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

Andrew Yang Founds the Forward Party

forwardparty.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 638 posts

Re: Andrew Yang Founds the Forward Party

#461

Post by gmadsen »

eej71 wrote: post #456
gmadsen wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think its more philosophical than an rubric for actual governance. The constitution was deeply influenced from enlightenment thinkers and basically the first of its kind that influenced the rest of the world.

Agreed! Towards that end I would recommend the recently published book _America's Revolutionary Mind_. It provides a comprehensive (and sometimes exhausting!) overview of the influence of Locke and other enlightenment thinkers on the evolving mindset of the pre-Revolutionary war era. It's not just a review of well known names - but shows just how much Locke's ideas really reached a large range of the then every day r…

very cool! appreciate the recommendation.

Re: Andrew Yang Founds the Forward Party

#462

Post by realce »

netcan wrote: post #436
realce wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1000% agree.

Glad to hear it. Yang Gang had/has the seeds of an interesting political paradigm, and a lot of that just emerged as people showed up on the sub. The paradigm was just not built to last, grow or evolve. Do you see a path from A to B? It would be a shame to see a general dispersal, without any form of continuity.

A lot of people worked very hard to build that bridge from the flash of the POTUS run to a more typical "movement" structure, but even in those efforts the disconnect between the motives and trust of the volunteers vs Andrew's crew was omnipresent. Humanity Forward couldn't even convince the volunteer orgs to adopt their name or charter without some extreme pushback due to their treatment of volunteers during the campaign. They further picked that network clean during the mayoral run, either disillusioning members with his poor, corporately-controlled campaign, or trying to leverage supporters that had nothing to do with NYC.

The path from A to B has already happened IMO. Andrew gave a certain group of people the ability to rise above their cynicism and feel politically useful for once. That feeling frees people and makes them uppity in the face of entrenched power, which is great. The next step of this whole game is YG ownership of this "party" instead of acting like it's Andrew's property, leading to a distribution of power throughout the network. Then you attack localities, like city councils and mayoral races, and build a new narrative closer to a "people's party" than "Andrew Yang's Party"

The party has to feel like the internet did: Anyone with the grit and intelligence can break through, meritocracy be damned.

Sorry to write a book about it lol.

UBI isn't a pipe-dream for NEETs, which is what it was in 2016.

Re: Andrew Yang Founds the Forward Party

#463

Post by _hilro »

geeB wrote: post #388
realce wrote: post #353

I raised over 400k for Andrew's POTUS run and devoted a year of my life to running his official Reddit (104k subs at peak), then joined a SuperPAC to further his positions after the run. The campaign team was full of fools who squandered almost every good turn received, most campaign workers were paid less than minimum wage, and Andrew eventually stole the pac's name and branding - Humanity Forward - put everyone out…

I do not have any personal experience, but sadly it does not sound too surprising from what's been out publicly. The moment he dropped out and immediately got the CNN job really changed my perception of him. Then after some events from his mayoral campaign, such as his Israel comments or the Staten Island ferry cowboy incident, it's pretty clear he is a politician like many others.

> the Staten Island ferry cowboy incident

What's suspect about that?

He stopped a guy assaulting a photojournalist and you have issues with it??

Re: Andrew Yang Founds the Forward Party

#464

Post by unethical_ban »

rajin444 wrote: post #381
richwater wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've given so much time to this person it's insane. _why_?

I have a high level of skepticism for anyone who is a reddit moderator. This is purely speculative and anecdotal, but the ones I've known are not generally healthy, stable people.

I'm a reddit mod for a 100k+ geographical sub.

I volunteered when I thought the mods did a poor job on something and DM'ed them, and one invited me to help.

So every day or three, I hop on and help clean out the report queue if it's stacked up.

Being a decent person, modding can be difficult because the internet is full of bad-faith people and idiots. Applying a consistent standard in a way that keeps the sub clean while allowing real conversation is tough, so it is a lot of judgement calls.

I could go on, but it is a tough job. I do it because I want the "chatroom of the city" to be as friendly as possible. I tend to let "merely stupid" comments get downvoted to oblivion, but name-calling or straight-up disinfo (I tend to look at their profiles for context) gets deleted quickly.

And yeah, I step away from it a few days a week, simply because caring too much will keep you steeped in horrible comments and stupidity far too much.

Re: Andrew Yang Founds the Forward Party

#465

Post by frankbreetz »

realce wrote: post #400
frankbreetz wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is disappointing to read, I guess it is true what they say: you don't become a billionaire by being a good person.

Not a billionaire, very meagerly "rich"

Wow, you are right[0]! I don't think I would even call him rich.

[0]https://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-politicians/democr...

Re: Andrew Yang Founds the Forward Party

#466

Post by Loughla »

runako wrote: post #452
Loughla wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think so. Again, that's focused very much on semantics. If you dive in and really ask questions, outcomes are seen as the same, even if inputs are seen as different. Pollution is a problem, in their views, even if it isn't causing global warming . The individuals (who I would note are actually very much in the minority) who steadfastly believe global warming isn't real, still identify that changes in species…

Thank you for the thoughtful explanation. Do you have any explanation for why these folks pretty reliably choose representation that pledges to relax environmental protections? Is it possible that they are concerned about the environment, but not concerned enough to matter at any practical level (e.g. given their expressed actions)?

Money, and a lack of understanding of the tragedy of the commons. That's the pure and simple of it.

I need to be able to exploit [resource a] to be able to feed my family. For example, take fertilizing a field or crop. So it runs off into the water. Well, that has never been a problem on my farm. I don't have algae blooms and my pond is fine. They don't seem to understand that they are just one small part of the larger picture of all of the nitrogen and phosphorous flowing into streams, rivers, lakes, etc. Source: The Obama era watershed protections that everyone was up in arms about.

They are very willing to express their concerns in their own backyard. Whether that is fostering native species, eliminating invasive species, or even adjusting farming/other practices to ensure the sustainability of their own soil. It just falls apart when it translates into policy across the board.

I feel like it's a lack of common definitions and something basic, but I don't really get it, to be honest.

Re: Andrew Yang Founds the Forward Party

#467

Post by trgn »

Pelic4n wrote: post #391
realce wrote: post #353

I raised over 400k for Andrew's POTUS run and devoted a year of my life to running his official Reddit (104k subs at peak), then joined a SuperPAC to further his positions after the run. The campaign team was full of fools who squandered almost every good turn received, most campaign workers were paid less than minimum wage, and Andrew eventually stole the pac's name and branding - Humanity Forward - put everyone out…

>He's not trustworthy, he's a horrible manager of people, and he never pays off on what he promises. The man was running for POTUS. Do you expect the men who lead the world to uphold your own moral standard? From Machiavelli's The Prince: >Every one admits how praiseworthy it is in a prince to keep faith, and to live with integrity and not with craft . Nevertheless our experience has been that those princes who have…

That's a selective reading. In fact, I wish more politicians would actually read the Prince, and explicitly incorporate the overall lessons. Machiavelli mostly advices leaders of not surrounding themselves with yes men, not letting their vanity cloud their judgements, lead modest and exemplary lives, be prudent with finances, prefer predictability and stability in all things, known their own limitations, not be greedy.

The popular readings for The Prince focus on the passages about scheming, ruthlessness, the palace intrigue basically. It's only a blip in the actual book.

If you do come away with a cynical reading of the Prince, it's not only about the supposed celebration of the amoral ruler, but also (maybe more) about the stupidity and fickleness of their subjects, or the gaggle of untrustworthy sycophants and rivals at court.

Re: Andrew Yang Founds the Forward Party

#468

Post by oneplane »

temp8964 wrote: post #460
realce wrote: post #353

I raised over 400k for Andrew's POTUS run and devoted a year of my life to running his official Reddit (104k subs at peak), then joined a SuperPAC to further his positions after the run. The campaign team was full of fools who squandered almost every good turn received, most campaign workers were paid less than minimum wage, and Andrew eventually stole the pac's name and branding - Humanity Forward - put everyone out…

> most campaign workers were paid less than minimum wage This is something really strange. If you work for a campaign, it is very very very very different from working for the Mcdonal's. You work for a campaign because you support its ideology, and you want it to win. You are not trying to make a living by working for a campaign. I would even say, you are not working for the campaign, you are working for yourself! It…

So you'll pay for your house, food, and other living requirements with what then?

Every time someone tries to make a case for paying people not enough to survive they just seem to forget that externalities exist...

Re: Andrew Yang Founds the Forward Party

#469

Post by brightball »

netcan wrote: post #446
brightball wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He would do better running as a Libertarian IMO. There's been support for UBI within the LP for a while, the party simply lacks candidates with a compelling story. In 2016 though, if the people who voted Green Party would have voted LP the LP would have earned 5% (instead it earn 3.5%) of the popular vote granting it full federal funding through the entire next election cycle. It's the closest any third party has com…

If he's planning on endorsing candidates in other parties, that's probably an option. OTOH, why take on all that baggage when it doesn't come with any votes? Probably makes more sense to recruit former LP and Green figures to run under the new banner.

You think it’s going to be easier to start a new party vs one that’s had growing support for over a decade and aligns with many of his values?

Re: Andrew Yang Founds the Forward Party

#470

Post by vorpalhex »

temp8964 wrote: post #460
realce wrote: post #353

I raised over 400k for Andrew's POTUS run and devoted a year of my life to running his official Reddit (104k subs at peak), then joined a SuperPAC to further his positions after the run. The campaign team was full of fools who squandered almost every good turn received, most campaign workers were paid less than minimum wage, and Andrew eventually stole the pac's name and branding - Humanity Forward - put everyone out…

> most campaign workers were paid less than minimum wage This is something really strange. If you work for a campaign, it is very very very very different from working for the Mcdonal's. You work for a campaign because you support its ideology, and you want it to win. You are not trying to make a living by working for a campaign. I would even say, you are not working for the campaign, you are working for yourself! It…

A major part of American politics is that the non-wealthy can participate.

This means we need to pay people like campaign workers enough to live so they don't need to be independently wealthy.

This doesn't extend to every person. There are volunteers who just seek donations and such.

Post reply on HN