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

I don’t know what to do, you guys

fredrikdeboer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 216 posts

Re: I don’t know what to do, you guys

#141

Post by stolio »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #139
stolio wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think I haven't heard this argument multiple times you're very wrong. It's well known in certain circles that this is the _correct_ view of the situation and you're not the first to graciously assume I simply haven't been exposed to it. On this point we disagree, and my post is about what happens when we disagree, that it's not OK for me to disagree. That it's wrong, fundamentally wrong, so wrong it can only b…

Regarding finding a compromise, I'm sure if Eich donated to equal rights after becoming CEO, nobody would have any qualms working for his organization anymore. Even the pitchforks and the most bloodthirsty protesters would likely have gone. That he didn't even try to correct the issue made it more likely that progressive coders would turn away. The depth of the thread seems to have reached a HN limit, so I can't resp…

So he was being publicly shamed and humiliated until he A) was fired B) resigned or C) renounced his personal beliefs? That's horrible. When gay people are treated this way I speak out and say it's wrong. When gay people treat people this way I speak out and say it's wrong.

> That he didn't even try to correct the issue made it more likely that progressive coders would turn away.

Just because he didn't prostrate himself before you doesn't mean he didn't put any effort in. https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/

And it would take a lot of "progressive coders" to make up for Mozilla losing its CEO/co-founder who had been working on Firefox since it was called Netscape Navigator and who just happened to be the creator of JavaScript.

Re: I don’t know what to do, you guys

#142

Post by mdpm »

Moral absolutism is the killer. There is no set of 'right' that you can apply regardless of context, actors or situation. Attempting to create such mental shortcuts is the problem, and perpetuating any as _absolutely_ 'correct' is toxic, and detracts from any of the real issues, actual humans, or real world consequences of whatever is under discussion.

Re: I don’t know what to do, you guys

#143

Post by deciplex »

nostrademons wrote: post #114
qnaal wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what about that community caused it to evolve like that

Hypothesis: When people are powerless for a long period of time, all they learn is the "language" of power, and every issue is cast as a life-or-death struggle where you are either with them or against them. When such people are close to attaining power, actually achieving it is the only thing that matters to them. They often become just as dogmatic oppressors as the people they fought against. It takes time to learn…

I think I get what you mean, but bear in mind that the examples in the article are all people who come from privileged backgrounds. It is definitely not about personal powerlessness, at least. It's something else.

Re: I don’t know what to do, you guys

#144

Post by mercer »

ytturbed wrote: post #52
stolio wrote: post #12

I spent about ten years being an "ally" to feminism, to the LGBT community, to minorities, etc. And then my views drifted ever so slightly from the tried and true party lines. One day I said I thought it was wrong that Brandon Eich was forced out of Mozilla, I said I thought it was wrong the way he was treated. Immediately the decade spent arguing for gay rights and marriage equality disappeared and I became a bigot,…

>shame has become a central tool for trying to create positive social change Yet it doesn't. It creates fear and reduces communication. The motive for shaming people, for trying to make people feel guilty, is to increase the power of the one who does the shaming. To cement their position in the in-group. Because deep inside they feel weak and powerless. Whereas truly good people make you feel stronger and they inspir…

And by reducing communication, it reduces the chances of people changing their beliefs. It might even strengthen their existing beliefs. And that goes for both sides of the argument, so you better make sure you're right before you start jumping on others for their 'wrong' beliefs.

I consider it an important goal to be as patient and open to communication as possible with others, and politely decline communication (or friendship) only when it's clear that there is nothing to be done, and that our views are too far apart.

Often I've failed at that. I've had my moments where someone's views were so offensive to me that I could not stay calm and continue conversing, but I consider that my failing, and something to work on. And to some extent I accept that I have my limits.

One of the reasons I take this approach, is that I've been utterly wrong in my beliefs in the past (conservative Christian, bible-belt style). Or rather, I think I was utterly wrong. And yet I was the same 'rational' person I am now.

Another reason is that I've spent most of my life being around wildly different people and cultures and belief systems. And the one thing it made me realize is that most people are not 'evil' in their beliefs, but that they either 1) never really thought about them much, or 2) made a fundamental error at some point of the process.

For example, it was only when I started reading 'republican' blogs that I started to understand and to a degree even appreciate their point of view on many things. Understanding the religious elements in this dynamic made this a bit easier too.

Perhaps the problem the author describes is a result of people living in very 'homogenous' surroundings, and as a result perhaps they never learned how to disagree in a civil way, or respect someone's views even though they disagree with them.

Re: I don’t know what to do, you guys

#145

Post by mercer »

qnaal wrote: post #65
stolio wrote: post #12

I spent about ten years being an "ally" to feminism, to the LGBT community, to minorities, etc. And then my views drifted ever so slightly from the tried and true party lines. One day I said I thought it was wrong that Brandon Eich was forced out of Mozilla, I said I thought it was wrong the way he was treated. Immediately the decade spent arguing for gay rights and marriage equality disappeared and I became a bigot,…

I wonder what about that community caused it to evolve like that

I suspect a big part of it is being in an echo-chamber of people who have almost the exact same set of beliefs, which are then contrasted with the more extreme opposite beliefs. This creates a rather simplistic (and therefore desirable) us vs. them dynamic.

I've experienced this as conservative christian, and I only realized how black and white my world-view had become once I 'got out'.

I could be wrong though. I generally avoid these 'communities' for the reason the author describes.

Re: I don’t know what to do, you guys

#146

Post by [deleted] »

electronvolt wrote: post #91
javajosh wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel ya. I'm a staunch gay rights advocate, even fought prop 8, but I still thought Eich was treated unfairly. A man shouldn't lose his job because of his political views, just like he shouldn't lose it for being, say, transgendered. Needless to say, this is a nuanced position, and some people simply don't have the capacity for nuance, sadly.

Question: if it came out that Eich had donated to, say, the KKK, would you feel the same way? I have mixed feelings over the way he was treated, but your argument actually seems the opposite of nuanced: the blanket claim that someone should never be fired for their political views (particularly, from a public position where their politics could have an effect on the company they represent both on internal culture and…

[deleted]

Re: I don’t know what to do, you guys

#147

Post by classicsnoot »

deciplex wrote: post #143
nostrademons wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hypothesis: When people are powerless for a long period of time, all they learn is the "language" of power, and every issue is cast as a life-or-death struggle where you are either with them or against them. When such people are close to attaining power, actually achieving it is the only thing that matters to them. They often become just as dogmatic oppressors as the people they fought against. It takes time to learn…

I think I get what you mean, but bear in mind that the examples in the article are all people who come from privileged backgrounds. It is definitely not about personal powerlessness, at least. It's something else.

It is, I believe,poor reasoning to equate privilege with power in the way you seem to. From a different perspective: a privileged white male [me] who is very sensitive to history and narrative, who knows that there is so much institutionalized bigotry in my sub group, who must actively work to be the man I wish to see around me, can feel completely powerless in the face of fate to live outside the external expectation of what my skin and penis are supposed to mean regardless of the prodigious opportunities I have enjoyed due to the biological lottery.

Re: I don’t know what to do, you guys

#148

Post by AnthonyMouse »

beerbajay wrote: post #66

The Vox article[1] by Amanda Taub is substantially better than either the deBoer's or Chait's articles (an article, by the way, that deBoer seems to entirely miss the point of) in that it correctly identifies the term "political correctness" as _a thing people only ever complain about_; it's not a thing that "the left" wants. > people pushed out and marginalized in left-wing circles because > they didn’t use the prop…

That article was awful. She starts by claiming political correctness doesn't exist because we don't know what it means, so she defines it using a straw man definition and spends the rest of the article knocking it down.

Political correctness is responding to politically unpopular viewpoints with punishment and vitriol.

Her point seems to be that labeling things political correctness which are actually reasoned arguments is harmful to discourse. But even if some idiots are doing that, that still doesn't mean that "actual" political correctness (i.e. responding to politically unpopular viewpoints with punishment and vitriol instead of reasoned arguments) doesn't happen or isn't harmful to discourse.

Re: I don’t know what to do, you guys

#149

Post by mercer »

Animats wrote: post #35
smacktoward wrote: post #16

I don't think it's an accident that all three of his examples involve college students. I saw plenty of examples of this type of aggressive ideological policing in various political groups I was involved in when I was college. I have seen exactly zero in nearly twenty years of being involved with and working in left-wing politics after graduation. (Which isn't to say it never happens, I'm sure it does, just that it's…

"Academic politics is so vicious because the stakes are so low." - Henry Kissinger. He'd both been on the Harvard faculty and was Secretary of State, so he knew. The real trouble with the political correctness thing about sex is that it's a distraction from the real political issues - money, and who gets how much. Most of what government does and can do is about money. The US right has its own problems with sex, but…

> Occupy ran into this. Occupy leaves behind one lasting achievement - the identification of "the 1%" as a problem. They never had a coherent agenda.

Small correction: From what I understand Occupy didn't have a coherent agenda by design. The initiators of the movement had other goals, and were relatively successful by their own measures (and I agree, to an extent).

Re: I don’t know what to do, you guys

#150

Post by palmer_eldritch »

omegaham wrote: post #36

I think one of the biggest problems with these types is that they associate opinions with morality. As in, if you hold uninformed / ignorant / bigoted opinions, you are automatically an evil person and should be treated accordingly. Are some bigoted people evil? Sure. But I think that a lot of people hold various opinions because they just haven't thought about it too hard. They've just gone along with whatever they'…

> if you hold uninformed / ignorant / bigoted opinions, you are automatically an evil person and should be treated accordingly

One could argue that such an opinion is in fact short-sighted and bigoted...

Post reply on HN