Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin) • Hacker News Board

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#131

Post by theorique » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 11:39 AM UTC

a8da6b0c91d wrote: post #113

Mithaldu wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm all for Strangeloop canceling his talk, however not for reasons of his political leanings, but because i consider Urbit to be nonsense and the way it handles itself to be dishonest. That said, this entire conversation has an amazingly suppressive effect on me. This is primarily because i come from east germany, have grown up in its social era until my early teens, and have seen how it changed since the wall fell,…

Please provide one example of a person being fired, or otherwise enduring serious economic consequences, for publicly voicing socialist or communist views. There are none. There are dozens of quite recent examples of rightists or libertarians or traditional Christians enduring serious consequences for free speech. In America we once had the red scare where a witch hunt hit socialists/communists. These days we have th…

The following link is an ongoing set of updates of people who have fallen victim to the so-called "brown scare" - being fired, ostracized, or otherwise penalized for holding right-wing views.

It's a lot more pervasive, and has been going on a lot longer than most people think. The Brendan Eich or Pax Dickinson purges are probably the most known to the HN community, but there are many, many more.

https://handleshaus.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/bullied-and-bad...

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#132

Post by duncan_bayne » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 12:21 PM UTC

sdfghjkl34567 wrote: post #74

tjradcliffe wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I do in fact fear the "social justice" crowd and their ability to mess with people and their careers when they don't follow the party line This is something I'd love see SJW's here react to. How do you feel about the fact that you have created a climate of fear amongst people who disagree with you? Would you prefer convincing them of the correctness of your position, but willing to accept that at least by making th…

Responding under a throwaway. I've been involved in anti-racist/anti-fascist work, either directly or on the periphery, for about ten years at this point. This takes many forms, from street confrontations with fascists, protests at book readings and other events, and also disrupting fascist conferences and similar. Anti-Racist Action is the organization that has developed the most tactical and strategic influence in…

This has to be a false flag. Surely?

"But if I could flip a switch and make every man feel the persistent, gnawing fear that a woman has of men, I would in a heartbeat."

If that's intentional parody, it's brilliant. If not, I guess there's always therapy.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#133

Post by hga » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 1:09 PM UTC

duncan_bayne wrote: post #132

sdfghjkl34567 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Responding under a throwaway. I've been involved in anti-racist/anti-fascist work, either directly or on the periphery, for about ten years at this point. This takes many forms, from street confrontations with fascists, protests at book readings and other events, and also disrupting fascist conferences and similar. Anti-Racist Action is the organization that has developed the most tactical and strategic influence in…

This has to be a false flag. Surely? "But if I could flip a switch and make every man feel the persistent, gnawing fear that a woman has of men, I would in a heartbeat." If that's intentional parody, it's brilliant. If not, I guess there's always therapy.

No, there really are people out there like that. If you haven't run into one before, you should perhaps consider yourself fortunate, but then again that perhaps limits your view of how evil people can be, especially at the "gut" level, the level that's best at motivating actions or at least preparations.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#134

Post by theorique » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 1:13 PM UTC

leppr wrote: post #78

Well, he is an active detractor of Democracy, it's possible he could try to spread his agenda through technology (take a look at the colonialist imagery in Urbit). His view on gender 'roles' is also dangerously close to hate speech (and before any of you calls me an islamophobic: as a non-muslim white male he has no cultural heritage that could justify his opinion, so it's different).

This still doesn't explain why Yarvin being present at a conference, giving a non-political talk on technology (presumably with no so-called "hate speech" content), represents a threat to anything or anyone at said conference.

The answer is: it doesn't. He was removed because some politically influential leftists wanted him declared a non-person.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#135

Post by hga » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 1:19 PM UTC

theorique wrote: post #125

Castlereagh wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do those who support Curtis appearing at the talk (wisely?) refrain from posting out of (legitimate?) fear of career repercussion? This. It also has the perverse effect of leaving the defense of "racists" to actual racists (e.g., [1]), thereby leading to guilt by association: "See, only racists are willing to defend this guy, so he's obviously a racist!" [1]: https://twitter.com/B8GodDante/status/607201146017615872

More recently, perhaps within the past year or two, I've been seeing online a polarization and evaporative cooling effect in action. There doesn't seem to be as much middle ground and nuance as there has been in the past. Any support or acceptance for an officially disapproved entity is tantamount to total or unqualified support or acceptance. Many moderates - in this case, moderate supporters of Yarvin, as shown in…

You can expand the above a bit by distinguishing between "c", "I, Steven Klabnik, am 'a communist' as the simplest thing to describe me", vs. "C", "I, Julius Rosenberg, became a member of the US Communist Party when it was popular, required careful vetting and submission to party discipline, which by definition made me a traitor."

And this reminds me of a quote by the not moderate Jim Hightower, "There's nothing in the middle of the road but a yellow stripe and dead armadillos."

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#136

Post by sdfghjkl34567 » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 1:32 PM UTC

a8da6b0c91d wrote: post #110

sdfghjkl34567 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Responding under a throwaway. I've been involved in anti-racist/anti-fascist work, either directly or on the periphery, for about ten years at this point. This takes many forms, from street confrontations with fascists, protests at book readings and other events, and also disrupting fascist conferences and similar. Anti-Racist Action is the organization that has developed the most tactical and strategic influence in…

> fascist You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Why is this not gray? I thought hacker news was above memes.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#137

Post by sdfghjkl34567 » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 1:36 PM UTC

TheCartographer wrote: post #119

sdfghjkl34567 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Responding under a throwaway. I've been involved in anti-racist/anti-fascist work, either directly or on the periphery, for about ten years at this point. This takes many forms, from street confrontations with fascists, protests at book readings and other events, and also disrupting fascist conferences and similar. Anti-Racist Action is the organization that has developed the most tactical and strategic influence in…

>You might be unsurprised to find out that free speech is not valued on the left or among "SJW" groups. I suggest you research this further, because I can't communicate to you in a single hacker news comment why this is, or what theoretical basis it has. Who needs theory? Practicality tells all. Extreme ideologies don't value free speech, because free speech allows the unwashed masses to communicate to each other jus…

I'm sure you've studied these political ideologies extensively (though my political ideology is pretty obviously very far from the ones you've listed). But it doesn't seem like you've ever questioned the sacred cow that is free speech to you.

I would give you some discussion questions, but I'm sure you'll never, ever move past this roadblock, so I won't feed the trolls.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#138

Post by hga » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 1:44 PM UTC

theorique wrote: post #130

sudioStudio64 wrote: post #12

Even though I'm deliciously close to 200 karma I'm going to ask this anyway... If someone has a view that is actually destructive for the forum its aired in ( I'm speaking hypothetically now ) does it have to be accommodated. By that, and I genuinely want to know what you guys think, what if a political candidate advocated the end of democratic elections? A "one man, one vote, one time" kind of thing. How is that han…

Extreme conservative opinions like Mr Yarvins are actually shocking to me. I don't think his particular writings should be banned or anything like that. However, are they so reactionary as to represent to the organizers a position that they don't want to even tacitly or obliquely endorse? Given that the reaction of the organizers was to remove Yarvin's talk, with extremely vague justifications, I think both sides cou…

But didn't Alex Miller make it clear he knew nothing about Yarvin's politics, that he was exercising a Heckler's Veto due to the people who were protesting Yarvin's politics?

As has been noted by others, this could be interpreted as the latter issuing a "Nice conference and career you have there, it would be a shame if anything happened to them". A political interpretation, yes, but one of pure power politics, vs. anything requiring an actual analysis of the putative issue, Yarvin's politics.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#139

Post by sdfghjkl34567 » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 1:47 PM UTC

tjradcliffe wrote: post #108

sdfghjkl34567 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Responding under a throwaway. I've been involved in anti-racist/anti-fascist work, either directly or on the periphery, for about ten years at this point. This takes many forms, from street confrontations with fascists, protests at book readings and other events, and also disrupting fascist conferences and similar. Anti-Racist Action is the organization that has developed the most tactical and strategic influence in…

Thanks for the forthright reply! I've been involved in political activism of one kind or other for decades, mostly in ways that are opposed to your ideals, so I'm not one tiny bit surprised to find a lefty who is opposed to free speech, nor am I unfamiliar with the "theoretical basis" for such abhorent positions. I wanted to cast as broad a net as possible in my question, as I know how eclectic the left is: the two m…

Yes, communism is certainly a dead horse these days. It's a little disappointing to me, but then I was never an electoralist and would never have taken either of those parties seriously. It's a little hilarious to read "I know how eclectic the left is: there were TWO communist parties in my country!" I suggest you research the left a little more, specifically the libertarian (in the original sense) left.

If you have a specific idea at all about how the world should be better, the people who oppose that are certainly not your friends. I think you're mistaking vision for myopia, dedication for anger, and pragmatism for hatred... but then you certainly hate me more than I hate you.

I'm probably just as unsure as you about whether I'll achieve my goals, but I have to try, because to do anything less would be a betrayal of all of humanity. I believe everyone is responsible for their actions, and so if I'm to be responsible I have to act somehow.

It's very easy to say that "the world needs more love," but love doesn't break bricks, as the saying goes. I doubt your own activism is limited to "love"; you probably do things that are intended to make reality assume some objective state. In doing that, you are preventing your opponents from forcing the world into their preferred state. This is no different from opposing free speech. I just have a more complete vision of the world that I want, and it doesn't include Mein Kampf or Birth of a Nation or hacker news's casual misogyny and racism.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#140

Post by sdfghjkl34567 » Thu, Jun 11, 2015, 1:56 PM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #100

sdfghjkl34567 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Would it not be better to work towards nobody feeling such fear? But that isn't the hypothetical. Do you understand the concept? Certainly if I had a faeries & unicorns switch I'd hit that as well, but we don't always have the options we'd like. In the meantime, if it's possible to make fascist programmers afraid for their careers, that's great for me. It means fascist movements are disrupted before they can even fo…

You came up with that specific hypothetical and it inherently carries your framework. It is set up as a zero sum interaction where everyone needs to be brought down rather than lifted up. But fighting injustice with more injustice is a race to the bottom. By your usage, I presume you're using definition #1 of http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascist even though you are not capitalizing it. If it is possible…

Dictionaries are descriptions, not proscriptions, of words. I'm not "using" any definition of fascism other than the one I've built up in my own mind based on my own lived experiences. I'm not going to be questioned on a dictionary.

It is true that all exercises of political power are at the end of the day coercive. My personal take on this is to minimize political power, but to do this takes a specific social arrangement that doesn't exist in the present day.

The hypothetical I came up with is one where it's easier to attack an existing system than to create new and liberatory systems. This is the same as reality. It is much, much easier to get a fascist talk removed from a conference than it would be to get everyone at that conference to come to an appropriate understanding of feminist and anti-racist thought and praxis. There are certainly people involved in education, propaganda, and outreach, but this is by nature a much slower process and one that will not bear fruit in any reasonable time span. It is certainly not fast enough to counteract things like fascists at conferences, so we shut down the fascists.

I also obviously disagree as to whether denying a fascist the ability to spread fascism is injustice, or more broadly, whether attacking the oppressor classes and limiting their ability to oppress is somehow unjust. But then, I also care much less about any concept of "justice." Certainly the world is not a just place, and I question whether the concept of justice as communicated by oppressor classes is something we need to bring with us into the future.

Finally

>distributed implementation of fascism

Do you notice the contradiction?