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

Shame on Y Combinator

marco.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 1001 posts

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#591

Post by jshevek »

e40 wrote: post #371
ElComradio wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost nobody will agree with the idea that in an ideal world built upon the "marketplace of ideas" that someone should be constrained from expressing political opinions for fear of losing their employment. In fact this being so is a primary driver of Trump's anti-PC appeal.

Can we stop with the straw man of people getting fired for their views! That is so over the top as to be ridiculous.

We have seen many examples in the last decade of "enemies of the left" being fired and no platformed for their views. This campaign targeting Thiel appears to be a product of the same value system, so it is understandable that some people consider it relevant to the discussion.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#592

Post by bloaf »

mc32 wrote: post #472
tptacek wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is in fact not a fundamental principle of democracy. There is no work of political philosophy anywhere that suggests we should be able to say whatever we'd like "without fear of repercussions". What is a principle of liberal philosophy, though, is that we should be tolerant of the beliefs of others (in the sense of not intervening to suppress them), including intolerant beliefs, until those intolerant beliefs th…

It may not be, but looking back many people view the blacklisting of American communists as antithetical to democracy even though their philosophy would have it to overturn our system and forge into a communist one. Blacklisting people because we think they are a threat to our society is what enabled employers of the past to make it hard for people of an opposing view to get jobs because their politics were "anti-Ame…

I think this comment should be higher. Industries have done exactly what Marco wants[1] and it was not a good look for America.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_blacklist

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#593

Post by macspoofing »

Upvoter33 wrote: post #91
thght wrote: post #85

Shame on you for blaming Y Combinator. If it was 1.25 million for Clinton you would probably praise Y Combinator, no? This feels more like a clash between your personal political preferences and Mr Thiels's. You are just blaming Y Combinator to inflate this story, trying to get more people on the Clinton side. Shame on you!

Why do people keep making this false equivalence between the two options? One candidate has repeatedly taken racist and sexist stances, as well as demeaned those who are handicapped (and honestly, the list goes on and on). If people don't take a stand against this type of thing, it is a tacit acceptance.

> One candidate has repeatedly taken racist and sexist stances

I dislike Trump immensely, but this narrative that this guy is OBVIOUSLY a racist, homophobe, a misogynist whatever, is not good for your country. Every election the DNC dog-whistles that the GOP candidate is all those things in order to discredit their opposition. For example, Romney was a flake but generally a decent guy and yet he was spun as a misogynist!! He's not a misogynist. Trump is a narcissist and a huckster, but he's not a racist. I'm not even sure he's a misogynist either.

You cannot disparage your opposition like that. It's unproductive because it entrenches supporters in their views and even radicalizes them. You're basically alienating 100 million people from mainstream politics - do you really really want to do that?

Stick to the issues.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#594

Post by macspoofing »

smt88 wrote: post #89
projectileboy wrote: post #84

Replace "Thiel" with "communism" and much of this article (and many of these comments) could be taken from the 1950s. McCarthyism is unacceptable from the right or the left.

McCarthyism was not about firing rich people for donating massive amounts of money to public political candidates. There is no similarity here.

It sure as heck had to do with your political beliefs.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#595

Post by webXL »

Shame on Marco. I can't stand Trump, but I also can't stand this ganging up on Thiel. I guess the fact that he's a billionaire means he can be bullied, but this political bullying has a chilling effect that leads to the lackluster choices we get for president every four years.

Thiel sees Hillary as a bigger threat to his interests than Trump. To prefer an outcome does not imply you favor all aspects of that outcome. As arrogant and simple-minded as Trump comes across, he didn't stay wealthy without delegating his authority, and there would be violence to no-end if he appointed racists and sexists to high-level positions. That egomaniac ultimately seeks admiration, and the threat of "deporting illegals" was most-likely (you never know and that's why I'm not voting for the guy) a strategy to get the nomination.

Instead of Thiel, we should be admonishing our media, which couldn't have hand-picked two more controversial figures and allowed themselves to be manipulated at every step. We should be admonishing Hillary and Trump supporters who turn a blind eye to their unethical tactics and ends justify the means mindset. The ends (aka political payback) usually just result in more corruption and more things to fix with government. We need to stop this cycle. We can start buy turning off the TV, and considering a third party.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#596

Post by dkrich »

dkrich wrote: post #476
tptacek wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People keep claiming that this sentiment is "profoundly illiberal". Those people should read more liberal philosophy, because it is not as if this is the first time this issue has come up. You can bring it back to John Stuart Mill if you like, but (very unsurprisingly) it's also one of the major themes of post-World-War-2 liberal philosophy. We are not required to tolerate intolerance when intolerance poses a threat…

I don't disagree regarding Trump, but where do we draw the line? Should any employer who's executive board strongly denounces Trump's views and rhetoric fire employees who support him via donations? Should Google suppress his website? I don't think Trump is the real threat to society, but rather that he is able to garner such widespread support in American society in 2016, and I don't think that's going to be fixed b…

@ggggtez Those who think that Trump is the most divisive and dangerous candidate ever have short memories or don't remember Richard Nixon or Barry Goldwater. I certainly do not support Trump and wholly disagree with whatever little bits of policy that he has discussed throughout his campaign, but I also try to be historically honest about context.

For example, some might forget the things that Bill Clinton did before and during his Presidency which were opportunistic, sexist, and at times, borderline racist. For example, things like personally overseeing the execution of a mentally deficient inmate to show that he was tough on crime (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricky_Ray_Rector), or chasing a woman around his office and biting her (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juanita_Broaddrick).

I realize Hillary is not Bill, however she supported him throughout his career through numerous serious ethical and character missteps, never left him, and now has him stumping for her on the campaign trail, which sort of makes her a de facto supporter of his behavior. Is Thiel's support of Trump really so bad that he should be ostracized and cut off? That doesn't solve the root problem of Trump's support, and it's not something I believe has any place in an enlightened society.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#597

Post by beachstartup »

chourobin wrote: post #211
nugget wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many very smart, educated, and informed people I know believe that Hillary has effectively monetized public service/political influence and is the most corrupt major party nominee to run for the Presidency in modern history. If people don't take a stand against that type of thing, isn't that tacit acceptance as well? Pick your poison, so to speak. Hillary's supporters will argue that she's not corrupt and has been in…

In 30 years of public life, there hasn't been a single shred of evidence to back up that claim. These people you know are sadly misinformed.

> hasn't been single shred of evidence to back up that claim

saying stuff like this doesn't help your cause. it really, really doesn't.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#598

Post by macspoofing »

smt88 wrote: post #131
projectileboy wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, none of the Hollywood writers who were blacklisted were rich? And none of them donated time or money to Communist causes? The intolerance is almost exactly the same.

I don't have a problem with a private company, such as YC or a production company, firing someone for publicly donating a massive amount of money to a political candidate. McCarthyism was different because: 1. Many of the people who were fired, blacklisted, or persecuted were only suspected communists. 2. Somewhat related: if any of the blacklisted people were rich enough to do so, they didn't publicly donate their d…

>McCarthyism was different because ...

... you really really dislike Trump and/or the GOP. That's the difference here.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#599

Post by jonasty »

tptacek wrote: post #204
ThomPete wrote: post #127

Marcos understanding of this situation is extremely telling for a fundamental problem with many americans relationship with politics. Most only get involved around election. After that their political interest is non existing. It's easy to get lured into the idea that politics is a simple choice between the moral good and the moral bad, that the choice is simple and that there is a one to one relationship between wha…

That is in fact not a fundamental principle of democracy. There is no work of political philosophy anywhere that suggests we should be able to say whatever we'd like "without fear of repercussions". What is a principle of liberal philosophy, though, is that we should be tolerant of the beliefs of others (in the sense of not intervening to suppress them), including intolerant beliefs, until those intolerant beliefs th…

Oppression of expression of opinion is more harmful to American society than Trump is.

Firing someone for supporting Trump is oppression of expression of opinion.

This is a great example of how "progressives" are often just as bigoted as the "bigoted" conservatives they oppose.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#600

Post by ythl »

tptacek wrote: post #558
edanm wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Sam Altman cannot coherently believe this while supporting Peter Thiel [,...]" Why not? This is the only part of your comment I have a problem with. People can coherently have two values that they care about, and have to weigh one against the other. It is totally legitimate to think that Trump is a threat to democracy, to completely oppose Thiel, but to also think that firing someone for their political beliefs is a…

The problem with this logic is that you're multiplying a very low probability against a truly catastrophic outcome. The expected value result of that calculation is still very, very bad. But I also disagree about Trump's prospects. As I wrote elsewhere on the thread: I think we underestimate the likelihood that Trump will win, and further I think we're going to be in exactly the same struggle in just 3 more years, wh…

> Even as a liberal Democrat, I feel sorrow for the loss of a loyal opposition and a voice for limited government.

I always got the impression from my liberal friends that they would be overjoyed controlling the house, senate, and oval office until the end of time with no opposition.

Post reply on HN