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

I'm Loyal to Nothing Except the Dream

blog.codinghorror.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 276 posts

Re: I'm Loyal to Nothing Except the Dream

#201

Post by spydum »

RodericDay wrote: post #177
rdtsc wrote: post #73

> As of 2017, the United States, through a sequence of highly improbable events, managed to elect an extremely controversial president. I think it a mistake to see this as a random fluke and chuck it up to chance. It seems like chance to those who were asleep or were watching news from their own bubble. Trump is a symptom of something that was already there probably decades in the making. If we ignore the conditions…

Best post by a mile. Not only did America elect Trump, Sanders also did mighty fine for someone who in years past would be considered unelectable. People pass around figures about GDP and low unemployment to prove to themselves things are absolutely fine, but then you dig further and you find that many feel lost and desperate. Obama said "America is already great", and many people found it a vomit-inducing quip. In m…

I think both trump and sanders were symptoms. The people wanted change (which is why Obama did so well). What they got was very moderate change. Government doesn't change as fast as people want, so they continue to vote more extreme for change. As others said, just about every other candidate in the running, aside from those two, were about the status quo.

So I agree: the last decade was about change. The downside I think is, we spend waaaay too much time working about the executive, when it's the local/state folks which can really drive the narrative. We need more principled folks running there, and leading from those levels.

Re: I'm Loyal to Nothing Except the Dream

#202

Post by imron »

pg314 wrote: post #182
imron wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is a very good reason: a humanitarian one Well, if we're going all humanitarian, the humanitarian thing to do would be to stop bombing these countries in the first place.

I agree that another humanitarian thing to do would be to stop bombing/droning other countries. But you are presenting it as if you only get to do one humanitarian thing. That is incorrect. You can do both. If you are trying to argue that a previous president's mistakes are a justification for this president's mistakes, I disagree.

I am not trying to argue that, I am merely angry that the people protesting today were not protesting at the far worse things that happened before and that ultimately led to the situation we are in now. Your comment got caught in the crossfire of that anger.

Re: I'm Loyal to Nothing Except the Dream

#203

Post by VLM »

facepalm wrote: post #123

I have high respect for CodingHorror, which is why I am confused about some of his claims. Perhaps HN can help me understand a few things: - why do people claim it is a muslim ban, when really it seems to be a ban on countries that the US is fighting a war with (except Iran)? Whether there is a causality between "at war with the US" and "Muslim" seems to be another question? - what is the proper US stance on Immigrat…

Minor corrections that we have been in a cold war with Iran, and a hot war with Islamic terrorism, both for a long time.

Walls are only crazy when the USA builds one; Israeli walls are great as is every other wall on the planet. Only USA walls are bad. Why? Donno.

You mention you're German, we treat our illegals as a slave racial underclass. On paper everyone gets OSHA protection, in practice only white people get OSHA protection, Americans are extremely racist. Essentially they hold the bottom social position that blacks had pre-civil rights. They are a form of corporate welfare in that their wages paid by the corporation are extremely low but the programs required for their entire families that are paid for by the citizen taxpayers at immense expense (those citizens are being driven out of work, so in the long run this pyramid scheme of a scam will run out of gas). Sort of the walmart effect (have the government pay the difference between the total cost of living and the pay we're willing to provide) but stronger.

I think the analogy to the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941 is useful, why if only we had opened our hearts when the planes appeared on the horizon, then the Japanese refugees would have simply landed their planes and opened Sushi shops in Hawaii, it all our fault that they killed thousands of military and civilians in a sneak attack, and saying anything bad about them or their actions is racist and horrible and especially above all else deplorable. There must not be thought and reasoning about the topic, only Pavlovian conditioned emotional response is acceptable discourse on the topic.

Re: I'm Loyal to Nothing Except the Dream

#204

Post by ashark »

dredmorbius wrote: post #29
MisterWebz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet people seemed to be awfully calm when Obama was droning weddings. I'm not saying we should've put so much hate towards Obama as well, I'm saying we should put things into perspective.

Democracy Now, "Drone Attacks", 152 results, all but two since 2009, overwhelmingly negative. http://m.democracynow.org/tags/282

Not a lot of people listen to Democracy Now, or read The Nation, or whatever. Unlike the right, the left critiques of (even their own people in) power don't often make it to mainstream news commentary, or interview targets of the mainstream news, so it'd be easy to think there is none if one doesn't consume left news and opinion sources directly.

Re: I'm Loyal to Nothing Except the Dream

#205

Post by splike »

mdemare wrote: post #178
andrewstuart wrote: post #117

Addressing the concerns of the Trump supporters is the only way forward. Why are they angry? Silicon Valley - one of the richest sectors of society, is up in arms because the disenfranchised "have nots" are expressing their anger about being "have nots" by just tearing the whole damn thing down. The "have nots" say - through Trump and his actions - "OK, you got everything, we got nothing, here's the payback". The hav…

Have nots? Trump voters were richer than Clinton voters.

Source?

Re: I'm Loyal to Nothing Except the Dream

#206

Post by grey-area »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #131
grey-area wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly don't think he has promised anything to address the points you raised, or has any intention to.

They're not examples of things Trump would do, they're examples of things neither of the major parties give you a choice over. Nobody knows what Trump will do. Make America Great Again could mean anything. Compare "Hope and Change" -- Obama was the first attempt at this when he defeated Clinton. Change didn't happen so people chose an even more radical option. It isn't that voting for the protest candidate is especia…

We now have a very good idea what Trump will do - literally what he promised to do, which was all about autarky, closing the country off and bringing industry back to the US, and of course to be the most important man in the world (he was on the cover of time magazine 15 times you know). He has been very clear and consistent in his words and actions. Americans first and I think Trump first amongst Americans in a nation of men, not of laws.

Re a protest vote yes I think there was a certain rage expressed but I genuinely think a lot of people looked at the solutions he proposed and liked them. Listen to Trump supporters talk - they are proud of the wall, proud of banning muslims and their hibbi jabbis and want to bring industry back to the US (doomed as that is for manual workers in this second industrial revolution).

This is the mistake people like thiel and musk are making - they think Trump is playing some clever long game and lying to people, that people can't really take all those crazy policies literally, or worse that they can manipulate him - wrong on all counts.

Re: I'm Loyal to Nothing Except the Dream

#207

Post by golemotron »

rdtsc wrote: post #73

> As of 2017, the United States, through a sequence of highly improbable events, managed to elect an extremely controversial president. I think it a mistake to see this as a random fluke and chuck it up to chance. It seems like chance to those who were asleep or were watching news from their own bubble. Trump is a symptom of something that was already there probably decades in the making. If we ignore the conditions…

> Trump is a symptom of something that was already there probably decades in the making. If we ignore the conditions which created Trump, if we only pay attention to what is in our own Facebook feed we'll end up with another Trump, and another. Every time assuming it was random or an act of God or Russians or whatever.

Yes, Jeff's post is notes from the filter bubble. Someone I know on Facebook was posting proudly after the election about how his son was spending the weekend reading The Atlantic and other mags to understand the Trump voter.

I said no, you get in a car and drive to a red state and talk to people. Mediated communication is not serving us.

Re: I'm Loyal to Nothing Except the Dream

#208

Post by facepalm »

whorleater wrote: post #192
facepalm wrote: post #123

I have high respect for CodingHorror, which is why I am confused about some of his claims. Perhaps HN can help me understand a few things: - why do people claim it is a muslim ban, when really it seems to be a ban on countries that the US is fighting a war with (except Iran)? Whether there is a causality between "at war with the US" and "Muslim" seems to be another question? - what is the proper US stance on Immigrat…

> why do people claim it is a muslim ban, when really it seems to be a ban on countries that the US is fighting a war with (except Iran)? Whether there is a causality between "at war with the US" and "Muslim" seems to be another question? Because it omits Christians from the ban? Because it bans legal visa holders and (initially) permanent residents, who, I repeat, went through the immigration process legally and now…

Perhaps the US is at war with Muslim groups in those countries, so it makes sense to (temporarily) ban Muslims? But how do they make sure someone is really a Christian?

Also the ban seems temporary to give them time to improve security checks.

Not saying it was handled well, but perhaps there is no other sensible way to do it? If you announce it beforehand, people you want to filter out will just rush to get through the door?

As for the Giuliani leak, I don't know - why not stick to actual policies, rather than rumors?

Re: I'm Loyal to Nothing Except the Dream

#209

Post by whorleater »

facepalm wrote: post #208
whorleater wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why do people claim it is a muslim ban, when really it seems to be a ban on countries that the US is fighting a war with (except Iran)? Whether there is a causality between "at war with the US" and "Muslim" seems to be another question? Because it omits Christians from the ban? Because it bans legal visa holders and (initially) permanent residents, who, I repeat, went through the immigration process legally and now…

Perhaps the US is at war with Muslim groups in those countries, so it makes sense to (temporarily) ban Muslims? But how do they make sure someone is really a Christian? Also the ban seems temporary to give them time to improve security checks. Not saying it was handled well, but perhaps there is no other sensible way to do it? If you announce it beforehand, people you want to filter out will just rush to get through…

> Perhaps the US is at war with Muslim groups in those countries, so it makes sense to (temporarily) ban Muslims? But how do they make sure someone is really a Christian?

That's the entire point, enforcing religious tests is absurd.

> Not saying it was handled well, but perhaps there is no other sensible way to do it? If you announce it beforehand, people you want to filter out will just rush to get through the door?

Yes, shocking enough, due process is necessary. And perhaps we don't grant visas and green cards to people who are considered dangerous then?

> As for the Giuliani leak, I don't know - why not stick to actual policies, rather than rumors?:

I'm fairly certain you're gaslighting at this point, but you can hear from Giuliani on live television himself. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF2k11QQW0g.

Post reply on HN