3 ms·

What's wrong with that worldview? Seems like the only issue is employers and landlords (??) overreacting. Why shouldn't someone be able to say "No soup for you

What's wrong with that worldview? Seems like the only issue is employers and landlords (??) overreacting. Why shouldn't someone be able to say "No soup for you 'cause I think you're an asshole?" Or why shouldn't I be able to not want to work with someone because they think npm did nothing wrong? I find it troubling what people get upset about these days. But it seems entirely their right to be upset about whatever they feel like. And others' right to mock them for it. It's disappointing that platforms like Facebook and Google don't seem neutral (the latter two taking steps to prevent gun sales). But until they're regulated it seems entirely OK for them to promote their own views.

abiox 11y ago
so, ideally, undesirables couldn't find shelter because nobody should be forced to have undesirable tenants. undesirable shouldn't be able to find food, because no entrepreneur should be forced to sell their goods to undesirable customers. undesirables, in an ideal world, should die slowly of hunger in the gutter. freedom!
defen 11y ago
> Seems like the only issue is employers and landlords (??) overreacting http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/articles/no-trump-voters-allowed http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/articles/no-trump-voters-allo... > I find it troubling what people get upset about these days. But it seems entirely their right to be upset about whatever they feel like. And others' right to mock them for it. The thing is, any individual actor doing these things is fine, and can look at their own actions and feel that they are acting ethically. But when that gets scaled up to the entire society, especially with outrage culture and mass coordination via instant worldwide communication it doesn't work. I don't know, it's like some weird variation on the prisoner's dilemma or something.
ankushnarula 11y ago
I think you're describing the right to free association. But when free association is dominated by mob mentality it becomes a minefield for dissenting voices.

abiox 11y ago

so, ideally, undesirables couldn't find shelter because nobody should be forced to have undesirable tenants. undesirable shouldn't be able to find food, because no entrepreneur should be forced to sell their goods to undesirable customers. undesirables, in an ideal world, should die slowly of hunger in the gutter. freedom!

defen 11y ago

> Seems like the only issue is employers and landlords (??) overreacting http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/articles/no-trump-voters-allowed http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/articles/no-trump-voters-allo... > I find it troubling what people get upset about these days. But it seems entirely their right to be upset about whatever they feel like. And others' right to mock them for it. The thing is, any individual actor doing these things is fine, and can look at their own actions and feel that they are acting ethically. But when that gets scaled up to the entire society, especially with outrage culture and mass coordination via instant worldwide communication it doesn't work. I don't know, it's like some weird variation on the prisoner's dilemma or something.

ankushnarula 11y ago

I think you're describing the right to free association. But when free association is dominated by mob mentality it becomes a minefield for dissenting voices.