6 ms·

As an attorney and someone in tech, I used to strongly admire Thiel. He left biglaw and took a gamble, and it paid off. But between his support for Trump and

As an attorney and someone in tech, I used to strongly admire Thiel. He left biglaw and took a gamble, and it paid off. But between his support for Trump and the Gawker nonsense, I no longer have any respect for the man. Anyone on record supporting trump is on the wrong side of history.

B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago
> on the wrong side of history Nikita Sergeyevich, is that you?
- elgabogringo 10y ago
  Point awarded. Context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_will_bury_you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_will_bury_you "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!"
  - _delirium 10y ago
    "History on our side" is a pretty common phrase, used by people of varying political stripes. A quick Google Books search turns up British MPs using it in the 1940s and George H.W. Bush using it in the 1990s, among others.
    - elgabogringo 10y ago
      Backward looking as a proofpoint, yes. Forward looking as a justification, no, it's not that common until recently and - at least to me - has a marxist sound to it.
    - B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago
      It's a bit of ideological poison, extracted from the root of the dialectical materialism tree (aka 'scientific socialism', as defined in the poems of Marx and Engels). The allegedly scientific basis is that there is an unstoppable march of historical progress, and you should cheer it on and actively lay waste to the obstacles that are going to be swept aside anyway. (Yes, it's a strange creed.)
      - _delirium 10y ago
        Isn't that more or less standard American ideology too? Manifest destiny, American exceptionalism, disruptive innovation... a whole cocktail of unstoppable onward marching. They disagree with the Marxists mostly in what is gloriously marching ever onwards, not that there is something doing so. There's even a popular patriotic song, The Battle Hymn of the Republic, about the onward marching.
        elgabogringo 10y ago
        Look, this isn't an ideology. More of an approach (not sure of the academic term for it, sorry.) I think it's marxist, though others have had the "inevitability of history" at times. As for your examples... Manifest destiny = forward looking. Wasn't good justification for expansion, though good justfications did exist. American exceptionalism = backward looking disruptive innovation = Neither, more just an adjective.
elgabogringo 10y ago
There's an irony to using the marxist derived "side of history" construct to support something you believe in. If there really is such a thing as history taking sides, Marx and his followers very clearly ended up on the wrong side. I imagine those co-opting the phrase now will suffer the same fate.
- DominikR 10y ago
  Even Political Correctness is a Socialist construct: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness#Early-to-mid_20th_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness#Early-to...
  - elgabogringo 10y ago
    hmm... So many of the "social justice" and "progressive" ideas have marxist roots.
rayiner 10y ago
On some issues maybe, on others probably not. I think he's on the right side of one key issue: http://www.salon.com/2016/06/22/donald_trump_is_no_lgbt_ally_he_shouldnt_be_the_only_voice_criticizing_islamic_intolerance http://www.salon.com/2016/06/22/donald_trump_is_no_lgbt_ally.... As a Bangladeshi with a beard I don't say that lightly, but we're at a weird point in history where only a guy not afraid of being called racist,[1] can take a stand (however opportunistic) on what is becoming a worldwide assault on cherished liberal social values. [1] As an aside, calling facially race-neutral comments about particular immigration statuses or religious beliefs "racist" is kind of offensive to people of that race who don't share that immigration status or those religious beliefs. I'm sure there are a lot of Hispanics in the US who came here legally who don't appreciate liberals saying that Trump wants to deport their families, as if all Hispanics are here illegally.
- elgabogringo 10y ago
  Pretty much. "Racist!", "Hate!". They are just buzzwords that serve to shut down debate.
  - pythia__ 10y ago
    Conversely, if you recognize this, do not let "liberal(ism)" become a thought-terminating cliche for you.
    - elgabogringo 10y ago
      I think I get what you are saying, but not sure. What is liberalism, BTW? Liberalism used to refer to philosophy of English enlightenment thinkers like John Locke and had natural rights as a large part of it's foundation. Today? well... hmmm... What is the intellectual foundation of today's "liberals"?
      - pythia__ 10y ago
        Not ceding classic liberalism with the word is the point. (Because ceding too much of it puts you at danger of a populist takeover, i.e., "literally Hitler".) Land explains this better (mentioning Thiel, too) at http://www.xenosystems.net/nrx-and-liberalism/ http://www.xenosystems.net/nrx-and-liberalism/. His thinking there should apply broadly to all non-left (non-)politics.

B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago

> on the wrong side of history Nikita Sergeyevich, is that you?

elgabogringo 10y ago
Point awarded. Context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_will_bury_you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_will_bury_you "Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!"
- _delirium 10y ago
  "History on our side" is a pretty common phrase, used by people of varying political stripes. A quick Google Books search turns up British MPs using it in the 1940s and George H.W. Bush using it in the 1990s, among others.
  - elgabogringo 10y ago
    Backward looking as a proofpoint, yes. Forward looking as a justification, no, it's not that common until recently and - at least to me - has a marxist sound to it.
  - B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago
    It's a bit of ideological poison, extracted from the root of the dialectical materialism tree (aka 'scientific socialism', as defined in the poems of Marx and Engels). The allegedly scientific basis is that there is an unstoppable march of historical progress, and you should cheer it on and actively lay waste to the obstacles that are going to be swept aside anyway. (Yes, it's a strange creed.)
    - _delirium 10y ago
      Isn't that more or less standard American ideology too? Manifest destiny, American exceptionalism, disruptive innovation... a whole cocktail of unstoppable onward marching. They disagree with the Marxists mostly in what is gloriously marching ever onwards, not that there is something doing so. There's even a popular patriotic song, The Battle Hymn of the Republic, about the onward marching.
      - elgabogringo 10y ago
        Look, this isn't an ideology. More of an approach (not sure of the academic term for it, sorry.) I think it's marxist, though others have had the "inevitability of history" at times. As for your examples... Manifest destiny = forward looking. Wasn't good justification for expansion, though good justfications did exist. American exceptionalism = backward looking disruptive innovation = Neither, more just an adjective.

elgabogringo 10y ago

There's an irony to using the marxist derived "side of history" construct to support something you believe in. If there really is such a thing as history taking sides, Marx and his followers very clearly ended up on the wrong side. I imagine those co-opting the phrase now will suffer the same fate.

DominikR 10y ago
Even Political Correctness is a Socialist construct: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness#Early-to-mid_20th_century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness#Early-to...
- elgabogringo 10y ago
  hmm... So many of the "social justice" and "progressive" ideas have marxist roots.

rayiner 10y ago

On some issues maybe, on others probably not. I think he's on the right side of one key issue: http://www.salon.com/2016/06/22/donald_trump_is_no_lgbt_ally_he_shouldnt_be_the_only_voice_criticizing_islamic_intolerance http://www.salon.com/2016/06/22/donald_trump_is_no_lgbt_ally.... As a Bangladeshi with a beard I don't say that lightly, but we're at a weird point in history where only a guy not afraid of being called racist,[1] can take a stand (however opportunistic) on what is becoming a worldwide assault on cherished liberal social values. [1] As an aside, calling facially race-neutral comments about particular immigration statuses or religious beliefs "racist" is kind of offensive to people of that race who don't share that immigration status or those religious beliefs. I'm sure there are a lot of Hispanics in the US who came here legally who don't appreciate liberals saying that Trump wants to deport their families, as if all Hispanics are here illegally.

elgabogringo 10y ago
Pretty much. "Racist!", "Hate!". They are just buzzwords that serve to shut down debate.
- pythia__ 10y ago
  Conversely, if you recognize this, do not let "liberal(ism)" become a thought-terminating cliche for you.
  - elgabogringo 10y ago
    I think I get what you are saying, but not sure. What is liberalism, BTW? Liberalism used to refer to philosophy of English enlightenment thinkers like John Locke and had natural rights as a large part of it's foundation. Today? well... hmmm... What is the intellectual foundation of today's "liberals"?
    - pythia__ 10y ago
      Not ceding classic liberalism with the word is the point. (Because ceding too much of it puts you at danger of a populist takeover, i.e., "literally Hitler".) Land explains this better (mentioning Thiel, too) at http://www.xenosystems.net/nrx-and-liberalism/ http://www.xenosystems.net/nrx-and-liberalism/. His thinking there should apply broadly to all non-left (non-)politics.