Time to Take a Stand • Hacker News Board

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#601

Post by 010a » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:44 PM UTC

> Guys, Donald Trump might be President. We need to speak out in our support for Clinton.

Donald Trump becomes our democratically elected President.

> Guys, _now_ is the time to take a stand against Donald Trump.

No, the time was 6 months ago. You failed.

It is astounding to me how little respect Silicon Valley elites have for the democratic process. This article is another instance of the continued marginalization of the massive voter base who voted for Trump, and, if it were read by them, would do nothing but convince them that Trump was the right choice.

How about, instead of saying "Trump is really bad", we encourage those in power to work with him and find solutions to the problems he has highlighted that work across the isle? Sam is just perpetrating class and party politics with this article, and its infuriating.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#602

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:44 PM UTC

briholt wrote: post #538

potatosoup wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've been killing Muslim families in these countries for years, even under Obama (a Nobel Peace Prize winner.) Like or hate Trump, I'm surprised that now is the time to be outraged. It should've been ages ago.

I suspect the outrage has less to do with a rational analysis of polices and world events and more to do with virtue signaling and groupthink.

[deleted]

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#603

Post by thex10 » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:45 PM UTC

Frondo wrote: post #553

_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…

You know who really needs to take a fucking stand? The low-level workers at these airports who are enforcing this bullshit ban. They need to grow some spines and start ignoring bad orders, no matter who they come from. "I was just following orders" was never an acceptable excuse to do the wrong thing.

I agree, but they often are the ones who have the most to lose. They lose their job and then aren't able to pay rent that month/feed their family etc.

A VP or probably even a middle manager taking a similar stand likely has cash saved up/secondary income/investments/other options to withstand this sort of change with fewer catastrophic results.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#604

Post by grzm » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:45 PM UTC

jonstewart wrote: post #563

grzm wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this is a high priority for you, have you personally dissociated yourself from people who hold views similar to Thiel's? Friends? Family? Coworkers? Employees? Employers? Business partners? Customers? Sam Altman and Paul Graham have spoken out. Sam has also posted specifically about Thiel ( http://blog.samaltman.com/the-2016-election ). They've donated to campaigns. They've likely done other things as well. If thi…

Yes, I have. As luck would have it, I also ran for a non-partisan local public office for my neighborhood in Washington, DC, and won. I have about a gnat's worth of power, but I'm trying to use it as best I can... and I don't have representation in Congress. What are you doing?

I'm actively trying to figure out how people can have constructive discussions with each other. The US is effectively split and I strongly believe that further isolating ourselves from one another only increases the polarization that resulted in the kind of election we had—across the board.

I'm glad to hear you're sticking to your convictions and getting involved. Unfortunately those two things alone, coupled with dissociation, can equally describe a lot of hateful groups as well. It can also lead to the "tyranny of democracy", when those in power aren't listening to those who they may disagree with yet still represent. I think all three (conviction, involvement, engagement) need to be blended for a truly fair and good end.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#605

Post by Groxx » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:45 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #444

scrollaway wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You focus so much on holding people accountable rather than prevention. Lay off seeking justice for a while, try to seek order instead. Listen to why people voted Trump rather than call them all bigots and justify it with "they knew what they were getting into". As a european who truly despises Trump: This idea that you're too busy blaming people for being racist to spend time listening to them is honestly frightenin…

Lay off seeking justice for a while Dude, I'm also European and I've spent 25 years listening to and debating with conservative people - in person, on the net, at academic gatherings and many other places. I have studied a wide variety of conservative philosophies and social groups. At what point are you OK with me drawing some conclusions, even temporary working conclusions that I might have to alter later? When I h…

Valid, but I think it comes mostly from the loudest people being the ones that haven't done so. They're the ones that need attention, because they're driving so many personal attacks (which largely make people more extreme, not less).

As always, there are exceptions (like you). Which is broadly what the comment was claiming - Trump voters are not 100% made up of nazis, in essence.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#606

Post by pavlov » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:45 PM UTC

smacktoward wrote: post #174

fowlerpower wrote: post #84

This is absolutely nuts. Green card holders (legal permanent residents of the United States) are being turned back from the US as soon as they get to the airport. They are being forced to file waivers which can be denied. How can legal permanent residents be denied entry? I mean this has to be breaking So many laws, how can this be ok?

Laws do not enforce themselves. They only have power when there are people with authority willing to stand up and enforce them. Without that, they are just words on paper. Right now all three branches of the Federal government are in the hands of the Republican Party. Trump has one branch; the other two have no interest in opposing him, so long as he lets them do what they want as well. So for the moment, at least, t…

The judicial branch is not in Trump's pocket (at least yet), but it moves much more slowly than the two others.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#607

Post by refurb » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:45 PM UTC

Frondo wrote: post #553

_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…

You know who really needs to take a fucking stand? The low-level workers at these airports who are enforcing this bullshit ban. They need to grow some spines and start ignoring bad orders, no matter who they come from. "I was just following orders" was never an acceptable excuse to do the wrong thing.

How do you know they aren't already doing it? From what I've read, the Executive Order was somewhat vague. Border officials do have some discretion.

Maybe they are strictly interpreting it in order to cause an outrage?

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#608

Post by googlryas » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:45 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #362

einarvollset wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Data does not support your opinion (yes I know Latinos is only one minority): https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-probably-did-bett...

Yes it does. The fact that Trump did slightly better than Romney doesn't alter the fact that he still lost big with that demographic.

Yes, but it brings into question the 'hateful rhetoric' narrative, when it appears that minorities did not perceive it as such(at least, based on how they voted). If minorities viewed Trumps statements as dangerous to them, wouldn't you expect fewer minorities to vote for Trump than, say, Romney?

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#609

Post by chvid » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:45 PM UTC

Silicon Valley should let go of politics and look inward; only supporting one party leaves you without influence when the other party wins.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#610

Post by cryoshon » Sat, Jan 28, 2017, 8:45 PM UTC

cderwin wrote: post #336

stonogo wrote: post #168

> This is very important people It's also complete bullshit. I actually live in a Trump-supporting area, and everyone I know who voted for him is ecstatic about this disgusting, offensive action. Trump is a bad person, and the people who voted for him are bad people, and I hope to God I 'push them away' as far as they'll get from me.

Honest question: how do you think a country where nearly half of its population are "bad people" should be governed? I can't imagine you'll actually be successful in pushing away one out of every two Americans. What do you think would be proper action to devalue the influence of these people and where in the world would you draw the line?

unfortunately, my answer to this is hypocritical, given the trump presidency: drag the regressives kicking and screaming into a more liberal future, one step at a time, carrying their dead weight as gently and as gracefully as we can, because it's the right thing to do.

i don't care if it sounds scary: the backward people of the world are our brethren, and we can't leave them behind even though they're inconvenient and ungrateful. they resent us looking down on them, but they have earned it.

it's what we as a liberal society have done for 200+ years now. the conservatives never get tired of losing on the long term because they frequently win battles in the short term.

the march toward enlightenment would be much faster without the dead weight of the viciously tribalistic and the willfully ignorant. but they're humans too, so we're obligated to improve the lives of their grandchildren by working toward a better future today. their grandchildren will be more liberal, and so, we'll have won.

this is a paternalistic view, to be sure. but we've seen how inept the backward tribes are at managing their own futures... and how much effort they expend on trying to ruin it for everyone else. better to let more evolved minds guide the rubes.