Live data from Hacker News

Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

nationalreview.com

51–60 of 110 posts

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#51

If this is really the problem conservatives claim it is, there's a simple solution: Get a backbone and delete your social media accounts. Most platforms (unlike HN) provide account deletion functions (though some keep them well-hidden).

Tom Cotton's editorial was not run in social media. This is much, much bigger than social media. Also, do you understand that you're advocating self-censorship? How is that a positive development for a liberal democracy, when large swathes of the population just remove their voices from the public debate out of fear for the "shoot first, don't ask questions" social justice mob?

You call it self-censorship. I call it opsec. In case you haven't noticed, we don't live in a "liberal democracy". We live in a police state, where anything you say or write can be held against you, and you're lucky if it happens in a court of law.

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#53
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This strikes me as awfully glib. My parents aren't racists and they empathize with the police reforms that BLM is advocating for (so do I). But they were raised with the belief that racism was due to prejudice. To them, racism is judging someone by their skin color / background rather than the actions of that individual. They don't buy into the idea of microaggressions and implicit bias. To many nowadays that makes t…

We're absolutely doing things that future generations will find abhorrent. And as our thinking as humans evolves, I hope we'll also change our behavior. But let's not make the perfect the enemy of the good. When we are aware that behaviors and symbols are hurtful to other humans, and we genuinely believe that other people should be able to live without fear, then we should change both. We're not going to get it 100%…

I can imagine some day in the future where people start tearing down statues because they were meat eaters.

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#54
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you aren't a moderate? I mean, you literally are calling anyone who participates in the internet these days insane. That hardly scans as a moderate take.

The ground has shifted. Someone who was a moderate in 1995 would be considered "alt-right" today.

I've been a moderate in 1995. At no point did I buy into ideology that we currently associate with the alt-reich.

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#55

> Sacramento Kings play-by-play announcer Grant Napear, who’s been calling games since 1988, was forced to resign after saying the words “all lives matter.” I thought 'All lives matter' was commonsense.

"All Lives Matter" taken literally totally is compatible with "Black Lives Matter". However "All Lives Matter" when said is not meant literally. No one said all livers matter until someone said "Black Lives Matters". It's an attempt to shut down "Black Lives Matter". And the opposite of "Black Lives Matter" isn't the opposite of "All Lives Matter", the opposite is Black Lives Don't Matter, which is what is happening…

As a counterpoint, look at what happens with the "it's okay to be white" posters. Completely benign, commonsense and not a reaction to something. And yet...

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#56
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

What does Putin have to do with anything? He runs a country that is not remotely communist (since at least 1991, nearly thirty years ago, last I checked)

That's why I had the caveat of "former". However, he's published NYT op-eds, and isn't exactly, I believe, considered persona grata in US politics, so there is precedent for the NYT running "officially distasteful" opinions.

Then again, the US doesn't seem to have any equivalent to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Camillo_and_Peppone

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#57
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you aren't a moderate? I mean, you literally are calling anyone who participates in the internet these days insane. That hardly scans as a moderate take.

The ground has shifted. Someone who was a moderate in 1995 would be considered "alt-right" today.

This is pretty hyperbolic. Somebody who was "moderate" in 1995 could be considered left-leaning or right-leaning today, depending on their specific politics, and in fact, without any specific context like "internet free speech", I would think a majority of them would be considered more left-leaning on average today. And even if that isn't true, the alt-right is a pretty specific flavor of hate-motivated shitposters, not just "people who are heavily right-leaning".

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#58
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"All Lives Matter" taken literally totally is compatible with "Black Lives Matter". However "All Lives Matter" when said is not meant literally. No one said all livers matter until someone said "Black Lives Matters". It's an attempt to shut down "Black Lives Matter". And the opposite of "Black Lives Matter" isn't the opposite of "All Lives Matter", the opposite is Black Lives Don't Matter, which is what is happening…

As a counterpoint, look at what happens with the "it's okay to be white" posters. Completely benign, commonsense and not a reaction to something. And yet...

Much like "radicalizing" the OK hand sign as meaning "WP," and the latest lolcow of making hawaiian shirts a sign of terrorist groups: seems like the right wing meme makers keep coming up with these things to alienate normies from activist types, and the left, who above all else in current year America, seems to enjoy thinking they have special knowledge that requires they lecture others about what is morally acceptable, keeps taking the bait. I don't see this pattern ending well.

Re: Welcome to America’s Cultural Revolution

#60
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To have an opposing view so toxic, amoral, and ethically vapid to risk being beaten, is to risk being beaten. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom of consequence. Advise practicing empathy.

You're saying that anyone who gets beaten for their opinion had it coming? Truly we live in evil times.

Absolutely did not say that. You seem to think the bar for being beaten for an opinion is so low that it's anything that goes against mainstream opinion.

Of course people should disagree, experience dialectics, have conversations, debate, spar, parry, and enjoy rigorous conversation.

But then there are sentiments that are beyond the pale. Should NAMBLA be allowed a late night talk show, or an NYT editorial to espouse their views? Should neo-nazis be given a soapbox, or even worse, access to a highly-targeted ad network to radicalize young men? Should Richard Spencer be punched in the face for being a bigoted piece of human garbage?

Should I be allowed to call him that? Is violence ever justified?

Post reply on HN