4 ms·

I really don't think it's reasonable to put this level of responsibility on others' actions (yourself? fine). Three years ago, regardless of your political stan

I really don't think it's reasonable to put this level of responsibility on others' actions (yourself? fine). Three years ago, regardless of your political stance, you couldn't drive to work without implicitly supporting foreign oil interests (not everyone can afford housing with great "walk scores"), now you might be able to if you can afford an electric car (still, a pretty unreasonable expectation). Voting? Sure, that's one thing, but buying a USB sound card from an American e-commerce site (which, I really had no reason to doubt you actually did a few moments ago in the first place...)?! What's the politically aboveboard alternative here? Building your own DIY DAC from 'MURICAN-made Texas Instruments components (yeah, I'm sure they have a "morally cleansed" supply chain, too...)? You're taking things to the extreme. Yes, a butterfly flapping its wings can cause a hurricane, but let's be realistic here. Given that there is such a fine line between reductio ad absurdum and strawman, my position stated a bit more clearly: Employees' political views shouldn't _completely jeopardize_ their livelihood in the form of causing them to lose their jobs. "Conflating the private responses of private parties and the public actions of the government is at best misguided and at worst dishonest." I'll give you that. It probably wasn't fair (even though, as they say, if it smells like a rat...) for me to assume recent actions taken by Facebook towards Palmer were a direct result of his public political activity/views. EDIT: I can't resist casting judgment, but in this day and age of dire social problems like "climate change" and "black lives matter," I think it's telling that your idea of political activism is buying, of all things, a USB sound card.

eropple 10y ago
I think you have tremendously misunderstood my post if you think I was calling buying a USB sound card "political activism." I called it political expression. One of literally dozens, perhaps hundreds expressions I performed today. And those political activities, those actions within the context of my polity, reinforce my views on society (and ambivalence or a lack of give-a-shit is, too, a belief). Now, you are definitely, one hundred percent right that there are cases where there are no good answers and you have to do the best you can with what you have available! But Donald fucking Trump (or Palmer fucking Luckey) have no interests that relate to such things. You don't have to live in TrumpCo housing, you don't have to buy Trump Steaks, you don't have to watch The Apprentice (though that's probably dead now), and you don't have to buy an Oculus Rift. So the idea of castigating people for opting not to support people whose active practices are bad and wrong and should not be promulgated is absolutely bonkers-silly. I compromised when buying that USB sound card because I would, all things being equal, buy a device from a seller who used labor practices and manufacturing practices that I was 100% on-board with--but I couldn't source one in the time I needed and I have a budget, and I needed it for a project whose failure would be more harmful to people I know and interact with on an everyday basis than the marginal harms caused by the purchase. But I thought about it before I did it, and came to the conclusion that it was an acceptable expression of what I actually believe. You express your political beliefs--and your religious beliefs, and your philosophical beliefs--not just by your vote, but by your actions. Every day. It never stops. You can never, ever, ever opt out. These beliefs are your character, and your character is who you are in the dark. Either you do them, or you don't believe them. There's no middle ground. You can't have beliefs and then not practice them (to the best of your ability, with natural accommodations for factors that prevent you from practicing them--like, this is why I emphatically don't cast Oculus employees in a poor light for being unfortunately attached to that company, because most people can't up and quit a job at a moment's notice). If the idea that "the practice of your beliefs is the having of them" is extreme, then we should all off ourselves and let the cockroaches have their shot. But it's not extreme. It's just uncomfortable to have it pointed out that you might not be practicing what you preach. . Moving on--I do think Facebook shoved Luckey in the basement for his political activity. They should. He makes the company look dirty. He makes people who work at Facebook feel less safe because he is making war on them (in the "politics is war by other means" sense of the word) for their ethnicity or their gender. I don't think that it's either incorrect nor pejorative to say that, if not for legal obligations, he probably would have been shitcanned immediately and it would have been for his political activity. And that's OK. When your politics are effectively existential threats towards people, "fuck you" is a pretty okay response. And that goes both ways. Bringing it back to a personal level: I destroy jobs because I'm a computer programmer and that's not a good thing for a lot of people. They can tell me to go fuck myself, they can choose not to interact with me. It's unlikely to have an impact, but they can. So it is up the chain, too. "Free speech" comes with consequences. So it is, and so it must be, or "free speech" is one-way. (Which is really what most--not necessarily you, I'm not a mind reader, but most--people who advocate for tolerance towards conservative and, frankly, reactionary politics are really angling for: the freedom to do unto others.)
maxerickson 10y ago
The claim is that even something trivial like buying the card is a political act, not that it is activism.
- Hydraulix989 10y ago
  Wait, what's the difference between a political act and political ACTivism?
  - eropple 10y ago
    Activism is an attempt to effect or advocate for the effecting of change in your polity. A political act is just an action with repercussions in your polity. (But this is why I used the word expression.)
    - Hydraulix989 10y ago
      How doesn't that contradict your argument? Shouldn't buying a USB sound card be considered activism? I'm not sure where to draw the line (since both your definitions have repercussions, in particular, you seem to be much more acutely aware of them than the average person in everyday scenarios, making your actions arguably activism).
      - eropple 10y ago
        Actions with an inextricably political component (which is to say, damned near everything) requires awareness and an understanding of what it encourages and reifies in order to be a decent human, but they are not taken with the political consequence as a primary motivator. When engaging in activism, the political consequence is the point.
  - maxerickson 10y ago
    For me, intent. Saying that buying the drive is a political act is a recognition that there are consequences to the system that makes it available. But there's not necessarily any intent to engage with those consequences when a drive is purchased. Writing the manufacturer a letter questioning their practices would be activism, it is done with the intent to change the consequences. I guess you could also engage with the intent to prevent change.

eropple 10y ago

I think you have tremendously misunderstood my post if you think I was calling buying a USB sound card "political activism." I called it political expression. One of literally dozens, perhaps hundreds expressions I performed today. And those political activities, those actions within the context of my polity, reinforce my views on society (and ambivalence or a lack of give-a-shit is, too, a belief). Now, you are definitely, one hundred percent right that there are cases where there are no good answers and you have to do the best you can with what you have available! But Donald fucking Trump (or Palmer fucking Luckey) have no interests that relate to such things. You don't have to live in TrumpCo housing, you don't have to buy Trump Steaks, you don't have to watch The Apprentice (though that's probably dead now), and you don't have to buy an Oculus Rift. So the idea of castigating people for opting not to support people whose active practices are bad and wrong and should not be promulgated is absolutely bonkers-silly. I compromised when buying that USB sound card because I would, all things being equal, buy a device from a seller who used labor practices and manufacturing practices that I was 100% on-board with--but I couldn't source one in the time I needed and I have a budget, and I needed it for a project whose failure would be more harmful to people I know and interact with on an everyday basis than the marginal harms caused by the purchase. But I thought about it before I did it, and came to the conclusion that it was an acceptable expression of what I actually believe. You express your political beliefs--and your religious beliefs, and your philosophical beliefs--not just by your vote, but by your actions. Every day. It never stops. You can never, ever, ever opt out. These beliefs are your character, and your character is who you are in the dark. Either you do them, or you don't believe them. There's no middle ground. You can't have beliefs and then not practice them (to the best of your ability, with natural accommodations for factors that prevent you from practicing them--like, this is why I emphatically don't cast Oculus employees in a poor light for being unfortunately attached to that company, because most people can't up and quit a job at a moment's notice). If the idea that "the practice of your beliefs is the having of them" is extreme, then we should all off ourselves and let the cockroaches have their shot. But it's not extreme. It's just uncomfortable to have it pointed out that you might not be practicing what you preach. . Moving on--I do think Facebook shoved Luckey in the basement for his political activity. They should. He makes the company look dirty. He makes people who work at Facebook feel less safe because he is making war on them (in the "politics is war by other means" sense of the word) for their ethnicity or their gender. I don't think that it's either incorrect nor pejorative to say that, if not for legal obligations, he probably would have been shitcanned immediately and it would have been for his political activity. And that's OK. When your politics are effectively existential threats towards people, "fuck you" is a pretty okay response. And that goes both ways. Bringing it back to a personal level: I destroy jobs because I'm a computer programmer and that's not a good thing for a lot of people. They can tell me to go fuck myself, they can choose not to interact with me. It's unlikely to have an impact, but they can. So it is up the chain, too. "Free speech" comes with consequences. So it is, and so it must be, or "free speech" is one-way. (Which is really what most--not necessarily you, I'm not a mind reader, but most--people who advocate for tolerance towards conservative and, frankly, reactionary politics are really angling for: the freedom to do unto others.)

maxerickson 10y ago

The claim is that even something trivial like buying the card is a political act, not that it is activism.

Hydraulix989 10y ago
Wait, what's the difference between a political act and political ACTivism?
- eropple 10y ago
  Activism is an attempt to effect or advocate for the effecting of change in your polity. A political act is just an action with repercussions in your polity. (But this is why I used the word expression.)
  - Hydraulix989 10y ago
    How doesn't that contradict your argument? Shouldn't buying a USB sound card be considered activism? I'm not sure where to draw the line (since both your definitions have repercussions, in particular, you seem to be much more acutely aware of them than the average person in everyday scenarios, making your actions arguably activism).
    - eropple 10y ago
      Actions with an inextricably political component (which is to say, damned near everything) requires awareness and an understanding of what it encourages and reifies in order to be a decent human, but they are not taken with the political consequence as a primary motivator. When engaging in activism, the political consequence is the point.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  For me, intent. Saying that buying the drive is a political act is a recognition that there are consequences to the system that makes it available. But there's not necessarily any intent to engage with those consequences when a drive is purchased. Writing the manufacturer a letter questioning their practices would be activism, it is done with the intent to change the consequences. I guess you could also engage with the intent to prevent change.