191–200 of 243 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Curtis Yarvin is a professed fascist who has written about his belief that some races are more suited to slavery than others. Having read a good deal of his unqualified reservations, I wonder if you can source this quote for me please?
Search Google, Twitter, or send me an email. I'm not going to link to hate speech here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What was incorrect about his statement?
It is two thousand and sixteen in the year of our Lord. Redbaiting doesn't work any more; McCarthy is death. Screaming "BUT WILL SOMEONE JUST THINK ABOUT THE VILE, VILE COMMUNISTS?" at every turn to suppress dissent no longer works. It is an evasionist tactic.
If not, why not?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This entire thread is a pretty depressing indictment of the sorts of people who hang out on HN. Seriously, nobody should care about offending Curtis Yarvin or any of his ilk.
Yarvin and his "ilk" aren't the ones complaining about being offended here.
"Include all! White supremacists, non-white... If a few people (say non-white) feel uncomfortable and don't want to come, we're OK with that 100%! Everyone should feel included! Racists, homophobes... Respect the beliefs of everyone, like believing there is a god, or that white people are superior, or believing you are being discriminated, or believing people will insult you or assault you at a whim for who you are,…
Discriminating against homophobic people is going to discriminate against a lot of Muslims, Russians etc. Discriminating against racists is going to discriminate against a lot of people from all over the world. Are you OK with that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is two thousand and sixteen in the year of our Lord. Redbaiting doesn't work any more; McCarthy is death. Screaming "BUT WILL SOMEONE JUST THINK ABOUT THE VILE, VILE COMMUNISTS?" at every turn to suppress dissent no longer works. It is an evasionist tactic.
You've missed the point. Namely: If one person's semi-trollish advocacy of monarchy under a pseudonym several years ago means he's too dangerous to be allowed to speak at a tech conference, then surely other people's absolutely sincere advocacy of Communism under their own names, today, would make them even more dangerous, and they should also be barred from speaking... right? If not, why not?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yarvin and his "ilk" aren't the ones complaining about being offended here.
The argument of the original post is that we shouldn't exclude Yarvin because it might make avowed racists feel unwelcome at FP conferences. To which I say: who cares? I don't want Yarvin at FP conferences, and I suspect none of the attendees particularly do either.
I'd imagine there's a solid overlap between Hacker News posters and people who might attend a functional programming conference, and judging by this comments section your position is in a distinct minority. So if it's OK to ostracize people based on their unpopular political opinions, you may find yourself in the hot seat you've been preparing for Yarvin.
How about this: perhaps we should instead strive for a system of pluralism and tolerance where we don't bring our political disputes into the professional sphere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one is obligated to like you or associate with you, doubly so if you have political beliefs that would likely result in their slavery. Community sanctions are part of what it means to be human.
Along the same lines, no one is obligated to like you or associate with you , doubly so if you have political beliefs that would likely result in their being unable to earn a living in their field. > Community sanctions are part of what it means to be human. But not the only part, or even the most important part. (And as long as we're getting philosophical, just because they're part of what it means to be human doesn…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. Sure, but trying to stamp out every person with opinions you think might lead to something bad someday is, frankly, more frightening to me than Moldbug. What you advocate threatens our existence as an open society. For social progress to happen, we need people to tolerate unlikable minorities. That's how things like gay rights happen, as 30 years ago, your arguments could have been use to ban a gay activist from a…
It's not about "might." That's like saying the sun "might" set, or the tide "might" recede. Worms like Moldbug have a 100% historical record of mutating into terribly destructive individuals when given even the slightest leeway. On the other hand, tolerating them has a zero percent success rate. Zero! Never, not once, in history have Fascists been beaten by anything by the usual liberal, democratic means of discourse…
Personally I believe there's a place for CoCs in any large organization or group but I think the content of CoCs should never include any political ideological opinions. If professionalism, respect, and separation of one's political and/or religious beliefs from a project/event is impossible for some then they shouldn't be part of it. Honestly, I wouldn't know or care if one programmer was a devout Mormon that donate…
Which has no bearing on the conversation, as you cannot deny that the person in question is anything but a vehement and devout racist.
We're not mad he's a christian. I'm not even mad he thinks trans sexuality and non-binarism is an illness. At least there is some idea I am human there. He genuinely thinks non-white people are a sub-species.
Please, please, please don't try and equate this to a "political" view. There is no political view worth entertaining that denies people's essential humanity.
This just in: preventing people to come to your conferences because of their beliefs is actually inadvisable and really, really difficult to make good on. I don't agree with the guy's views either, but I wouldn't disinvite him just because he thinks that way. Good on LambdaConf for letting him come anyway. Many of the quotes from this piece were shockingly powerful. I'm happy I took the time to read it.
That's VERY easy to make editorial decisions on. The entire purpose of the conference staff is to editorialize.