7 ms·

A fringe candidate who advocates for war crimes and dismantling the democratic institutions of America. I think you're giving Trump too much of a pass here.

Typhon 10y ago
I agree that however hateful and ridiculous he gets, Trump is not a nazi. I roll my eyes whenever someone calls him a nazi or implies he is a nazi. For example, this guy : https://twitter.com/paulg/status/785769454516916228?lang=fr https://twitter.com/paulg/status/785769454516916228?lang=fr I think there's a contradiction in PG's (and Sam Altman's) public attitude towards Trump and their attitude regarding Thiel. I mean either Trump is beyond the pale, in which case they should not associate themselves with any of his supporters, or he is not, in which case they should cut the goddamn hyperbole.
CapitalistCartr 10y ago
Freedom is the right to be wrong. Freedom of speech isn't fought at Michaelangelo's David; its fought at Larry Flynt's Hustler.
baddox 10y ago
Can you name a politician at the national level with an executive position or foreign-policy-related legislative position who doesn't advocate war crimes?
cperciva 10y ago
I'm not giving Trump a pass. I'm giving Trump supporters a pass, because I believe it's possible to support a candidate without supporting every position they espouse. (In fact, with Trump's many contradictory statements, this is guaranteed for any of his supporters!) If one of your employees advocates for genocide, go ahead and fire them. If one of your employees supports a candidate who advocates for genocide -- well, it might call into question their judgment, but maybe they like the rest of the platform and think that the call for genocide is mere hyperbole.
- OmarIsmail 10y ago
  The crux of this whole situation rests on how "bad" a person considers Trump and by proxy Trump supporters. At the extreme end if an employee was fired for supporting literal Nazis would anybody kick up a fuss? Not likely. Let's bring it to be less extreme. Is it "ok" for an employee to be reprimanded for supporting the KKK? What about David Duke who formerly led the KKK? What about if they are a member of Stormfront? There are groups and positions that cross a line that is acceptable and that line is different for each person. We can delegate to the government - I.e. Groups that are "officially" designated as hate groups - but many people don't. There are many people (Trump supporters AND critics) that interpret some of Trump's most defining and consistent policies as racist, sexist, islamaphobic and xenophobic. So Trump to many people is beyond their line of acceptability. And therefore the supporters are too. The messiness of the situation is that it is so subjective despite there being an objective component to it (objective is: unacceptable opinions should not be tolerated. Subjective is: what is unacceptable?)
  - candiodari 10y ago
    > There are many people (Trump supporters AND critics) that interpret some of Trump's most defining and consistent policies as racist, sexist, islamaphobic and xenophobic. So Trump to many people is beyond their line of acceptability. And therefore the supporters are too. Wouldn't that qualify these people at least as racist as Trump could possibly be himself ? Where is the limit for these people, by the way ? Not buying stuff from people with some "unacceptable" political orientation ? How about religious orientation ? How about people who feel men and women aren't equal because of religious affiliation ? How about muslims who espouse the "kill anyone leaving islam" rule of that religion ? We should not care if we are to have a well-functioning politcial system. Doesn't seem either party is interested in that, but still.
  - cperciva 10y ago
    how "bad" a person considers Trump and by proxy Trump supporters Stop right there. There is a constitutionally protected right to support a political candidate. You should not be punishing someone for exercising their constitutionally protected rights; the fact that a candidate is reprehensible does not justify exercising collective punishment against his supporters. At the extreme end if an employee was fired for supporting literal Nazis would anybody kick up a fuss? Not likely. I don't know if there is a National Socialist party in the USA, but if there was then I don't think anyone should be fired for supporting their political activities. Of course, if a National Socialist party included a paramilitary wing which was carrying out violent attacks on political enemies, supporting them would no longer be a matter of supporting a political organization; it would be supporting a criminal organization, which is certainly not a constitutionally protected right.
MustardTiger 10y ago
The fact that these arguments always seem to require one said to make up crazy nonsense is pretty telling. He advocates nothing of the sort.
- woofyman 10y ago
  Trump advocates killing the families of terrorists. http://truthinmedia.com/reality-check-trump-says-kill-terrorists-families-but-obama-already-has/ http://truthinmedia.com/reality-check-trump-says-kill-terror... He also advocates torture. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5775d740e4b04164640f6597 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5775d740e4b04164640f6597
  - MustardTiger 10y ago
    Ok? Neither of those are war crimes or dismantle US democracy, which are the claims in question.
    - pen2l 10y ago
      Per Common Article 3 of Geneva Conventions, killing families of terrorists and torture are war crime.
      - MustardTiger 10y ago
        No, try reading it. We do both of those things all the time. Where's the war crimes trials? Those are only war crimes under certain circumstances.
    - querulous 10y ago
      he wants to jail journalists and his political opponents and he's been actively undermining the legitimacy of the electoral process for weeks i don't know how to describe that other than he wants to 'dismantle US democracy'
      - MustardTiger 10y ago

Typhon 10y ago

I agree that however hateful and ridiculous he gets, Trump is not a nazi. I roll my eyes whenever someone calls him a nazi or implies he is a nazi. For example, this guy : https://twitter.com/paulg/status/785769454516916228?lang=fr https://twitter.com/paulg/status/785769454516916228?lang=fr I think there's a contradiction in PG's (and Sam Altman's) public attitude towards Trump and their attitude regarding Thiel. I mean either Trump is beyond the pale, in which case they should not associate themselves with any of his supporters, or he is not, in which case they should cut the goddamn hyperbole.

CapitalistCartr 10y ago

Freedom is the right to be wrong. Freedom of speech isn't fought at Michaelangelo's David; its fought at Larry Flynt's Hustler.

baddox 10y ago

Can you name a politician at the national level with an executive position or foreign-policy-related legislative position who doesn't advocate war crimes?

cperciva 10y ago

I'm not giving Trump a pass. I'm giving Trump supporters a pass, because I believe it's possible to support a candidate without supporting every position they espouse. (In fact, with Trump's many contradictory statements, this is guaranteed for any of his supporters!) If one of your employees advocates for genocide, go ahead and fire them. If one of your employees supports a candidate who advocates for genocide -- well, it might call into question their judgment, but maybe they like the rest of the platform and think that the call for genocide is mere hyperbole.

OmarIsmail 10y ago
The crux of this whole situation rests on how "bad" a person considers Trump and by proxy Trump supporters. At the extreme end if an employee was fired for supporting literal Nazis would anybody kick up a fuss? Not likely. Let's bring it to be less extreme. Is it "ok" for an employee to be reprimanded for supporting the KKK? What about David Duke who formerly led the KKK? What about if they are a member of Stormfront? There are groups and positions that cross a line that is acceptable and that line is different for each person. We can delegate to the government - I.e. Groups that are "officially" designated as hate groups - but many people don't. There are many people (Trump supporters AND critics) that interpret some of Trump's most defining and consistent policies as racist, sexist, islamaphobic and xenophobic. So Trump to many people is beyond their line of acceptability. And therefore the supporters are too. The messiness of the situation is that it is so subjective despite there being an objective component to it (objective is: unacceptable opinions should not be tolerated. Subjective is: what is unacceptable?)
- candiodari 10y ago
  > There are many people (Trump supporters AND critics) that interpret some of Trump's most defining and consistent policies as racist, sexist, islamaphobic and xenophobic. So Trump to many people is beyond their line of acceptability. And therefore the supporters are too. Wouldn't that qualify these people at least as racist as Trump could possibly be himself ? Where is the limit for these people, by the way ? Not buying stuff from people with some "unacceptable" political orientation ? How about religious orientation ? How about people who feel men and women aren't equal because of religious affiliation ? How about muslims who espouse the "kill anyone leaving islam" rule of that religion ? We should not care if we are to have a well-functioning politcial system. Doesn't seem either party is interested in that, but still.
- cperciva 10y ago
  how "bad" a person considers Trump and by proxy Trump supporters Stop right there. There is a constitutionally protected right to support a political candidate. You should not be punishing someone for exercising their constitutionally protected rights; the fact that a candidate is reprehensible does not justify exercising collective punishment against his supporters. At the extreme end if an employee was fired for supporting literal Nazis would anybody kick up a fuss? Not likely. I don't know if there is a National Socialist party in the USA, but if there was then I don't think anyone should be fired for supporting their political activities. Of course, if a National Socialist party included a paramilitary wing which was carrying out violent attacks on political enemies, supporting them would no longer be a matter of supporting a political organization; it would be supporting a criminal organization, which is certainly not a constitutionally protected right.

MustardTiger 10y ago

The fact that these arguments always seem to require one said to make up crazy nonsense is pretty telling. He advocates nothing of the sort.

woofyman 10y ago
Trump advocates killing the families of terrorists. http://truthinmedia.com/reality-check-trump-says-kill-terrorists-families-but-obama-already-has/ http://truthinmedia.com/reality-check-trump-says-kill-terror... He also advocates torture. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5775d740e4b04164640f6597 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5775d740e4b04164640f6597
- MustardTiger 10y ago
  Ok? Neither of those are war crimes or dismantle US democracy, which are the claims in question.
  - pen2l 10y ago
    Per Common Article 3 of Geneva Conventions, killing families of terrorists and torture are war crime.
    - MustardTiger 10y ago
      No, try reading it. We do both of those things all the time. Where's the war crimes trials? Those are only war crimes under certain circumstances.
  - querulous 10y ago
    he wants to jail journalists and his political opponents and he's been actively undermining the legitimacy of the electoral process for weeks i don't know how to describe that other than he wants to 'dismantle US democracy'
    - MustardTiger 10y ago