Is population density the reason Americans can't discuss politics? • Hacker News Board

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

#251

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 5:31 PM UTC

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?

#252

Post by cherrycherry98 » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 5:33 PM UTC

jmyeet wrote: post #91

No. Kurt Lewin is viewed by many as the father of social psychology [1], who made a name for himself particularly with studying the social dynamics that allowed the HOlocaust to happen, the psychology of obedience. What allowed otherwise ordinary people to go along with such horrors has been studied ever since. I believe MAGA will be studied in similar terms for similar reasons for decades to come as researchers will…

You are trying to draw a parallel between mass deportation and genocide that I do find valid. Rounding up people for deportation may be considered a violent act but not nearly to the degree of intentional mass murder. Also alluding that migrant internment camps (which would be temporary holding facilities for deportees) would be like something akin to Auschwitz (an actual industrialized mass murder facility) feels like more of a smear than a realistic argument.

The law defines the process for legal immigration and many people have broken the law. Either intentionally or through incompetence the government has failed to effectively enforce immigration law. If the people of the USA wanted open borders then they should consent to it via the democratic process.

Illegal immigration is not a victimless crime. It strains local resources to accommodate the influx of people. Housing costs are driven up and labor costs down for the most vulnerable in society. Unvetted criminals or gang members entering pose a threat to public safety.

That being said I don't feel good about the mass deportation and the pain and suffering it would surely cause people who mostly mean no harm to anyone and are looking for a better life.

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

#253

Post by JumpCrisscross » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 5:33 PM UTC

sunshowers wrote: post #173

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> being able to say, "I disagree, and discussing it further won't change my mind" is important Though, I would argue, unnecessary. If you faithfully believe, challenge shouldn’t be burdensome. If you’re open to revision, maybe they have a point. I’m not Epictetus, but unless your conversation partner is an idiot or a bore, there is usually something redeeming there.

We only have a finite amount of time on this planet.

Yet we’re in this very discussion.

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

#254

Post by mike_hearn » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 5:54 PM UTC

Nursie wrote: post #77

Swizec wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> rather than through the lens of the broken US political parties / election system This is key, in my observation as an immigrant from Europe who's lived here ~10 years. Europe for the most part has multi-party democracies meaning that for every pet cause you might have there is a party that focuses on your cause. Larger causes get parties that might even get elected into parliament. Those larger parties still have…

> americans have this weird thing where they worship politicians instead of treating them as disposable public servants who exist at the mercy of your vote As a British person I also find this weird. There was a tiny amount of it with Boris Johnson and that was mirrored in the very small cult of personality that rose up around Jeremy Corbyn. But for the most part politicians of all stripes are considered with mild di…

Corbyn was famous for organizing large rallies, if anything this was a criticism of him - he was much more interested in rallies and protests than leadership.

Pictures of Corbyn in front of huge crowds at rallies:

https://labourlist.org/2019/08/corbyn-encourages-labour-mps-...

https://www.counterfire.org/article/letter-left-corbyn-labou...

https://socialistworker.co.uk/news/thousands-rally-for-jerem...

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

#255

Post by archagon » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 5:55 PM UTC

I find it bizarre how many people are still discussing American politics as if there remain two sensible and balanced political parties in play. Unfortunately, we do not have that anymore. We have a coalition liberal/conservative Democratic party and a far-right Republican party that has driven straight off a cliff. One of the candidates for president is a vile, stupid, deeply corrupt rapist who literally tried to overturn the last election and now wants to be “dictator for a day,” while his closest allies[1] are radical ethno-nationalists who want to install an authoritarian state with 19th century cultural trimmings. Every other word these people speak is an unambiguous lie in service of riling up their base and accruing power. Candidates like McCain and Palin are but a blip in the rear view mirror.

At this point, I only have the energy to gawk in horror at the unfolding situation: discussing the minutiae of policy feels almost comical when the very soul of the country is at stake. Never could I imagine how much blatantly obvious evil could be laundered through the intrinsic balance fallacy of a two-party system.

[1]: https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-says-project-2025-auth...

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

#256

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 5:55 PM UTC

bruce511 wrote: post #81

bombcar wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In absolute numbers, your statement is true. But the deaths are not equivalent because of agency. Road deaths are "random". Obviously each one has a specific cause, but we're all equally at risk. We're all in agreement that they should be avoided, and we have significant legislation to improve safety (no one is advocating for drunk driving.) The issue either abortions is not the death part, but the agency part. Those…

[deleted]

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

#257

Post by mike_hearn » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 5:58 PM UTC

MeetingsBrowser wrote: post #227

olalonde wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically, "not aborting" may always cause the mother to die since childbirth always carries some risk. But if you mean a case where the fetus is already dead, I doubt many people would oppose the abortion? What are their arguments? I genuinely can't think of any. Maybe this is just a case of the law being ambiguously written and doctors erring on the safer side?

In my state abortion is illegal no matter the circumstances.

Which state is that? I thought the strictest laws at the moment were in Alabama, which does allow abortions in the case of a serious risk to the mother's life.

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

#258

Post by mike_hearn » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 6:04 PM UTC

ChocolateGod wrote: post #183

benterix wrote: post #182

It's enough to think for a couple of seconds to realize it has nothing to do with population density, otherwise you could freely discuss politics in less populated areas of the States. The real reason is that politics, and especially the two party system in most Western countries, is based on polarization, e.g. blaming the other party for all the evil of the world. It's not some abstract "politics". For left-leaning,…

> the two party system in most Western countries Pretty sure Europe is mostly multi-party systems where coalitions are the norm, so including North America the only two western countries where dual-party is the norm is the United Kingdom and United States (both use first-past-the-post which encourages dual-party systems). That said, I agree on two party systems promoting toxicity, the Brexit debate in the UK which wa…

Brexit wasn't a party issue, it was a referendum, so citing it as an example of two-party politics is a bit odd. Other European countries have also had referendums on aspects of the EU that were extremely bitter, often because the pro-EU side lost and then simply ignored the results/asked again.

It wasn't a near-perfect 50/50 split either. It was 52/48, which yielded a large margin of ~1.8M more votes to leave. Referendums in societies that only have them rarely will always be somewhere around the middle point, of course, as if there was already a clear majority in favour of one direction then it'd have been implemented already without the need for a referendum.

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

#259

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 6:05 PM UTC

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]

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

#260

Post by rightbyte » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 6:08 PM UTC

danaris wrote: post #202

rightbyte wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And being able to say, "I disagree, and discussing it further won't change my mind" is important. 'Agree to disagree' is just an opt out. At that point there usually isn't any agreement upon what is disagreed upon in the first place. It is a debate evasion. It is usually more honest to say 'I don't want you to convince me or the audiance otherwise'. But ye there is some endurance limit the discussion need to respec…

The problem with this position is that politics in the current situation are not just about minor details of tax policy or whether to build a bridge here or five miles away there . They are an existential matter for too many people. When the issue at hand is something like "I think black people deserve the same rights as white people," no, no one is ever going to convince me of the opposite. There is literally no poi…

I think it might be benifitial to not assume one self is the good guy. It doesn't work on a macro level to assume that.

You could change black and white to Palestinian and Israeli and suddenly most of these 'I would never' would have a very nuanced view on the matter.

But, as I agreed, there is a limit on stamina to discuss with the outmost fringe people.