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

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

#271

Post by worstspotgain » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 11:17 PM UTC

rightbyte wrote: post #264

worstspotgain wrote: post #24

[flagged]

You should specify if you mean Israel, China or Russia. It is impossible to tell which you alure to.

My post was intentionally generalized to stay on point. The "wise" know which. Some readers might truly (not disingenuously) not know, but then the argument would degenerate into a blind political flamewar - which is the key system in the weaponized trolling arsenal that made this all possible.

The only way to have this argument is on general terms - does a foreign adversary have an "effective right" to win elections by subverting the democratic process.

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

#272

Post by worstspotgain » Fri, Oct 11, 2024, 11:38 PM UTC

jmyeet wrote: post #266

cherrycherry98 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 li…

> You are trying to draw a parallel between mass deportation and genocide that I do find valid. Consider the 10 stages of genocide [1]. The anti-immigration hysteria is probably at stage 6 at this point. > The law defines the process for legal immigration and many people have broken the law. There are many categories of so-called "undocumented" migrants and you have to consider each group. Anti-immigration rhetoric f…

I completely agree with everything you wrote, with one small exception: Venezuela was destabilized by Putin's goon Maduro. Per-capita GDP has dropped 3/4-fold [1]. This accomplished two things:

- Reduce world oil production, boosting world prices and thus Russia's revenues.

- Create a migrant wave. This was the Western Hemisphere equivalent of the Syrian wave engineered by Assad, another goon. The waves are weaponized into anti-migrant hysteria by Putin's goons in countries that still have meaningful elections.

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/371876/gross-domestic-pr...

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

#273

Post by Nursie » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 1:30 AM UTC

mike_hearn wrote: post #254

Nursie wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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...

That first one seems to be a bit more protest than rally - but yes, he did seem to, and that’s quite unusual in the UK political landscape.

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

#274

Post by whaaaaat » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 2:46 AM UTC

ChocolateGod wrote: post #214

whaaaaat wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear, I believe both parties are anti-trans. Malcom X was spot on with the Fox and the Wolf -- they both want to eat the lamb, the wolf is just a lot more honest about it. I regularly argue that Biden has been specifically and materially awful to the trans community. Do not mistake me saying that Republicans want to do worse as somehow saying the Dems are good. But anti-trans legislation, particularly at the s…

> To be clear, I believe both parties are anti-trans This is IMHO the most toxic and divisive topic not just in politics, but in society too, it touches upon a universal long and cultural fabric of sex division. What you may consider anti-trans to someone else is updating legislation to cover something they never thought it would need to. Republicans or conservatives in general, may be opposed to same-sex marriage, b…

> may be opposed to same-sex marriage, but it doesn't specifically make them anti-gay.

It absolutely does make them anti-gay. "Gay people should have fewer rights than we do" is fundamentally an anti-gay stance.

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

#275

Post by stale2002 » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 4:53 AM 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.

I'm curious, why did you ask a question of me if you didn't care about what my answer was?

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

#276

Post by aprilthird2021 » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 8:50 AM UTC

sunshowers wrote: post #166

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't feel as if politics is a low stakes discussion in India, especially the religious end of political discussion. There are so many incidents of full blown riots and violence and killings over what people say about this and that religion or how you portray or don't portray this and that figure.

Religion absolutely is very high stakes. But there is a very deep seated cynicism about electoral politics in much of the country.

Yeah I agree, especially as many politicians sort of buy off the right communities to basically have the vote finished before we go to the polls

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

#277

Post by aprilthird2021 » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 9:02 AM UTC

binary132 wrote: post #198

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't feel as if politics is a low stakes discussion in India, especially the religious end of political discussion. There are so many incidents of full blown riots and violence and killings over what people say about this and that religion or how you portray or don't portray this and that figure.

That’s because it’s an identity thing. And it’s not just religion, it’s also different groups (right?) who have different opinions about what territory belongs to those groups. Is that something which frequently comes up as a subject of debate at table stakes political discussions? I don’t know how common it is for those conflicting parties to interact, but something tells me they don’t discuss politics about it calm…

Identity, caste, religion, and ethno-linguistic grouping are the backbone of Indian politics, so yes these things come up whenever any political topics come up

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

#278

Post by binary132 » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 1:48 PM UTC

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #277

binary132 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s because it’s an identity thing. And it’s not just religion, it’s also different groups (right?) who have different opinions about what territory belongs to those groups. Is that something which frequently comes up as a subject of debate at table stakes political discussions? I don’t know how common it is for those conflicting parties to interact, but something tells me they don’t discuss politics about it calm…

Identity, caste, religion, and ethno-linguistic grouping are the backbone of Indian politics, so yes these things come up whenever any political topics come up

and these debates happen peaceably between members of conflicting groups? doubt.

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

#279

Post by kelseyfrog » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 5:05 PM UTC

s1artibartfast wrote: post #203

kelseyfrog wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't sleep at night because it would cause cognitive dissonance. I don't think I'm capable of intellectualizing my way out of it. More power to the people who can do it. It's just not within my ability.

im curious what the dissonance is. what is the it in "out of _it_" is it just cultural instinct and expectation?

This is one of those comments that stuck with me. First because of my inability to articulate a response, but I've had some time to think.

When I think about why I'm uncomfortable with the idea, it stems from feeling like a lack the ability to push back against bigotry with tact. While some people have this skill, I do not. The consequence of this is either not engaging with bigots, or not speaking up when something bigoted is said.

I believe that not speaking up against bigoted beliefs implicitly normalizes their acceptability. What I mean by this is that I personally and deeply value tolerance and non-judgementalness with the exception of bigotry[1].

Faced with an inability to tactfully push back, I feel left with not engaging with folks who are overtly bigoted. Saying, "well you should not do that or feel that way," doesn't change the emotional response I have to that situation, it only pushes the intellectual part of me farther way from the emotional side creating a wider gap between feeling and intellect - effectively sowing greater cognitive dissonance.

More power to the people who have the skills to tactfully engage with bigots, but that's not me right now. Maybe someday.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

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

#280

Post by kelseyfrog » Sat, Oct 12, 2024, 5:06 PM UTC

s1artibartfast wrote: post #237

zero-sharp wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, other people have cognitive dissonance too. It's not just you. Being aware of the bad and still engaging doesn't mean that the issue is being ignored or given less weight. Most people are full of contradictions and often carry beliefs that might be seen as controversial (perhaps in hindsight). Maybe it's not appropriate to lump all controversial beliefs into one, but I think a small part of the problem is that we…

I dont think it is necessarily about the hard conversations with others. I think it is just convenient for some people to cut the world into black and white binaries and reduce other humans to one dimension. There is a human instinct resolve ambiguity, and barring that, heuristically paper over it. The more emotionally engaging a topic is, the more galling the uncertainty and cognitive dissonance is. The more distres…

There's two types of people, those who think in black and white, and those who think in shades of grey.