Live data from Hacker News

Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

georgesaines.com

121–130 of 302 posts

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#121
post #8

For a lot of people in the US, politics has become very personal. I believe that some policy decisions have become a direct threat to my health and I can try to discuss those policies calmly but I'm not good at covering my aggravation. I'd say that everyone has gotten increasingly disdainful of the 'other side'. I know I have - I'm not proud of it but I'm also not a good actor. I was in a message group recently and s…

[flagged]

Didn’t take too long for Godwin’s law

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pregnant women are dying because they are not getting appropriate medical care. Doctors are unwilling to give pregnant women appropriate care because they may face criminal charges. This is happening directly because of legislation that has been pushed forward exclusively by one political party in this country. So I find it hard to understand how someone can care about women's health and support these policies. I'm f…

> So I find it hard to understand how someone can care about women's health and support these policies. I'm flabbergasted that I know parents of daughters who support these policies. Do you really not know the reason? They believe fetuses are humans and that killing them is akin to murder, just as killing a baby would. It's as simple as that.

Have you read "the only moral abortion is my abortion"?

https://joycearthur.com/abortion/the-only-moral-abortion-is-...

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no party that will make “every waking moment a nightmare" for the LGBTQIAP+. That’s the same thing we heard in 2016, and nothing came of it then. And in fact between 2020 and 2024 there is definitely an argument that can be made that even under the “preferred” party things got worse. Ironically, that exact rhetoric has led to multiple terror attacks on innocent people.

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#124
post #74

Speaking as an Indian, what's really going on is that everyone in India has lost hope in their political decisions actually impacting their lives in ways that they wish. So politics is a pretty low-stakes discussion in India, like sports teams. In America we haven't quite lost hope yet. edit: to be clear, politics does impact lives in India, but it does so in ways that are quite disconnected from individuals' politic…

Part of it is that all political parties in the USA have given up "conversion/conversation" or trying to get this "hypothetical middle" to budge. Instead, they're both entirely geared up to get "their base out to vote" which you do by riling them up in all possible ways.

That’s clearly not true, just look at both T and H backpedaling on their policies to move them towards the center.

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It has nothing to do with tribal affiliation and everything to do with policy. This is absolutely not how a lot of people operate.

I'm sensing some sort of neurotypical/neurodiverse divide here. I don't think it's unreasonable to live a morally comprehensive life. For example, I probably couldn't be friends with a white-supremacist even if they were kind, gentle, supportive, and caring. Some folks are able to look past those things and more power to them. I, however, couldn't sleep at night.

I'm with you. There are hard lines. But I also have hard lines in who you support. Like, if you vote for a politician who supports, e.g., the eradication of trans people, then even if you say, "I don't believe in that" you've furthered that cause by issuing your vote. I can't abide someone who is willing to compromise on some things.

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So I find it hard to understand how someone can care about women's health and support these policies. I'm flabbergasted that I know parents of daughters who support these policies. Do you really not know the reason? They believe fetuses are humans and that killing them is akin to murder, just as killing a baby would. It's as simple as that.

> They believe fetuses are humans and that killing them is akin to murder, Unlike the woman carrying the fetus. In my state, abortion is illegal even if not aborting may cause the mother to die. This is pro life.

That's the thing- Imagine you think killing fetuses is akin to murder. What response would you give to your own point?

There is a huge list of counteragents someone could make if they start from that basis, and your counterpoint does nothing to impact them.

Everyone is talking past each other with arguments which make sense to them, but are largely off target for the other person.

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pregnant women are dying because they are not getting appropriate medical care. Doctors are unwilling to give pregnant women appropriate care because they may face criminal charges. This is happening directly because of legislation that has been pushed forward exclusively by one political party in this country. So I find it hard to understand how someone can care about women's health and support these policies. I'm f…

I’d be curious (although you don’t have to answer and we can leave it rhetorical if you prefer) - how much is your health really directly at risk here? Are you a woman in a red state planning to have children soon? Or are you in a blue state, and perhaps have already had children? Even if you were in a red state - would you have the means, and would, travel to a blue state if you had an issue? And if not, really, wha…

Some of us care about harms to our fellow citizens, too? Just because a law might not impact me personally[1] doesn't stop me from going "no, this law is a bad law because it tramples on people's civil liberties."

The Golden Rule.

> it’s intellectually dishonest to act like a conservative doesn’t care about pregnant woman

No, it isn't. Several states have passed total abortion bans that have included, or end up effectively including, abortions for complications in which the pregnancy isn't viable, at all. This ends up harming the mother, for nothing. Cf. [2], [3].

> Why is that a bad thing? Where do you live? If you have liberal views on this, live in a liberal state.

Because fundamental human rights should be secured for all citizens, not just citizens of some states here or there. People should not be forced out of their home, uprooted for their families, just to secure basic rights, or worse, to simply remain alive.

> people don’t want to do the hard work of changing people’s views

The majority of Americans favor abortion.

> If you want to argue that Roe v Wade was the right way to advance abortion rights in the US — how would you feel if a Republican court in 4 years made abortion illegal country wide

Flipping judicial decisions is something that should be inherently done rarely and only with the utmost consideration — when we're certain the precedent is wrong. Otherwise, how can you argue that the system is just?

(The majority of Americans also disagree with Dobbs.)

[1]: They do impact me personally, but I do not think that is a requirement for people to engage in debate. Certainly, more people have a vote than are impacted by some policies, so it practically behooves me to engage them in debate, since their vote will indirectly determine whether such policies pass.

[2]: https://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(22)00536-1/fulltext

[3]: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/12/29/1143823...

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#128
post #105

Speaking as an Indian, what's really going on is that everyone in India has lost hope in their political decisions actually impacting their lives in ways that they wish. So politics is a pretty low-stakes discussion in India, like sports teams. In America we haven't quite lost hope yet. edit: to be clear, politics does impact lives in India, but it does so in ways that are quite disconnected from individuals' politic…

I think Americans have lost hope as well. I think in America it isn't hope for a better tomorrow that is driving politics anymore, it is fear for a worse tomorrow. I don't know how things are in India, but I imagine people have lost hope that politics will actually impact their lives in ways they wish, but they probably aren't as fear-driven as Americans (yet). And this explains why you can discuss politics with some…

There is also an element of vindictiveness and revenge. e.g. you harmed me, so I am willing to suffer costs to inflict harm an you.

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#129
I think the answer is “don’t generalize based on your sample size of 8 people”. I talk about politics at work all the time. It’s totally fine. I actually disagree with the majority view but we talk about it rationally and make jokes.

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Practice is important. And being able to say, "I disagree, and discussing it further won't change my mind" is important. But many of the current political topics are life or death for parts of the community. Like, I know plenty of trans sysadmins for whom politics isn't just "well, one party advances ideas I support and the other less so". For them it's "One party will make my every waking moment a nightmare". I unde…

> being able to say, "I disagree, and discussing it further won't change my mind" is important Though, I would argue, unnecessary. If you faithfully believe, challenge shouldn’t be burdensome. If you’re open to revision, maybe they have a point. I’m not Epictetus, but unless your conversation partner is an idiot or a bore, there is usually something redeeming there.

It has an opportunity cost. It's not burdensome to be challenged, per se, it's burdensome to repeat that, "Yes, I think trans people are humans with complex interior lives who mostly want to be left alone. No, they are not coming into bathrooms en masse to molest you. Yes, they deserve to just get on with their lives. No, we shouldn't mock them for who they are" etc. etc.

It takes someone 3-5 seconds to "just asking questions" and it takes me much more than that to respond. There's an obvious imbalance there that leads to:

a) It's a lot more exhausting to respond than to ask

b) It's vulnerable to malicious askers abusing my good faith answering time

So while, with close friends, I'm happy to answer questions. Or with well meaning allies who genuinely want to learn and just don't understand. But like, random folks? On an internet forum? Nah. They can ask and I can say, "Sorry, let's just not engage."

Post reply on HN