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

Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

rollingstone.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 203 posts

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#191

Post by knz »

wepple wrote: post #59
knz wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Australia is actually a very stable place, nothing much really happens (no civil war, no prime ministers assassinated, little violence etc.) Of course, the media looks for something sensationalist, and now a massive number of people think Australia is "full of deadly animals waiting to kill you". America is the same. Despite all of the rhetoric about the election, gun violence, and policing the US is largely a safe…

Whilst I mostly agree, I think the key difference is that the US has a majority control of international media, and whilst they love to hype up domestic concerns for viewer ratings, they're significantly more reckless when talking about "not-America". The fact that you level Australia and the US has both "safe and stable"; the US is an order of magnitude more troublesome than Aus (As someone who has lived in Australi…

I grew up in New Zealand and have visited Australia many times (and still have many friends and family living in Australia). I now live in Minnesota.

Is it really any better there? Australia has it's own history of crime related violence, corrupt police, poor treatment of Aboriginal people, poverty, child abuse, drug crimes, and offshore detention centers. Australia is also another major country that seems to ignore environmental issues. Australia only has 12% of the population that the US has - I suspect that if the population was larger the similarities would be even more apparent.

I love visiting Australia but there are definitely some issues under the surface there.

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#193

Post by protomyth »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #186
protomyth wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, since frankly, I wasn't giving them a chance before the incident. They had their heyday, but they are just another outrage press now. Their Boston Bombing cover was reprehensible. Its just another data point of a trend line.

IMO it was responsible of them publish that viewpoint and I respect them for doing so while the rest of the media was busy grabbing pitchforks and pouring gas over crosses. The guy was guilty as all hell but the way it all went down was shady. Getting him sentenced to death would have been a cakewalk if done by the book. Instead it was years of press releases making him look more and more guilty and getting that spun…

Their cover tried to glorify him like a rock star. Getting caught in the act generally results in a guilty verdict.

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#194

Post by nikdaheratik »

grillvogel wrote: post #144
oarsinsync wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't understand the opposing viewpoint, you can't discuss it with those that agree with it. You're reduced to "no, you're wrong", which is the same viewpoint they have. Sticking to places that are skewed towards a similar bias as yourself doesn't help you understand those that have differing views to you. It can be especially important to be able to do this when those people are in your family, in order to ke…

>If you don't understand the opposing viewpoint, you can't discuss it with those that agree with it. You're reduced to "no, you're wrong", which is the same viewpoint they have. who cares? what is the purpose of exposing yourself to things that will annoy you that you have no control over, just so you can argue with people?

For many ideas, you can't really understand what your own viewpoint until you see an opposing idea and reject it. And you can't really consider why you believe what you believe until you have to defend it against criticism.

That being said, this kind of argument is only really useful in the right kind of environment, academia for example. Certainly not the vast majority of the Internet. And once you've thought about these things for a bit, there's not much value in continually exposing yourself to a toxic cesspool just to remind yourself that it's not for you.

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#195

Post by nostromo123 »

Noseshine wrote: post #21
guard-of-terra wrote: post #12

Well maybe we should stop backing people into a corner then? For example, why don't back down on immigration? Instead, it sounds like "we're not listening to your concerns, rightful or not, your opinion won't affect how things are done". Hard to imagine how this treatment won't lead to panic attacks. Actually, countries definitely become harder and harder on immigration but there's a failure to project these changes…

> Well maybe we should stop backing people into a corner then? I agree with you thus far... > For example, why don't back down on immigration? But why this? I would ask for one thing: Rationality and existence of a connection. For example, if my country Germany is any guide, the parts of the country with the most fear of immigration are the ones least affected by it! Given that missing connection, how would it solve…

So what now: people are not allowed anymore to be afraid of something they have not experienced themselves? Haven't been hit by a car / experienced a nuclear strike / had cancer, but I am not allowed to fear them on principle?

By the way, the ability to see a potentially dangerous situation happening to someone else and deciding you don't want to be in that situation yourself is a sign of a correctly functioning cognitive system.

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#196

Post by nostromo123 »

megous wrote: post #77
Noseshine wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well maybe we should stop backing people into a corner then? I agree with you thus far... > For example, why don't back down on immigration? But why this? I would ask for one thing: Rationality and existence of a connection. For example, if my country Germany is any guide, the parts of the country with the most fear of immigration are the ones least affected by it! Given that missing connection, how would it solve…

In Czech Republic, it's even more pronounced. The government accepted in total about 20 immigrants from Syria so far and if you read comments on the internet, or watch demonstrations, it's like the end of the world is coming. Also some of the fear might be quite shallow. There was a report of some old lady in the village that accepted some refugees. She was first afraid when asked about newcomers, stating fears that…

If all refugees behaved like that, with a willingness to integrate and understand our ways, I think there would be much less fear going around.

The people start being afraid when they see that some of the so-called refugees are violent, look down on women / homosexuals / Christians / Jews / etc., try to live by their own law, and so on. In a word, we are tolerant and have to accept their intolerance.

Don't believe me? Just look at the reports of Christian refugees being mobbed by Muslim refugees in asylums in Germany. I don't understand why in such a situation the Christian refugees have no right to be protected, while the Muslims have to be shown "tolerance" for their "religious beliefs". Or Muslim refugees openly declaring in German newspaper interviews that Hitler was a great man and Jews should be eradicated. Do we really want such people in Western countries?

This is what makes people afraid, not the fact that someone has a different skin colour or a different religion. Sure there are some lunatic "white supremacists" / bona fide racists, but most people's fears are legitimate and not born out of xenophobia or racism. And this is the obstacle to a reasonable discussion: usually, any such fears are dismissed with the "you're racist" comment. Sorry, I don't think I'm racist just because I don't subscribe to the idea that Jews should be exterminated.

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#198

Post by greggman »

matt_wulfeck wrote: post #84
legulere wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is not adherence to some constitution (especially the American constitution which contains quite some arbitrary and outdated things), but basic human rights. A constitution can be a legal framework for basic human rights, but many are pretty bad at that and the US has actively decided to not honor human rights (not accepting rulings of the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court,…

What things are outdated? It's a document that outlines the principles of separation of powers and the role of government. I think it is still very much relevant. Even if it was rewritten how would it be improved? Wouldn't we end up with the same principles just maybe worded differently?

if I understand correctly separation of powers is not spelled out well in the constitution.

The supreme Court didn't have any power until the 1830s

http://www.wnyc.org/story/giggly-blue-robot

Re: Why We're Living in the Age of Fear

#199

Post by Gruselbauer »

cylinder wrote: post #86
Gruselbauer wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no feasible way for me to agree more with this. I very much belong to those negatively affected by this phenomenon. I'd wager many a HN commenter is. My RSS feeds are a carefully crafted web of information, as much of a not-echo chamber I can create. From stuff I don't agree with on almost anything - Breitbart and its national counterparts, neocon blogs, libertarian thinktanks - to sources I think of as pret…

I'm the same, but don't have quite an RSS feed. Are you able to share a list of your subscriptions?

Currently offline until the satellite bidirectional dish arrives - yes, that remotely ;) - but once I'm back, I'll gladly share. Gonna comment here again then.
Post reply on HN