Live data from Hacker News

Dignity

lastwordonnothing.com

21–30 of 41 posts

Re: Dignity

#21
post #15

This is all about travel. In the terms of the author I have to consider myself a front-row person. But I can easily go back to the rural area I come from - and I do so regularly - and I really enjoy it every single time. If I could, I would probably live there. The thing is: you cannot live where your roots are and be who you want to be at the same time. You have to travel. A guy from the Ukraine cannot be a Stanford…

> A guy from the Ukraine cannot be a Stanford professor and be close to his parents at the same time.

They can, however, use their experience from Stanford, and try to improve education in Ukraine, be an independent researcher in Ukraine, try to create a "mini-Stanford" around themselves in Ukraine, etc. An uphill battle for sure, but possibly with more immediate impact.

Re: Dignity

#22
post #15

This is all about travel. In the terms of the author I have to consider myself a front-row person. But I can easily go back to the rural area I come from - and I do so regularly - and I really enjoy it every single time. If I could, I would probably live there. The thing is: you cannot live where your roots are and be who you want to be at the same time. You have to travel. A guy from the Ukraine cannot be a Stanford…

The more you travel, the more you find that one persons front-row is another persons back-row, and so it goes on and on in circles, until eventually you realize that travel is the only way to go.

Re: Dignity

#23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have this pet theory that much racism is actually wrongly interpreted classism. In many countries, big ethnic minorities (eg African Americans and Latinos in the US, or the Turkish & Maroccan Dutch where I live) are much poorer, on average, than the national average. I suppose that many people might think that poorer people are more likely to break into their homes, rob them on the street, sell drugs etc than riche…

That doesn't explain the racism against Jews, or Asians. I think the explanation is more biological. You're hardwired to feel that people who look and talk like you are the easiest to ally with. Sometimes it even becomes a self-reinforcing loop - if blue people have a slight preference to ally with other blue people, then green people will find it easier to ally with greens than with blues, which will be noticed by t…

> That doesn't explain the racism against Jews, or Asians.

True, but it does explain some of why white people in a super white neighborhood call the cops when a black guy is walking down the sidewalk. It's totally ridiculously bigoted but I think there's a big "this guy looks poor, is he going to break in somewhere?" component to it. And that's classism, not racism.

I'm not saying classism is any better btw. I am saying that trying to solve classism-disguised-as-racism by talking about skin color or culture is missing the mark. The narrative "most black people don't $negative_stereotype" is common, but I hardly see any "most poor people don't $negative_stereotype" messages out there.

Re: Dignity

#25
post #19

Dignity is a really under-used word these days. And leaving it out is why so many of the discussions on class and money get nowhere - because it exists outside the monetizable sphere. Or rather, there are all sorts of ways to sell it but few to buy it back again.

There is a way to buy it back, but it is very expensive, with time and a lot of thought and even more of actions.

I do not expect this title has anything to do with reasoning about people's choices at all. Nor with the concept. I think it might have more to do with dismissal. Its opposite.

What irks me is that talking as if "people/science cannot understand" is a different kind of hubris. Not humility.

It's only that this limited quant approach is not enough. Too reductionist, too simplified. World is much richer than such spherical cow models.

To falsify this idea, consider when people thought men flying on daily basis was impossible. Yet here we are. And we can do, as a whole, so much more.

The idea that something is unknowable is not productive. It may make you feel good or accept your limitations, but there are so many other ways of doing that which are not regressive and do not apply your presumption on state of knowledge, humanity or the world on others.

Respect is a two way street. Lacking in the USA lately, while forced and faked in the some Asian cultures.

Respectability is a separate matter stemming from it.

Dignity is a word of many and inconsistent meanings, mostly undefined. Excellent way to hide what you really mean.

Re: Dignity

#26

One day in the future I hope we can take classism as seriously as other forms of bigotry like racism and sexism. Explicitly racial segregation is over, but capitalist class society segregates people by socio-economic class implicitly (it's explicit in only certain places like airplane cabins). Of course, class is a great way to continue to run a racist society: Just cram the underclass with most of the minorities! Th…

> The only solution is to replace the class system with something that provides unconditional dignity for all.

I am really afraid of comments that state that there is only one solution for a social problem. Speaks a lot about the mindset of the commenter. Please, do not be that person.

Re: Dignity

#27
post #4

One of the most poignant and evocative things I've read of late. I don't want to spoil the experience if you plan to read, so just two excerpts. > What I learned from the book is that the differences between the back and front row are more than money, marginality, jobs, and education. That is, the back row kids chose lives and educations that weren’t going to get them fancy jobs and high salaries, and they did it onl…

I had never expected to have my atheism challenged [..] part of it was recognizing a simply utilitarian value in faith

That feels odd to me. Recognizing the value of community doesn't seem at odds with a rejection of supernatural entities. Likewise, I don't see the value of evangelizing my agnosticism to communities of different structure. Pluralism to me is an essential component of a society as large as our current one.

Maybe there is stuff just too big and complex to understand and perhaps that is the essential truth

Speaking only for myself here, but I don't need a god to acknowledge that our material and social world in complex beyond comprehension. At the same time, I also don't feel the need to have a being in my life that does comprehend all. It is enough for me to know the limits of my knowledge, and to scope my life within that context. Even more to the point, I find that the quest for "one essential truth", to the point of denouncing different conceptions of the unknown, is in itself detrimental to society.

So as to your question, I believe there is tremendous value in allowing people to be secure in their religion. It provides security, comfort and community for them. And I believe the recent surge in anti-scientific movements is in part motivated by (atheists') relentless attacks on the core tenets of other communities. Gods have always resided in the unknown, not in the unknowable. As the limits of our knowledge progresses, so have gods changed their shape. But by attacking faith on the unknowable, people have created much more animosity and defensiveness than should have been necessary.

Re: Dignity

#28
Having recently finished "Hillbilly Elegy," this interview reminded me of similar themes. America doesn't really have a meaningful discourse on class I suspect because the Soviet machine dominated it for so long it became a kind of third-rail topic.

If you are from a working class background, or find yourself navigating it, what you notice about people who have left it is they leave behind that very "dignity," (or honour) that defines working people. They become placeless, "political," "from anywhere," as opposed to "from somewhere."[1] It's because an elite education broadens your perspective so that the symbols and things you previously thought were meaningful and powerful don't figure in with the same significance when you see the bigger picture of possibilities. What working people treat as a localized cultural dignity can seem like superstition when viewed against much greater power in a global context and perspective. This dignity is still important, but higher education "pops," you out of that view.

The side effect (or cause of problems) of this is that today, even the most elite institutions do not create enough cultural distance between working people and the new administrators, and so you have this insecure burgher class in America who define themselves with displays of contempt for "white trash," "rednecks," etc, because even their advanced education and high paying jobs (or cultural capital) do not provide them with enough distance and certainty that they are in fact sufficiently different, that working people wouldn't even register as a threat to their identity.

The reason a "noble," person can treat people equally is because there is absolutely no danger of the association harming their identity and position. It's also why country people can seem extra egalitarian, because they just don't have a stake in the affectations of city class navigation.

You can also see how the most militant critics of working class values and of the underclasses' dignity systems and honour codes are the people who most closely resemble them, or perceive they are only a few paychecks away from them: "artists," with middling if any higher education, unionized workers, city dwellers with precarious culture and media jobs. The lower middle who need to distinguish themselves and work harder so they don't lose, "everything," and be reduced to those people they are trying so hard to separate themselves from. On the upper end, there is a kind of haughty mystification at why anyone would actually fear wearing red or blue in certain neighbourhoods, but when they say they don't understand, what they mean is they don't need to.

This negative cycle of downward class anxiety and neuroticism from the new middle just provokes entrenchment of working tribe values and reactionary views, and you get the culture wars of today. America's new elite is not exceptionally elite by historical standards, and it knows it, and their impostor syndrome is expressed mainly as contempt for an underclass and the scapegoating of working class people.

The solutions are more complex, but the problem seems stark as day.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/mar/22/the-road-to-so...

Re: Dignity

#30
I think Arnade has good instincts, and the blog that all of this started with remains a wonderful read.

But I wish he would broaden the scope of his polemic. It’s all about how rich people need to empathize better with not-rich people, but it never goes beyond that into looking at why our society is the way it is. Why can you find so many people congregating at McDonald’s? My answer would be that we spent the last few decades slowly eliminating our public spaces to the point that McDonald’s is all most communities have left. That doesn’t need to be his take but it would be nice to see one.

On the other hand, maybe I should leave well enough alone. His profiles of the people he met in Hunts Point are incredible examples of treating people with dignity who our society has completely discarded. Ultimately a very Christian act, i would say.

Post reply on HN