: post #109
lukev wrote: post #106

It is germane to point out that it isn't simply "political" writing or blogging. Moldbug has several essays that are explicitly racist, and though he would no doubt dispute the relationship, the vocabulary and arguments he uses are virtually the same as those of modern Nazis. Strangeloop, in the past, has explicitly tried to foster a minority-friendly environment. Many of the other speakers are from minority groups.…

Personally I'm cool with conferences banning out-of-the-closet racists from speaking. I guess that makes me the minority on HN. /shrug. So be it.

Yeah, maybe we should make this more clear.

Sign your name here if you're fine with providing a platform for racists: [] and enter it into the public record.

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#127

Post by steveklabnik »

corporealist wrote: post #80

Alex Payne founded a socialist blog: https://www.jacobinmag.com/ Why is writing about certain political ideas OK, but writing about certain other political ideas not OK? Why are those certain other political ideas "not OK" enough for someone to be banned from a technology conference?

It would seem from this blog post, he joined the advisory board, but was not a founder: https://al3x.net/2015/03/03/jacobin.html

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#128

Post by sagichmal »

corporealist wrote: post #80

Alex Payne founded a socialist blog: https://www.jacobinmag.com/ Why is writing about certain political ideas OK, but writing about certain other political ideas not OK? Why are those certain other political ideas "not OK" enough for someone to be banned from a technology conference?

    > Why is writing about certain political ideas OK, but 
    > writing about certain other political ideas not OK?
Calling socialism and racism the same thing, just a "certain political view", is about as intellectually honest as calling speeding and murder the same thing, just a "certain sort of crime".

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#129

Post by sagichmal »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #8

I wonder - suppose someone Alex Miller agreed with, but who also caused controversy, was met with opposition by folks who disliked her. For example, suppose a bunch of gamergate types were to complain about Brianna Wu giving a purely technical talk about pathfinding and AI. Would all the folks who are so quick to defend Strangeloop also defend it in this case? Somehow I doubt it.

    > For example, suppose a bunch of gamergate types were to 
    > complain about Brianna Wu giving a purely technical talk 
    > about pathfinding and AI. Would all the folks who are so 
    > quick to defend Strangeloop also defend it in this case?
    >
    > Somehow I doubt it.
Of course you should doubt it -- gamergate troglodytes are in the clear moral wrong. There are such things as moral decisions, and people, organizations, and societies are free, indeed obliged, to make them.

Absolute and unfettered free speech isn't a moral imperative. Speech can be curtailed, in some circumstances, when it has moral justification.

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#130

Post by overgard »

nyolfen wrote: post #120
PopeOfNope wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whatever happened to "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."? Marxism happened. Limiting speech has always been a tactic employed by the political left. Words like "racist", "sexist" and "homophobe" were designed to shut down free speech. It's extremely effective at silencing any opposition.

marxism has very little to do with racism, sexism or homophobia

Sure, but those labels are very useful for throwing your opponents under the bus.
Post reply on HN