Live data from Hacker News

Time to Take a Stand

blog.samaltman.com

491–500 of 1001 posts

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#491
post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But not Muslims from the 189 remaining countries. So maybe it's not, in fact, about Islam per se? Do you think there is such a possibility? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country

It's about Muslims (and only Muslims) from the 7 listed countries. I'm not sure how to make this any more clear.

> Emphasis mine. Why those 7 countries specifically though? Anything special about them?

I dunno. Is there?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/us/politics/refugee-musli...

"The visa-issuance process plays a crucial role in detecting individuals with terrorist ties and stopping them from entering the United States. Perhaps in no instance was that more apparent than the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001"

So the EO cites September 11 and other terrorist attacks. Yet most of the 9/11 attackers came from Saudi Arabia. Why is it not on this list?

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#492

I hope you mean "Peacefully Protest" I shut my eyes and ears once protesting becomes violent.

> I shut my eyes and ears once protesting becomes violent A lot of the freedoms you take for granted were achieved by "violent protests", including the "Boston Tea Party".

In that context the violence was targeted. The tea was owned by a company closely aligned with the state. So violence against a Trump property would make more sense then say just busting out a Starbucks window. This is even more true now that we know that Trump will keep his properties.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#493

In case anyone is still skeptical that this is really a Muslim ban and not just a blanket ban on refugees and immigrants, note that Trump has said he will give priority to Christian refugees: http://www1.cbn.com/thebrodyfile/archive/2017/01/27/brody-fi...

Irrelevant. The text of the order is what matters. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/us/politics/refugee-musli... Yeah, he's doing a shitty job communicating it, but what did you expect... > (b) Upon the resumption of USRAP admissions, the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made…

> to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.

Which religion is the majority in all of these countries?

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#494
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…

This is very important people - calling everyone who voted for Trump a racist homophobe Maybe they are not racist homophobes, but they voted a racist homophobe and his cabal into power. They knew that his was one of the expected outcomes. Voting is powerful and you are (co-)responsible for the outcome. If you don't want racist executive orders, don't vote for a racist. Simple as that.

Agreed. Trump clearly stated that he was going to institute a Muslim ban and didn't rule out a Muslim registry when asked by reporters, so this policy shouldn't be a surprise to those who voted for him.

Germans have accepted collective guilt for the Holocaust, and have come to terms with that, even though a minority first voted Hitler into power-and, as a consequence of this collective acknowledgement, popular support for Nazism has been purged from German culture.

In contrast, a large proportion of South African whites tend to equivocate when asked if Apartheid, which was voted for for generations of whites, before they voted it out, was bad (spoiler alert: it was evil, and I'm not going to relitigate why on HN again). The Truth and Reconcilliation Comission allowed for those who committed physical acts of violence to confess their crimes in return for forgiveness, but the broader plunder and evil of apartheid remains unacknowleged by much of white South Africa (and its diaspora), and it means that racism still permeates SA society.

Working class people are hurting all over the world. But the economic pain felt by Germans in Weimar Germany didn't excuse the Holocaust. They were voting for anti-Jewish violence, as much as they were voting for VW Beetles and autobahns. Similarly, the suffering of Boers at the hands of the British didn't excuse Apartheid.

I'm not equating the scale or scope of Trump's actions with the Holocaust or with Apartheid, but I do think that those who chose to vote for him did so with their eyes wide open, and knew what he stood for. Trying to forgive them, or excuse their actions before they acknowledge their own culpability is not healthy for anyone.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#495
Tech companies must use their advertising networks to influence public opinion on these issues.

Instead of ads for products/services, they should allocate space for ethical and moral issues.

Staying 'politically' neutral is no longer an option when we're dealing with issues which affect a great part of Earth's population, like climate change, globalised economy, aggression and war and so on.

Tech companies must get political - in fact, they must reinvent politics like they reinvented so many other fields.

We have to do this now or these people will slowly shut everyone down, like they did in China, Russia, Turkey, etc..

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#496

Trump has an anti-Muslim position because the recent bombings, shootings, stabbings, and semi-truck attacks in Europe have all been committed by Muslims. And it's not a coincidence - their ideology says that they are rewarded in the afterlife for killing "infidels" (us). Christians don't live by this kind of ideology.

None of this justifies discrimination against Muslims. I'm flagging this because this kind of incendiary racism has no place on HN.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#497

I strongly encourage people who consider Donald Trump to be a threat to consider arming themselves in accordance with the 2nd Amendment. While my hope for the future does not involve needing to use them, if the situation one day comes to that, I would prefer that people who are indifferent to the actions of this administration NOT be the only ones with guns.

But lebanon_tn, guns are scary and you're likely to get hurt if you have one in your house. It's much better to rely on the police to protect you. Why would you ever want to own a gun.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#498

Is there a hn version without politics?

Why is it acceptable to be so downright anti-political?

That's not necessarily the issue. There are places where people want to discuss politics, and places where those politics can be discussed constructively. A lot of HN members don't want HN to be a place where politics is a focus of a lot of discussion. It's also not necessarily a place where it can be discussed constructively. There are other places to be more actively political. HN doesn't need to be one of them.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#499

It makes me sad that politics has made its way to the top of HN. I'm relatively new here. One of the things I love about the community is that it has been something of an oasis over the past few months. This is in no way intended to denigrate the esteemed author or his thesis. I'm just disappointed that we're at this point.

I mean.... Stay out of the political posts? The tech stuff seems unaffected by this.

One thing I love about this community is that, even on divisive political issues, I usually see excellent discussion and points, specifically by people who disagree with me.

I want HN debating politics* because of how HN debates.

* But yeah, as long as it stays to DEFINITELY political posts. Only politics I want in my tech is language wars :P

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#500
post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

.

> Of course, one plausible explanation is that Democrats don't like Christians

That's a conspiracy theory with no evidence, not a plausible explanation. Refugees can't vote for a long time. There are too few to make any substantive electoral difference.

Post reply on HN