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

Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 213 posts

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#201

Post by mlrtime »

alganet wrote: post #196
mlrtime wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is anyone who voted for Trump a sucker?

I think the world is full of suckers right now, both right wing and left wing. Also, full of suckers for CEOs and celebrities. Suckers for AI utopia and so on. Trump somehow contributed to that radicalization (he is not the sole responsible for it though). I think many who support him don't see it that way, and instead interpret his actions as some sort of cheat codes for progress that cut through a lot of bullshit.…

Well said, thank you. The only thing I have a slight issue with is this.

"If made to chose though, I would definitely go left."

This is part of the problem I think. Many people (dare I say everyone) doesn't fit neatly in a left vs right. On certain topics, definitely, but not like a sports team.

So why do we just assume this from someone having a R or a D on their voter card or who they voted for last time?

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#202

Post by mlrtime »

gen220 wrote: post #149
mlrtime wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a humanity issue, this is a legal one. The president ran on removing people from this country who entered the country illegally. He is executing what he ran on and what the people voted for. I don't personally approve of all the tactics that are being used, however it is clear that some cities are not in favor of these Federal laws at all no mater which tactic is used. I also realize how quickly these con…

What if immigration courts are also starting to target people who came here legally? (Green card holders) What if they begin to find “clerical errors” in their applications that suggest their immigration status is “fraudulent and illegal”? And what if they begin to target naturalized citizens, but only ones who had the misfortune of being born in “terrorists countries” like China and Venezuela and Iran? At what point…

I don't deal in what-if hypotheticals... this is anxiety and I don't allow it. I also (try not to) don't allow manipulation.

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#203

Post by mlrtime »

dragonwriter wrote: post #142
mlrtime wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a humanity issue, this is a legal one. The president ran on removing people from this country who entered the country illegally. He is executing what he ran on and what the people voted for. I don't personally approve of all the tactics that are being used, however it is clear that some cities are not in favor of these Federal laws at all no mater which tactic is used. I also realize how quickly these con…

> This is not a humanity issue, this is a legal one. Its only not a humanity issue if you have no humanity, but, even so, it is also an issue where the President has been violating more than executing the law,

>if you have no humanity

Manipulation is a common tactic to try and persuade someone of a belief, politicians are great at it.

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#204

Post by mlrtime »

wredcoll wrote: post #160
mlrtime wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a humanity issue, this is a legal one. The president ran on removing people from this country who entered the country illegally. He is executing what he ran on and what the people voted for. I don't personally approve of all the tactics that are being used, however it is clear that some cities are not in favor of these Federal laws at all no mater which tactic is used. I also realize how quickly these con…

> country who entered the country illegally Why does the legality only matter when it applies to a minority we're demonizing? Trump's current wife very famously entered the US illegally, not to mention the dozens of other crimes trump has publically committed recently. People in these conversations very frequently bring up laws and legality but fail to recognize that laws only work when they apply to everyone equally…

>minority we're demonizing

Which minority is being demonized?

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#205

Post by mlrtime »

jibal wrote: post #190
rootusrootus wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be easier to accept a both-sides argument if there were good examples and counter-examples for what opposing viewpoints are equally reprehensible.

Your correspondent is on the other side (the one the video is critical of).

What side am I on, can you see the side now?

Are we on separate sports teams or armies in a war?

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#206

Post by gen220 »

mlrtime wrote: post #202
gen220 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if immigration courts are also starting to target people who came here legally? (Green card holders) What if they begin to find “clerical errors” in their applications that suggest their immigration status is “fraudulent and illegal”? And what if they begin to target naturalized citizens, but only ones who had the misfortune of being born in “terrorists countries” like China and Venezuela and Iran? At what point…

I don't deal in what-if hypotheticals... this is anxiety and I don't allow it. I also (try not to) don't allow manipulation.

FWIW the question about green card holders is not a what-if hypothetical.

https://www.npr.org/2025/04/01/nx-s1-5339698/green-card-hold...

I have a friend who’s been in the U.S. for 12 years and has been a green card holder for at least half that time. His siblings are citizens and minors. He and his parents are in the middle of being slow-motion deported, because the immigration courts are claiming his original application was fraudulent due to him being a national security threat. There is no new information or evidence that wasn’t in their original application. They just don’t like his country of origin and the high school his dad went to in the 70s. The whole family is trying to draw out the case so his siblings can finish high school before they’re deported.

These stories are everywhere. You can call them “anxiety” and try to ignore it, but this is not manipulation — it’s how this regime works. When they exhaust one layer of the vulnerable they have to go one rung higher up the ladder.

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#207

Post by gen220 »

mlrtime wrote: post #204
wredcoll wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> country who entered the country illegally Why does the legality only matter when it applies to a minority we're demonizing? Trump's current wife very famously entered the US illegally, not to mention the dozens of other crimes trump has publically committed recently. People in these conversations very frequently bring up laws and legality but fail to recognize that laws only work when they apply to everyone equally…

>minority we're demonizing Which minority is being demonized?

Which minorities are being arrested and deported and detained?

Non-citizens are a minority of people residing in this country (<15% of the population). This includes everything from people who immigrated here illegally, to asylum seekers, refugees, visa holders, and green card holders. And they’re being scapegoated for “crime”, unemployment, inflation, “domestic terrorism” (participating in protests).

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#208

Post by alganet »

mlrtime wrote: post #201
alganet wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the world is full of suckers right now, both right wing and left wing. Also, full of suckers for CEOs and celebrities. Suckers for AI utopia and so on. Trump somehow contributed to that radicalization (he is not the sole responsible for it though). I think many who support him don't see it that way, and instead interpret his actions as some sort of cheat codes for progress that cut through a lot of bullshit.…

Well said, thank you. The only thing I have a slight issue with is this. "If made to chose though, I would definitely go left." This is part of the problem I think. Many people (dare I say everyone) doesn't fit neatly in a left vs right. On certain topics, definitely, but not like a sports team. So why do we just assume this from someone having a R or a D on their voter card or who they voted for last time?

I don't know. If I were to guess, I would blame excesses in campaigning and polling as heavy contributors to the polarization effect.

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#209

Post by nirui »

worldsayshi wrote: post #129
nirui wrote: post #121

The firm got some good in it, sure. But as I see it, today people could be motivated by a firm of good meanings, then tomorrow a post with bad intentions could swing people the other way just as far. The firm was produced back in 1945, but we still hearing similar if not exact same racist and xenophobic talk points today across many countries of different backgrounds. This alone is telling. People don't really care a…

People will be more likely to have good intentions if they expect others to have good intentions. If there's a lot of distrust in society good intentioned narratives will lose their power.

People are more likely to have good intentions when they expect a good payback (including non-monetary as well as monetary ones) from the good intentions they gave out. It's more of a trade than care.

Organisms on this planet require resource to survive, but resource is limited. The nature is fundamentally a zero-sum game so that's what everything tends to fall back to when hard time comes. This is so predictable, played again and again, like we're cogs in a machine. Well, maybe we really are.

Re: Don't Be a Sucker (1943) [video]

#210

Post by [deleted] »

mlrtime wrote: post #200
rootusrootus wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If by sucker you mean in the context of the film's title, then that fits. If we use a more general definition of sucker, then I guess it depends on if the Trump voter wanted exactly what he is delivering. If they are getting precisely what they wanted, then they aren't really a sucker, they are something else.

So you are only not a sucker if you agree 100% on everything he does? And this is the first time in this nations history where that is true? Meaning its ok to partially agree with previous presidents and NOT be a sucker?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN