4 ms·

There is an extremely simple test for such arguments: would anyone make this argument if the person in question was Osama bin Laden? Suppose old Osama was a Has

There is an extremely simple test for such arguments: would anyone make this argument if the person in question was Osama bin Laden? Suppose old Osama was a Haskell wizard. Would anyone argue he should still be at the talk? No. But Nazis? Who make bin Laden's terrorism look like a rounding error? They're A-OK! And people wonder about why there's a diversity problem in tech.

moldbugisvile 11y ago
But Marxists, they're cool right? Edgy even! If you want to hold these standards and exclude someone like Moldbug, fine by me. But if you do that there, do it consistently. Newsflash: Che Guevera executed blacks, gays, nuns, and more in cold blood; his face is now considered a bland apparel decoration. Mao and Stalin and Pol Pot and Mengistu and many others killed and caused the deaths of 10s of millions of human beings, far more than Nazis could hope for. Marxism has never gone out of fashion on the left, and prominent tech speakers display their Marxist colors proudly. Who will boycott them and stand for the memory of the millions killed in Marxist suppression, genocide, and famine?
- zahmahkibo 11y ago
  I gotta say, this is some next-level red baiting.
  - 13thLetter 11y ago
    What was incorrect about his statement?
    - zahmahkibo 11y ago
      It is two thousand and sixteen in the year of our Lord. Redbaiting doesn't work any more; McCarthy is death. Screaming "BUT WILL SOMEONE JUST THINK ABOUT THE VILE, VILE COMMUNISTS?" at every turn to suppress dissent no longer works. It is an evasionist tactic.
      - 13thLetter 11y ago
        You've missed the point. Namely: If one person's semi-trollish advocacy of monarchy under a pseudonym several years ago means he's too dangerous to be allowed to speak at a tech conference, then surely other people's absolutely sincere advocacy of Communism under their own names, today, would make them even more dangerous, and they should also be barred from speaking... right? If not, why not?
        zahmahkibo 11y ago
        Because communism isn't more dangerous than Fascism
brighteyes 11y ago
1. Bin Laden actually killed thousands of people. If, instead, your example was a Muslim preacher who advocated controversial views, but was not violent himself nor the head of a violent organization, then yes - we should accept such a Muslim preacher, if he has an interesting technical talk to give. 2. Has Moldbug actually self-identified as a Nazi? He has offensive views to many, to be sure, but Nazi is much more specific, and to me, a weird way to interpret what he writes. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying that what you call "Nazi" I would call "disgusting, wrong, and troubling." The fact we don't agree on what precisely he is - even if we both dislike him - is one reason why we should not ban him. Especially since on other people we might not agree on who to ban (e.g. some consider abortion doctors to be literal murderers; should they ban such doctors from a programming conference?). 3. About the diversity situation in tech: the article mentions how another industry, medicine, handles this kind of thing. LambdaConf's decision is the default in that industry. In fact, in practically all industries. Yes the gender difference in tech is larger than in medicine. That is inconsistent with your claim.
- zahmahkibo 11y ago
  1. Do you think people like Hitler just arise out of the sea one day, like Aphrodite, completely unbidden? No. Worms like Moldbug lay the path for the actually physically dangerous people to rise up. 2. I'm not gonna get bogged down in a nomenclature debate. We both agree he's a terrible person; that's enough for my argument to work. 3. This would only be true if this were the ONLY factor for the diversity problem (there are others)
  - brighteyes 11y ago
    1. Sure, but trying to stamp out every person with opinions you think might lead to something bad someday is, frankly, more frightening to me than Moldbug. What you advocate threatens our existence as an open society. For social progress to happen, we need people to tolerate unlikable minorities. That's how things like gay rights happen, as 30 years ago, your arguments could have been use to ban a gay activist from a tech conference. Yes, tolerating unlikable minorities like whatever Moldbug is has risks. But it's a risk we have to take.

moldbugisvile 11y ago

But Marxists, they're cool right? Edgy even! If you want to hold these standards and exclude someone like Moldbug, fine by me. But if you do that there, do it consistently. Newsflash: Che Guevera executed blacks, gays, nuns, and more in cold blood; his face is now considered a bland apparel decoration. Mao and Stalin and Pol Pot and Mengistu and many others killed and caused the deaths of 10s of millions of human beings, far more than Nazis could hope for. Marxism has never gone out of fashion on the left, and prominent tech speakers display their Marxist colors proudly. Who will boycott them and stand for the memory of the millions killed in Marxist suppression, genocide, and famine?

zahmahkibo 11y ago
I gotta say, this is some next-level red baiting.
- 13thLetter 11y ago
  What was incorrect about his statement?
  - zahmahkibo 11y ago
    It is two thousand and sixteen in the year of our Lord. Redbaiting doesn't work any more; McCarthy is death. Screaming "BUT WILL SOMEONE JUST THINK ABOUT THE VILE, VILE COMMUNISTS?" at every turn to suppress dissent no longer works. It is an evasionist tactic.
    - 13thLetter 11y ago
      You've missed the point. Namely: If one person's semi-trollish advocacy of monarchy under a pseudonym several years ago means he's too dangerous to be allowed to speak at a tech conference, then surely other people's absolutely sincere advocacy of Communism under their own names, today, would make them even more dangerous, and they should also be barred from speaking... right? If not, why not?
      - zahmahkibo 11y ago
        Because communism isn't more dangerous than Fascism

brighteyes 11y ago

1. Bin Laden actually killed thousands of people. If, instead, your example was a Muslim preacher who advocated controversial views, but was not violent himself nor the head of a violent organization, then yes - we should accept such a Muslim preacher, if he has an interesting technical talk to give. 2. Has Moldbug actually self-identified as a Nazi? He has offensive views to many, to be sure, but Nazi is much more specific, and to me, a weird way to interpret what he writes. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying that what you call "Nazi" I would call "disgusting, wrong, and troubling." The fact we don't agree on what precisely he is - even if we both dislike him - is one reason why we should not ban him. Especially since on other people we might not agree on who to ban (e.g. some consider abortion doctors to be literal murderers; should they ban such doctors from a programming conference?). 3. About the diversity situation in tech: the article mentions how another industry, medicine, handles this kind of thing. LambdaConf's decision is the default in that industry. In fact, in practically all industries. Yes the gender difference in tech is larger than in medicine. That is inconsistent with your claim.

zahmahkibo 11y ago
1. Do you think people like Hitler just arise out of the sea one day, like Aphrodite, completely unbidden? No. Worms like Moldbug lay the path for the actually physically dangerous people to rise up. 2. I'm not gonna get bogged down in a nomenclature debate. We both agree he's a terrible person; that's enough for my argument to work. 3. This would only be true if this were the ONLY factor for the diversity problem (there are others)
- brighteyes 11y ago
  1. Sure, but trying to stamp out every person with opinions you think might lead to something bad someday is, frankly, more frightening to me than Moldbug. What you advocate threatens our existence as an open society. For social progress to happen, we need people to tolerate unlikable minorities. That's how things like gay rights happen, as 30 years ago, your arguments could have been use to ban a gay activist from a tech conference. Yes, tolerating unlikable minorities like whatever Moldbug is has risks. But it's a risk we have to take.