Luxury beliefs are status symbols (2022) • Hacker News Board

Re: Luxury beliefs are status symbols (2022)

#341

Post by littlestymaar » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 6:42 PM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #334

littlestymaar wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just found this on Google and because this is behind a paywall you haven't read it, right? Because the argument made here isn't the one you think it is: it's about financing social care in order to be able to make crime disappear (making the police “obsolete”). Now I don't think that's realistic, and no matter how fair your society is going to be there would always be the need for some police in the end (the auth…

> You just found this on Google No, it went viral three years ago when it came out and I remembered it. > Because the argument made here isn't the one you think it is: it's about financing social care in order to be able to make crime disappear (making the police “obsolete”). Yes, and? That’s exactly the argument I think it is. > Yes the provocative title is an invitation to strawmans but you fell for the trap A stra…

> Yes, and? That’s exactly the argument I think it is.

Then why are you responding in a thread along with someone who takes the argument as in “literally remove the police directly and let the chaos begin”? And why are you using this article as a support for their argument?

> A strawman is when you misrepresent a position as being absurd

No, a strawman is when you misrepresent someone's argument as being another absurd argument. The argument in the article isn't the one that automatic6131 is arguing against, and since you quoted the article as if it was, you're effectively making a strawman against it.

If you think the argument in the article is absurd, that's fine that you criticize it, but it's not what you're doing here.

Re: Luxury beliefs are status symbols (2022)

#342

Post by sangnoir » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 6:49 PM UTC

steveBK123 wrote: post #263

indigo945 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not call the author a racist, and to be quite honest, I fail to understand how one can reach that conclusion outside of a willful attempt to misrepresent my criticism.

No, you deflected by immediately discounting the author as being predictably, in your estimation, anti- feminist / anti- anti-racist. Is this so different? It's saying the thing without saying it.

> Is this so different? It's saying the thing without saying it.

This is reductive and only true in a binary world. If I question some anti-terrorism approaches, does that make me pro-terrorism? Of course not, but one could dishonestly accuse another of that to silence them or derail the conversation (see The Dixie Chicks). The world is hardly ever black and white.

Re: Luxury beliefs are status symbols (2022)

#343

Post by denton-scratch » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 6:54 PM UTC

erik_seaberg wrote: post #326

denton-scratch wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The royal family is rather an extreme example; they are classy as well as being powerful and wealthy. They royals are the epitome of aristocracy; people descended from kings and peers of the realm are a small minority of the upper class. Sometimes classy people fall on hard times; so yes, they make their own breakfast. But they don't lose their class. Flying coach is also an extreme example; anyone who can afford bus…

When Americans see “public school” we think of what you would probably call a “state school,” funded by taxes and not at all targeting elites.

Yeah, I know; but I don't know a better word. In this context, it's not about education you have to pay for privately; it's about a group of institutions designed to train the ruling class, particularly the colonial civil service. You do have to pay, though...

Re: Luxury beliefs are status symbols (2022)

#344

Post by lom888 » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 6:55 PM UTC

catlover76 wrote: post #337

lom888 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, the deflections of 'racism' and 'sexism' are thought-terminating cliches bandied about in an act of pure class war. No need to listen to Trumpies talk about immigration and how it effects their community if they're all racists; that makes them the other and we can just pretend they don't exist.

I have genuinely never heard or read a Trump supporter discuss any practical effect of immigration, illegal or otherwise, on their actual communities. It's all very theoretical, based on hyperbolic and often false "news" items, and involves a heavy dose of borderline glee in being emotionally callous and selfish. At beast, I have seen people misread statistics to support their position, but, again, that's not really…

Okay, here's something written by Trump supporter and Cal State Fresno prof. Victor Davis Hanson discussing the effect of immigration on a community where he has lived since 1970:

https://www.hoover.org/research/diversity-illegal-immigratio...

Re: Luxury beliefs are status symbols (2022)

#345

Post by sangnoir » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 6:58 PM UTC

MisterBastahrd wrote: post #320

lelanthran wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I figured out as soon as I saw the link title that the author's examples for "luxury beliefs" would just so happen to be associated with a feminist and anti-racist outlook. Isn't the author's point that the examples correlate very highly with affluence? The fact that it may/may not be correlated to something else might be relevant, but I'm not seeing the relevance.

This article might be the single most vapid thing I've read all day, and I just read a Bari Weiss article for context. Author leans in quite heavily to his own bonafides... somehow able to rise from foster homes to the military to graduate from Yale. Neato. And then he gets REALLY basic shit wrong. "Working class" does not mean "lower middle class white folks." Go ask 10 "working class" black folks whether this count…

Painting your ideological opponents as "elite" and "out of touch" is a political trick as old as time, it encourages the listener not to engage the subject purportedly supported by the elite, but instead dismiss it out of hand as something no regular man should even bother themselves with.

Bonus points for making them elites in academia who apparently do not know how the "real word" works.

Re: Luxury beliefs are status symbols (2022)

#346

Post by nec4b » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 7:06 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #330

nec4b wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess both, one hand they don't have the time to come up elaborate ideological concepts/fantasies and on the other hand they don't really have the power to change anything. If the most egregious thing you can be accused of is "publicly dumping cases of Bud Light", I don't think you are at the same level as the inventors and executioners of the cultural revolution for example.

> If the most egregious thing you can be accused of is "publicly dumping cases of Bud Light", I don't think you are at the same level as the inventors and executioners of the cultural revolution for example. The people doing that (and moreso, spreading the idea of it) largely are the intelligentsia (and largely not the proletarian intelligentsia), and while that’s one particular demonstrative act , its not by far the…

If they can't be even accused of dumping Bud Light cases (you say even this was devised by the intelligentsia), what is then the most egregious thing the poor did?

Re: Luxury beliefs are status symbols (2022)

#347

Post by XajniN » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 7:13 PM UTC

jlos wrote: post #258

neilk wrote: post #106

Let’s consider the contrary. Do poor people sometimes hold highly questionable beliefs, promulgated by institutions, and does professing these beliefs in expensive and flamboyant ways confer status? Religion ticks all these boxes. In some contexts, so does patriotism, racism, worship of the military, publicly dumping cases of Bud Light, etc etc etc. In some ways, even disdain for education is a sort of expensive stat…

> Religion ticks all these boxes Regular participation in religious services is of the most beneficial activities a person can do for their mental health. I'm not saying this as a platitude, but as a well documented observed phenomenom [0][1]. To the point, I regularly see studies on benefits to those who regularly attend religious services and have never seen a study showing any adverse affects from it. That is not…

> But irreligiosity does not scale

It does scale, only ~13% of the population of the Czech Republic are religious (affiliated) [1], and additional ~10% are not affiliated but consider themselves as believers [2].

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20220121163456/https://www.czso....

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Czech_Republic...

Re: Luxury beliefs are status symbols (2022)

#348

Post by DontchaKnowit » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 7:15 PM UTC

MisterBastahrd wrote: post #320

lelanthran wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I figured out as soon as I saw the link title that the author's examples for "luxury beliefs" would just so happen to be associated with a feminist and anti-racist outlook. Isn't the author's point that the examples correlate very highly with affluence? The fact that it may/may not be correlated to something else might be relevant, but I'm not seeing the relevance.

This article might be the single most vapid thing I've read all day, and I just read a Bari Weiss article for context. Author leans in quite heavily to his own bonafides... somehow able to rise from foster homes to the military to graduate from Yale. Neato. And then he gets REALLY basic shit wrong. "Working class" does not mean "lower middle class white folks." Go ask 10 "working class" black folks whether this count…

There is not a state that will jail women for a failed pregnancy. Thank you for contributing to the ever-fucked up and misinformed conversation about abortion.

Re: Luxury beliefs are status symbols (2022)

#349

Post by catlover76 » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 7:21 PM UTC

lom888 wrote: post #344

catlover76 wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have genuinely never heard or read a Trump supporter discuss any practical effect of immigration, illegal or otherwise, on their actual communities. It's all very theoretical, based on hyperbolic and often false "news" items, and involves a heavy dose of borderline glee in being emotionally callous and selfish. At beast, I have seen people misread statistics to support their position, but, again, that's not really…

Okay, here's something written by Trump supporter and Cal State Fresno prof. Victor Davis Hanson discussing the effect of immigration on a community where he has lived since 1970: https://www.hoover.org/research/diversity-illegal-immigratio...

That is a valuable perspective and all, and I don't discredit it (or concern for curbing illegal immigration as a top policy priority in general), but I'm not sure it's that persuasive for the point you are trying to make.

Let me put it this way: pointing to one cogent article by a non-representative Trump supporter (you won't find many of them in academia, and the college-educated skew liberal/Dem) doesn't really make me change my mind about writing most of them off as racists based on my personal experience and what most of them say (which is not as cogent and reasonable as this guy's article).

Re: Luxury beliefs are status symbols (2022)

#350

Post by tenacious_tuna » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 7:26 PM UTC

jlos wrote: post #258

neilk wrote: post #106

Let’s consider the contrary. Do poor people sometimes hold highly questionable beliefs, promulgated by institutions, and does professing these beliefs in expensive and flamboyant ways confer status? Religion ticks all these boxes. In some contexts, so does patriotism, racism, worship of the military, publicly dumping cases of Bud Light, etc etc etc. In some ways, even disdain for education is a sort of expensive stat…

> Religion ticks all these boxes Regular participation in religious services is of the most beneficial activities a person can do for their mental health. I'm not saying this as a platitude, but as a well documented observed phenomenom [0][1]. To the point, I regularly see studies on benefits to those who regularly attend religious services and have never seen a study showing any adverse affects from it. That is not…

I broadly agree with your statements that in general religion brings better mental health to a population and that there's a void of community in populations that aren't centered around religion. That's something I've personally felt, growing up in the Christian church and existing outside of it as an adult. I feel like saying there's never adverse effects or that "irreligiosity does not scale" misses the point in a few ways.

First, there's pretty obvious harmful effects of religion: on the minor end, feeling ostracized if you happen to be different than what the stated beliefs say are correct, i.e. being queer in the Christian church and ostracized or driven to suicide for it. (Or even more fundamental issues, like taking issue with men being the head of households.) On the extreme end, you have crusades, pogroms, wars that engulf nations. Obviously relatively harmful. Or even on the individual scale, ritual killings of those who defy the religious order.

I'd also posit that, again from the Christian faith, believing there's an all-powerful god who will sort out justice in the afterlife leads to negative outcomes here on Earth: believing you'll have everlasting life in heaven is of course going to limit your investment in systems here on Earth. I've had religious people cite (paraphrased) that "god will sort it all out" when I ask why they don't push to directly address more of the problems in the world. There's an abdication of responsibility I've found relatively common amongst my religious family on such issues. (Not universally, notably, but still.)

Regardless, for those who have "lost faith" on epistemological grounds, what is the alternative to irreligiosity? I don't "choose" not to believe in the Christian (or any other) god, I'm unconvinced by the evidence put forward by their evangelists. I have no philosophically sound alternative to atheism unless and until I encounter convincing evidence to the contrary.

I also worry about people "giving up" some of their philosophical beliefs just to belong to that kind of community. I've talked before [0] about how other more extreme communities (e.g. flat earth) aren't so much comprised of people who believe the premise of the group so much as people who _want to belong somewhere_.

> But irreligiosity does not scale

What's the alternative? The atheist segment of the population giving up portions of their ethical and philosophical autonomy to churches in exchange for a sense of community? Continuing to enable the hold of said autonomy over those who believe largely because they aren't exposed to other epistemologies because their community center discourages it?

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37068007