Time to Take a Stand • Hacker News Board

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#391

Post by Senji » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:00 PM UTC

RangerScience wrote: post #261

ftrflyr wrote: post #214

I'm sorry, but you fail to understand exactly what the ACLU stands for - the first word says it all. American. Green Card holders, refugees, and illegal immigrants are not Americans. We need to and should protect Americans first. Period. For all of you who don't understand not agree with this, perhaps you are unamerican?

No. And when you find yourself calling people unamerican, you're doing horribly. Historical example? McCarthyism. Does the ACLU stand for American as in persons, American as in culture, American as in country...? Unless you work there, not up to you. ACLU getting in on this implies America as a lot of things. America as a dream. America as a land of laws. America as a corporate entity honoring agreements. And more. Y…

McCarthy was right. There were actual card carrying communist subversive active in the US. The Russians got the nuclear bomb faster then they would have precisely because of communist spies handing them the research.

Don't screach about McCarthy being wrong.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#392

Post by adamrezich » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:00 PM UTC

anonmous wrote: post #203

Is there a hn version without politics?

Is there a place where you can get video game news without politics?

Is there a social media hub without politics?

Is there a subreddit for atheism without politics?

Because of everyone having an Internet connection in their pocket, emotional meme battles ("politics") have infected every corner of modern society. You cannot escape.

The people who benefit from the emotional meme battling have made sure that you can't think logically about just about anything these days without hitting on a learned emotional trigger. Once you hit this trigger, you cannot reason about it any further, because your emotions override your powerful logical processing ability.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#393

Post by rajacombinator » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:00 PM UTC

Billionaire Silicon Valley tech CEOs are NOT sympathetic characters with the general public. (Or pretty much anyone outside the VC echo chamber.) Might as well ask the CEOs of Goldman Sachs and JPM to "take a stand." The only option SV has is to continue introducing bias and propaganda into their already heavily biased products.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#394

Post by jonstewart » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:00 PM UTC

Sama doesn't need to "remind anyone involved in this administration" about how they'll regret the actions of this administration. He simply needs to remind Congress--who can undo an executive order--and he can easily get their attention with lobbying and donations.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#395

Post by gcp » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:00 PM UTC

kawera wrote: post #195

jacquesm wrote: post #38

The time to take stand was 3 months ago. Things will get a lot worse now before they can get better and no amount of blogging is going to change that. Trump is hell bent on destroying America from within and his followers (who we are not supposed to criticize) are A-Ok with that. Soon to be seen in a theater near you in Europe as well.

Call me naive but Trump's repugnant behaviour and actions may well steer voters away from similar european candidates. The rise of Martin Schulz, plus Merkel, is probably enough to stop Germany's far right from gaining power. Austrians have shown restraint in the last election and at least for now Spain and Portugal are pretty safe. Will Hamon/Macron be enough to block the FN in France? Lest not forget that the FN in…

Call me naive but Trump's repugnant behaviour and actions may well steer voters away from similar european candidates.

Or it might show them that it's possible to "take action against the muslim/refugee threat" and they'll demand the same from their candidates.

The most terrible nuances, like the ban affecting permanent residents, weren't reported in the news here. Most people wouldn't understand how the US system works anyway.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#396

Post by innocentoldguy » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:01 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #219

djrogers wrote: post #8

> In doing so, we should not demonize Trump voters—most of them voted for him for reasons other than the promise of a Muslim ban. We need their eventual support in resisting actions like these, and we will not get it if we further isolate them. This is very important people - calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist homophobe, a moron, and not deserving of the franchise is not going to help anything. I didn't vo…

I've sen a lot of angst over the last week about people on the left expressing approval for 'punching nazis' following Richard Spencer suffering a whack on the ear during a TV interview. It's true, someone, probably form the left, carried out an act of physical violence while he was just standing there talking. But let's not forget that Spencer and various members of his social circle have - for years now - been expr…

I have questions about a few of your comments, if you don't mind indulging me:

1. Who is speaking for ethnic cleansing and genocide? Can you provide citations? I hear a lot of people talking out against illegal immigration, since it drives down wages and makes it harder for poor Americans to compete and make a living. I also hear politicking regarding banning muslims from entering the U.S., due to the fear of terrorism. I agree that an all out ban stinks of WW II internment camps (a bit close to home too, since my wife is Japanese), but I'm not sure how you can extrapolate genocide from those conversations. Disallowing people from entering the U.S. doesn't really equate to genocide, does it? I don't really know what you're referring to, exactly, since you didn't provide any citations, but "genocide" seems a bit hyperbolic to me, with the information I currently have.

2. Are you advocating physical violence against people who have differing opinions than you? You lead in with Richard Spencer, and then ended by saying you're not going to apologize for being against the political speech you're referring to. I'm curious if you're suggesting physical violence as a means of shutting down said opinions?

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#397

Post by woofyman » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:01 PM UTC

rfrank wrote: post #184

woofyman wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't change a closed mind. Trump can say the sky is green and his followers will agree.

Then just skip to violence and stop wasting time? You can absolutely change closed minds, and I don't think most of those people's minds are as closed as you perceive them to be.

I'm not advocating violence. You can't have a rational discussion with people who believe the universe is 6000 years old.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#398

Post by cryoshon » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:01 PM UTC

_m8fo wrote: post #7

Why is that all of these posts saying to "take a stand" fail to explain the political process? I'll just quote myself here. If you want to help stop trump the most effective ways are to: 1. Call - Local congresspeople (http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/) - Senators (https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/) - Local officials (https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials) 2. Participate - Get involved in local electi…

the only actions that matter at this point are going to be protests in which you bring thousands or millions of your friends and shut down economic activity in urban centers.

the democrats are a minority, and so they can't effect political change. the republicans are on board with trump, and so they won't effect political change.

that means that you have to effect political change by physically preventing the operation of the country to move forward until your demands are met.

you can't do this from your computer chair or your couch.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#399

Post by jonstewart » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:01 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #301

SamReidHughes wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not in Syria and thus can only repeat what other people say, but I've heard that ISIS is committing genocide against Christians, Yazidis, and Shiites. The source of this information is John Kerry.

Exactly. Doesn't it make sense to prioritize those people who are under the most persecution in those countries?

Yes, and those under the most persecution are primarily Muslims who oppose Assad, or just happen to live in areas of Syria that oppose Assad.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#400

Post by Koshkin » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:02 PM UTC

467568985476 wrote: post #296

cornholeconnie wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So only opinions that you deem acceptable are ok. So people are not entitled to their own opinions...

It's perfectly reasonable to kick a toxic person out of your community. Free speech means the government won't put you in prison. It doesn't mean that other people are required to entertain your opinions.

> reasonable to kick a toxic person out

I agree - as long as being "toxic" means hurting the business. But as far as the "community" is concerned, it would be interesting to know what percentage of it might be, if not in favor of, but rather tolerant to Trump being president, regardless of whether he is seen as a "presidential material" (whatever that means) or not.