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

Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

georgesaines.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 302 posts

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#241

Post by HDThoreaun »

bombcar wrote: post #73
nineplay wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pregnant women are dying because they are not getting appropriate medical care. Doctors are unwilling to give pregnant women appropriate care because they may face criminal charges. This is happening directly because of legislation that has been pushed forward exclusively by one political party in this country. So I find it hard to understand how someone can care about women's health and support these policies. I'm f…

More women will die today from vehicle related injuries than will die all year from prevented abortions. But one topic is at the top of all the news, the other is ignored, because it's so common.

Society has decided that car crashes are a worthy trade off for having cars. Its not in the news because the vast majority of americans agree that cars are good even if they have downsides.

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#242

Post by HDThoreaun »

deathanatos wrote: post #134
s1artibartfast wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing- Imagine you think killing fetuses is akin to murder. What response would you give to your own point? There is a huge list of counteragents someone could make if they start from that basis, and your counterpoint does nothing to impact them. Everyone is talking past each other with arguments which make sense to them, but are largely off target for the other person.

… really? Let's say, for sake of argument, that a fetus is a life, equal in rights to that of a human. What counterpoint is there to support the argument that 2 dead is better than 1 dead?

This has been thought about quite a bit. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-deontological/

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#243

Post by kelseyfrog »

stale2002 wrote: post #240
kelseyfrog wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact it's a privilege to not have to worry about moral purity. Being able to look past views without personal consequences is life free of that burden. Some people don't have that option.

Sure, it would suck to have some sort of very serious mental disorder that forced one to hyper fixate on things that they have no ability to control or effect, and for which it is detrimental to focus on that as opposed to one's immediate and day to day problems. So, in some sense it is a "privilege" to not have such a rare and extreme problem. But, mostly the privilege is in the other direction, and the people with…

Maybe you can give an example where you feel like you had to compromise your morals because you're not rich, wealthy, and undiscriminated? It would help to have something tangible to talk about.

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#245

Post by stale2002 »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #243
stale2002 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, it would suck to have some sort of very serious mental disorder that forced one to hyper fixate on things that they have no ability to control or effect, and for which it is detrimental to focus on that as opposed to one's immediate and day to day problems. So, in some sense it is a "privilege" to not have such a rare and extreme problem. But, mostly the privilege is in the other direction, and the people with…

Maybe you can give an example where you feel like you had to compromise your morals because you're not rich, wealthy, and undiscriminated? It would help to have something tangible to talk about.

> had to compromise your morals

Well, going back to the original hypothetical that was brought up about making friends with racists.

Befriending the racists can actually be a pretty effective way of getting the racists to stop assaulting you at school every day.

If that example is too extreme, you can go with "making friends with people to work together on homework so you can graduate".

And, you are what you pretend to be sometimes, and eventually that stuff can turn into real friendships.

I would never judge someone for doing that.

But you seem to think that making moral "compromises" must mean that one's life is free from burdens.

By all means, do what you need to do in your life.

But, it is extraordinarily insulting that you are calling people privileged for having the "luxury" of not being morally pure, and not being able to pick and choose perfect friends.

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#246

Post by kelseyfrog »

stale2002 wrote: post #245
kelseyfrog wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you can give an example where you feel like you had to compromise your morals because you're not rich, wealthy, and undiscriminated? It would help to have something tangible to talk about.

> had to compromise your morals Well, going back to the original hypothetical that was brought up about making friends with racists. Befriending the racists can actually be a pretty effective way of getting the racists to stop assaulting you at school every day. If that example is too extreme, you can go with "making friends with people to work together on homework so you can graduate". And, you are what you pretend…

It sounds like you find my outlook reprehensible.

This is a great example of how communication between people with different outlooks breaks down. We'll eventually get frustrated, call it quits, and never speak again. It's the exact pattern played out in miniature.

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#247

Post by caeril »

marxisttemp wrote: post #231
bongoman42 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The interesting thing is, it is hard to tell which side you are talking about here. I've heard exactly the same thing from both the left and the right.

Is it? Is it really hard to tell? This isn’t about what you’ve “heard from both sides”. Which actual rights is the left seeking to take away that would make you so confused about which side is being referred to?

Yes, it's hard to tell if you're capable of objectively viewing the absurdity of modern politics.

The left is very clearly attempting to curtail the right to free speech, free association, and economic freedom.

The right is very clearly attempting to curtail the reproductive rights of women, and freedom of movement across borders.

Sure, if you're inured to the "my side is angelic, and the other side is evil", it's easy to tell. But stepping outside of that, it's pretty clear that both sides are gunning for their own specific versions of tyranny.

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#248

Post by [deleted] »

caeril wrote: post #247
marxisttemp wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it? Is it really hard to tell? This isn’t about what you’ve “heard from both sides”. Which actual rights is the left seeking to take away that would make you so confused about which side is being referred to?

Yes, it's hard to tell if you're capable of objectively viewing the absurdity of modern politics. The left is very clearly attempting to curtail the right to free speech, free association, and economic freedom. The right is very clearly attempting to curtail the reproductive rights of women, and freedom of movement across borders. Sure, if you're inured to the "my side is angelic, and the other side is evil", it's ea…

[deleted]

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#249

Post by JumpCrisscross »

marxisttemp wrote: post #232
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's burdensome to repeat that, "Yes, I think trans people are humans with complex interior lives who mostly want to be left alone So…don’t. Listen to why they think that. The point is it’s fine to walk away still disagreeing but understanding why a little better. > On an internet forum? Oh hell no, I’m talking about in person.

[flagged]

> listen to someone explain why they think trans people aren’t humans with complex interior lives who mostly want to be left alone

Honestly, yea. Because here’s the wild thing: they’re not crazy. Or at least, they’re no crazier than the ostensibly-tolerant New Yorkers who have all kinds of misconceptions about a separate portfolio of characteristics. They’re also a significant fraction of voters. So if trans rights are something you actually care about, you should absolutely understand the arguments that sway a disinterested centre. (And I can’t think of a better argument for someone disinterested than one who won’t even entertain a conversation.)

On almost any issue there are passionate fringes and a disinterested centre interested in casually discussing a topic or not discussing it at all. Understanding the mechanics around how the former motivate (or exhaust) the latter is interesting and core to democratic politics.

Re: Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics?

#250

Post by [deleted] »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #246
stale2002 wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> had to compromise your morals Well, going back to the original hypothetical that was brought up about making friends with racists. Befriending the racists can actually be a pretty effective way of getting the racists to stop assaulting you at school every day. If that example is too extreme, you can go with "making friends with people to work together on homework so you can graduate". And, you are what you pretend…

It sounds like you find my outlook reprehensible. This is a great example of how communication between people with different outlooks breaks down. We'll eventually get frustrated, call it quits, and never speak again. It's the exact pattern played out in miniature.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN