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

Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

811–820 of 980 posts

Re: Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed

#811

Post by NickC25 »

koolba wrote: post #782
btreecat wrote: post #732

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lack of enforcement mechanisms, captured courts, feckless political stooges, gullible public. E.g. Virginia governor illegally purged voters within a certain time window. Courts said "yeah that was illegal, you need to stop" VA attorney gen said "no I don't." And while the court of appeals agreed with the lower court "yeah simple violation of the law. Reinstate revoked registration." The VA supreme court was like "na…

> Lack of enforcement mechanisms, captured courts, feckless political stooges, gullible public. > e.g., Virginia governor illegally purged voters within a certain time window. Courts said "yeah that was illegal, you need to stop" VA attorney gen said "no I don't." And while the court of appeals agreed with the lower court "yeah simple violation of the law. Reinstate revoked registration." The VA supreme court was lik…

>The fact that he won the case means that it was not an illegal purge. It was expressly legal. The SCOTUS agreed as well: https://www.npr.org/2024/10/30/g-s1-30644/supreme-court-virg...

Your whole argument basically falls apart with this logic: "Republicans wanted to cheat to put a Republican in power, until they were stopped by a court of law, and when defeated, appealed to powerful Republicans, who voted along party lines to give more power to Republicans."

Re: Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed

#812

Post by caminante »

macNchz wrote: post #759
derangedHorse wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason why a slippery slope is a fallacy is that the starting point is an arbitrary threshold. Nothing here indicates the end of democracy to me. To someone looking to find some indication, anything can look like the beginning of the end.

Many of the circumstances being called out as concerning in recent weeks map well to historical examples—the framing of the argument alone doesn’t inherently invalidate it when we have good examples of comparable events (e.g. purge and installation of unqualified loyalists) precipitating critical, difficult to recover from outcomes (democratic backsliding) in other societies. When the stakes are so high, vigilance is…

> Many of the circumstances being called out as concerning in recent weeks map well to historical examples

They also map to historical counter-examples.

You don't have to go far. Take hysterical false positives like #RussiaGate, which turned out to be a manufactured hoax.

Re: Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed

#813

Post by NickC25 »

koolba wrote: post #786
sjsdaiuasgdia wrote: post #742

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of the problem is the incredible corruption at the Supreme Court. The courts increasingly can't be trusted to be a stopgap. https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/06/supreme-court-justices-milli... Then you have the current administration making veiled threats against senators to ensure they vote as intended. https://www.rawstory.com/morning-joe-today-2671089005/ This is why we need reinforcement of the governmental struc…

> Part of the problem is the incredible corruption at the Supreme Court. The courts increasingly can't be trusted to be a stopgap. Just because a body disagrees with your desired interpretation of the law does not mean its corrupt. I disagree with the liberal justices on just about every split decision, but I don't think they're on the take. They simply have a different philosophy of the law. I challenge you to find…

>Just because a body disagrees with your desired interpretation of the law does not mean its corrupt.

Have you heard of a gentleman by the name of Clarence Thomas? If you have, I'm sure you've heard about some of the gifts he's been given by people who had upcoming business before the court?

Re: Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed

#814

Post by slantedview »

michaelmdresser wrote: post #795
Bhilai wrote: post #785

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Get subscription of high value newspaper or magazine. Professionals work there, so you will get real facts, worthy opinions and less emotions. I struggle with this. It's incredibly challenging to find reliable, unbiased news sources these days, especially with the perceived slant of many major outlets. It's discouraging when even subscriptions to reputable publications like the NYT and WSJ leave you feeling like yo…

I’ve been sticking to the weekly edition of The Economist for years to stay informed while escaping the news cycle. The US coverage is remarkably good. The weekly cadence mean I’m often a week behind the news, but to me that’s a feature. The editorial pieces (those expressing “the opinion of the newspaper”) are kept separate as “Leaders” and I read them last, if it all; I usually read each issue back-to-front followi…

The Economist is not exactly a neutral source of information, and is very much pro-big business, which has caused it to take horrible positions on many important issues throughout its long history, such as overthrowing democratic governments, supporting dictatorships, etc.

Re: Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed

#815

Post by Gud »

Glyptodon wrote: post #290

I don't have outrage fatigue. Outrages are outrages and they are what they are. Are there many exaggerations and fake outrages? Sure. But things like the USA's current constitutional crisis are real. What I struggle with isn't fatigue at outrage, it's knowing what to do about it. I think violence is going to become more common, but I don't particularly think it will be effective. So less so than outrage, it's the fee…

Work on government reform. Work on bringing power back to the people, implement direct, decentralized democracy.

It might sound like a silly pipe dream. But it works extremely well in Switzerland and I promise it won't just work well where you live, your country will flourish.

Re: Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed

#816

Post by sjsdaiuasgdia »

NickC25 wrote: post #813
koolba wrote: post #786

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Part of the problem is the incredible corruption at the Supreme Court. The courts increasingly can't be trusted to be a stopgap. Just because a body disagrees with your desired interpretation of the law does not mean its corrupt. I disagree with the liberal justices on just about every split decision, but I don't think they're on the take. They simply have a different philosophy of the law. I challenge you to find…

> Just because a body disagrees with your desired interpretation of the law does not mean its corrupt. Have you heard of a gentleman by the name of Clarence Thomas? If you have, I'm sure you've heard about some of the gifts he's been given by people who had upcoming business before the court?

He ignored the link about Thomas' massive gift/donation totals in my earlier post. He's heard about it but might be willfully ignoring it.

Re: Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed

#817

Post by xocnad »

Bhilai wrote: post #785
majgr wrote: post #570

Living in Poland ruled by trumpists for 8 years I have these experiences: - Get subscription of high value newspaper or magazine. Professionals work there, so you will get real facts, worthy opinions and less emotions. - It is better to not use social media. You never know if you are discussing with normal person, a political party troll, or Russian troll. - It is not worth discussing with „switched-on” people. They…

> Get subscription of high value newspaper or magazine. Professionals work there, so you will get real facts, worthy opinions and less emotions. I struggle with this. It's incredibly challenging to find reliable, unbiased news sources these days, especially with the perceived slant of many major outlets. It's discouraging when even subscriptions to reputable publications like the NYT and WSJ leave you feeling like yo…

There is no such thing as an unbiased new source. Rpoerting only articles with pure fact there is still selection bias in what topics are covered and what facts are presented. Giving equal coverage across articles and within results in both sides reporting which can seriously tilt the article.

Choose reputable sources and read with an understanding of the corespondent's perspective as well as the publication's. Diversify your choices to not isolate yourself.

Re: Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed

#818

Post by koolba »

NickC25 wrote: post #811
koolba wrote: post #782

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lack of enforcement mechanisms, captured courts, feckless political stooges, gullible public. > e.g., Virginia governor illegally purged voters within a certain time window. Courts said "yeah that was illegal, you need to stop" VA attorney gen said "no I don't." And while the court of appeals agreed with the lower court "yeah simple violation of the law. Reinstate revoked registration." The VA supreme court was lik…

> The fact that he won the case means that it was not an illegal purge. It was expressly legal. The SCOTUS agreed as well: https://www.npr.org/2024/10/30/g-s1-30644/supreme-court-virg ... Your whole argument basically falls apart with this logic: "Republicans wanted to cheat to put a Republican in power, until they were stopped by a court of law, and when defeated, appealed to powerful Republicans, who voted along pa…

> Your whole argument basically falls apart with this logic: "Republicans wanted to cheat to put a Republican in power, until they were stopped by a court of law, and when defeated, appealed to powerful Republicans, who voted along party lines to give more power to Republicans."

Alternatively: "Republicans wanted to clean up the voter rolls by removing self-declared non-citizens. Democrats wanted to cheat by allowing those non-citizens to vote so they went judge shopping till they found one that was willing to temporarily stop the effort. Republicans followed the process and appealed through the court system. And the final ruling by the highest court in the land agreed with the Republicans that the action was legal.".

So I'd argue the Democrats challenging the case are the ones that ended up on the illegal side.

Re: Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed

#819

Post by NickC25 »

anamdhek wrote: post #642
warkdarrior wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much of the German population in the 1930s and 1940s was not aware of concentration camps, and learned of them once the Allies arrived.

Early 30s, sure. Late 30s and 40s? You should qualify your statement with “this is a heated historical debate, but some people argue that…” Keep in mind the significant incentives to not seek out information, to disbelieve the information one did come across, and to lie after the war was over.

One of my neighbors when I grew up was part of Hitler Youth, and had moved to the US after the war. (for time context, I'm in my mid 30s, and he died a decade ago at IIRC 95 or 96, and I asked him about it maybe 20 years ago.)

I asked him if he and his fellow youths knew of anything. He said at first, no, but pretty quickly when all the jewish-owned businesses vanished almost overnight, everyone knew something was up. Did they know about the camps? Debatable. But even the kids knew that they jewish population was kicked out of society.

Re: Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed

#820

Post by wonderwonder »

tuukkah wrote: post #771
wonderwonder wrote: post #770

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Friend, I'm not sure I follow you. My claim is still they are anti--trump based purely on their statements. You may attempt to twist their words however you like but taken at face value, they are clearly anti-trump. Their banner literally states: "This is what we're up against"

"If you are not for us, you are against us." Or how exactly does "we don't want to be Trump's friend" become "we are anti-Trump"?

Friend, I am not really sure what you are arguing. There website fundraising banner literally says they are against Trump, Musk and the rest. I'm not the one saying it, they are. If you disagree, your argument is with the Guardians editors.
Post reply on HN