6 ms·

> In the event that he really does turn into Hitler, I promise to stand up to stop him along with all the other people who will. Well, that's nice - although y

> In the event that he really does turn into Hitler, I promise to stand up to stop him along with all the other people who will. Well, that's nice - although you just agreed to something you believe won't happen. I don't believe he will, either; but are you standing up to what his electorate is doing? http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/11/trump-voters-threatened-women-people-of-color-yesterday.html http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/11/trump-voters-threatened-wome... Take it from someone who saw what Brexit did to the UK: Your country, by electing someone with an unpleasant set of views on race/religion, has implicitly given free reign to people with even more unpleasant views on those to do whatever they want and not fear repercussions because... after all, they've been told they're in the majority now. I suspect it's easier to promise to stand up to the "as close to 0 as you can mathematically get" than to address problems that are happening today.

jerf 10y ago
"has implicitly given free reign to people with even more unpleasant views on those to do whatever they want and not fear repercussions because..." And I believe that our country was already giving free reign to those with "unpleasant views". For instance, I don't think it's a coincidence that race relations have generally considered to be getting worse over the past several years: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/24/us/poll-shows-most-americans-think-race-relations-are-bad.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/24/us/poll-shows-most-america... I'm a pragmatist. If people are all saying or doing the right things in the leadership but the race relations are getting worse, then clearly they are not saying or doing the right things.
- scrollaway 10y ago
  So, "no"? And no because it's a problem that already existed and keeps getting worse? Tell me: Where's the Godwin line, exactly? You railed against ubernostrum just because he compared a current situation to one in the 1930s and what you get out of this is that America's safe: should Trump turn into Hitler, America is safe because you, and surely lots of others, will stand up to the government! Goody. Well, I feel better now, whew! You're a pragmatist, right? So tell me: Where is that point where you, and many others, stand up to the growing problem? Is it when the people rise up and protest? (They already have.) Is it when people start dying? (Many are). Or do you wait until a wall is being built, religions are being rejected at the border and the targeted groups are being threatened on the street? Where is that fucking line? Do thousands have to die? Does it have to be tens, hundreds of thousands? Is it when it hits 7 digits? You won't stand up to all this nonsense? Fine. I fully realize you don't have the logistics for it. Nobody does. No worries, you won't have to -- an ethnic cleansing is, as you said, mathematically close to 0. And really, there'll be nobody left by the time it gets to that point, because you're not standing up now.
  - LBXrRkxx 10y ago
    The world is overpopulated right now and would be better if 90% of living people didn't exist. If I had to pick America with the Republicans gone or Democrats gone I'm leaning towards Democrats.
    - grzm 10y ago
      Really? This is the language you want to use at this point? Even jokingly suggesting preferring that one class of people be removed? If people down vote or flag your comment are you going to complain?
      - scrollaway 10y ago
        Flag and move on. Please don't indulge in the trolling.
        grzm 10y ago
        Thanks. I'm just getting so discouraged right now.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
    - sctb 10y ago
      You've been making flamewar-style comments like these which aren't OK on HN. Please comment civilly and substantively or not at all.
234dd57d2c8db 10y ago
Oh yes, because surely it's only those evil Trump supporters who are the bad guys! As you can see here a wild pack of trump supports are attacking a poor old hillary supporter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnQNFBHHs6w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnQNFBHHs6w Oh wait no, sorry, that's a group of leftists literally beating up an old man 10v1 because he's white and might have voted for Trump. Sorry, you were saying something about people not fearing repercussions?
- scrollaway 10y ago
  I don't even see what your post is trying to say. The only charitable explanation I can come up with is you're trying to reinforce my point that those in the majority feel like they can be assholes without repercussions. Take a long, hard look at both my post and yours and ask yourself what point you're attempting to make (and if you somehow don't come up empty, please share it with the rest of the class - I'd love to know at least).
  - 234dd57d2c8db 10y ago
    Your post suggests that now that Trump supporters are the majority, it's open season on minorities. Like somehow the regular joes who voted for Trump will turn into some kind of criminals that go around beating up minorities. I find that ridiculous. It's not just the majority, it's the minority as well (see the video). Criminals gonna criminal, regardless if they are the majority or minority. It's also unfair to say that the act of electing Trump is implicitly condoning this kind of behavior, which is absurd. ~60 million people voted for Trump. A tiny minority will use it as an excuse to commit violence and crime. Just like a tiny minority of Hillary supporters will use the election of Trump to commit violence and crime (See video). Now, you use Brexit as an example where ordinary people who didn't agree with the direction the country was going and wanted a change, somehow turned to violence. I'd need to see some evidence of this because here's an article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3805008/The-great-Brexit-hate-crime-myth-claims-epidemic-race-crimes-referendum-simply-false.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3805008/The-great-Br...) that provides direct evidence from your police force that hate crimes did not significantly increase. Here's a sample from the article: "However, its footnote added that 85 people had logged hate crime ‘incidents’ on True Vision, a website that records unverified allegations of such behaviour, during the four days in question, up from 54 during the corresponding period a month earlier. What exactly did this mean? The police press release made things clear. ‘This should not be read as a national increase in hate crime of 57 per cent but an increase in reporting through one mechanism’ over a single 96-hour period." And the next section is a series of images that were used as propaganda citing a 57% increase in hate crimes since brexit used by anti-brexit campaigners. A direct contradiction to your police force's analysis of the statistics. The idea that somehow ordinary people turn into racist criminals is just wrong. So there, I shared with the class. I hope your condescending response made you feel smug and happy inside. Made me feel good to drop police stats to prove my case. Why don't you go ahead and share your stats with the class that suggest an uptick in violence due to "implicit" permission.
oldmanjay 10y ago
It seems that you want people with opinions you find odious to be unhappy all the time and accept that as their lot in life. If I've understood that correctly, by what mechanism do you propose this work?
- scrollaway 10y ago
  What I did was describe the current situation in the US. I'm making no particular remark, in the post you're replying to, on what I want out of "people with opinions I find odious". If someone is willing to say that they would stand up to an ethnic cleansing, I think it's reasonable to ask them at what point they'll stand up to it. I do find cultural bigotry to be odious though and to answer your question, I will not protect the rights of people to threaten and kill others. I will not defend a culture that promotes the exclusion of classes of people by skin color, religion, accent, gender or even political leanings. I don't know why you're asking me what mechanism would make this work. People's unhappiness has very little impact on whether policies work. Otherwise, we wouldn't be having this discussion, as the things I refuse to defend would not be happening in the first place.
  - oldmanjay 10y ago
    You said > Your country, by electing someone with an unpleasant set of views on race/religion, has implicitly given free reign to people with even more unpleasant views on those to do whatever they want and not fear repercussions because... after all, they've been told they're in the majority now. If you want these people to not feel free to express their opinions then you want some other thing. Feel free to explain what, if I misconstrued.
    - scrollaway 10y ago
      I think you might be reading "to do whatever they want" far too generously, unless you consider death threats (and worse) to be free expression of opinions that should be protected.
      - 10y ago

jerf 10y ago

"has implicitly given free reign to people with even more unpleasant views on those to do whatever they want and not fear repercussions because..." And I believe that our country was already giving free reign to those with "unpleasant views". For instance, I don't think it's a coincidence that race relations have generally considered to be getting worse over the past several years: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/24/us/poll-shows-most-americans-think-race-relations-are-bad.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/24/us/poll-shows-most-america... I'm a pragmatist. If people are all saying or doing the right things in the leadership but the race relations are getting worse, then clearly they are not saying or doing the right things.

scrollaway 10y ago
So, "no"? And no because it's a problem that already existed and keeps getting worse? Tell me: Where's the Godwin line, exactly? You railed against ubernostrum just because he compared a current situation to one in the 1930s and what you get out of this is that America's safe: should Trump turn into Hitler, America is safe because you, and surely lots of others, will stand up to the government! Goody. Well, I feel better now, whew! You're a pragmatist, right? So tell me: Where is that point where you, and many others, stand up to the growing problem? Is it when the people rise up and protest? (They already have.) Is it when people start dying? (Many are). Or do you wait until a wall is being built, religions are being rejected at the border and the targeted groups are being threatened on the street? Where is that fucking line? Do thousands have to die? Does it have to be tens, hundreds of thousands? Is it when it hits 7 digits? You won't stand up to all this nonsense? Fine. I fully realize you don't have the logistics for it. Nobody does. No worries, you won't have to -- an ethnic cleansing is, as you said, mathematically close to 0. And really, there'll be nobody left by the time it gets to that point, because you're not standing up now.
- LBXrRkxx 10y ago
  The world is overpopulated right now and would be better if 90% of living people didn't exist. If I had to pick America with the Republicans gone or Democrats gone I'm leaning towards Democrats.
  - grzm 10y ago
    Really? This is the language you want to use at this point? Even jokingly suggesting preferring that one class of people be removed? If people down vote or flag your comment are you going to complain?
    - scrollaway 10y ago
      Flag and move on. Please don't indulge in the trolling.
      - grzm 10y ago
        Thanks. I'm just getting so discouraged right now.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
  - sctb 10y ago
    You've been making flamewar-style comments like these which aren't OK on HN. Please comment civilly and substantively or not at all.

234dd57d2c8db 10y ago

Oh yes, because surely it's only those evil Trump supporters who are the bad guys! As you can see here a wild pack of trump supports are attacking a poor old hillary supporter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnQNFBHHs6w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnQNFBHHs6w Oh wait no, sorry, that's a group of leftists literally beating up an old man 10v1 because he's white and might have voted for Trump. Sorry, you were saying something about people not fearing repercussions?

scrollaway 10y ago
I don't even see what your post is trying to say. The only charitable explanation I can come up with is you're trying to reinforce my point that those in the majority feel like they can be assholes without repercussions. Take a long, hard look at both my post and yours and ask yourself what point you're attempting to make (and if you somehow don't come up empty, please share it with the rest of the class - I'd love to know at least).
- 234dd57d2c8db 10y ago
  Your post suggests that now that Trump supporters are the majority, it's open season on minorities. Like somehow the regular joes who voted for Trump will turn into some kind of criminals that go around beating up minorities. I find that ridiculous. It's not just the majority, it's the minority as well (see the video). Criminals gonna criminal, regardless if they are the majority or minority. It's also unfair to say that the act of electing Trump is implicitly condoning this kind of behavior, which is absurd. ~60 million people voted for Trump. A tiny minority will use it as an excuse to commit violence and crime. Just like a tiny minority of Hillary supporters will use the election of Trump to commit violence and crime (See video). Now, you use Brexit as an example where ordinary people who didn't agree with the direction the country was going and wanted a change, somehow turned to violence. I'd need to see some evidence of this because here's an article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3805008/The-great-Brexit-hate-crime-myth-claims-epidemic-race-crimes-referendum-simply-false.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3805008/The-great-Br...) that provides direct evidence from your police force that hate crimes did not significantly increase. Here's a sample from the article: "However, its footnote added that 85 people had logged hate crime ‘incidents’ on True Vision, a website that records unverified allegations of such behaviour, during the four days in question, up from 54 during the corresponding period a month earlier. What exactly did this mean? The police press release made things clear. ‘This should not be read as a national increase in hate crime of 57 per cent but an increase in reporting through one mechanism’ over a single 96-hour period." And the next section is a series of images that were used as propaganda citing a 57% increase in hate crimes since brexit used by anti-brexit campaigners. A direct contradiction to your police force's analysis of the statistics. The idea that somehow ordinary people turn into racist criminals is just wrong. So there, I shared with the class. I hope your condescending response made you feel smug and happy inside. Made me feel good to drop police stats to prove my case. Why don't you go ahead and share your stats with the class that suggest an uptick in violence due to "implicit" permission.

oldmanjay 10y ago

It seems that you want people with opinions you find odious to be unhappy all the time and accept that as their lot in life. If I've understood that correctly, by what mechanism do you propose this work?

scrollaway 10y ago
What I did was describe the current situation in the US. I'm making no particular remark, in the post you're replying to, on what I want out of "people with opinions I find odious". If someone is willing to say that they would stand up to an ethnic cleansing, I think it's reasonable to ask them at what point they'll stand up to it. I do find cultural bigotry to be odious though and to answer your question, I will not protect the rights of people to threaten and kill others. I will not defend a culture that promotes the exclusion of classes of people by skin color, religion, accent, gender or even political leanings. I don't know why you're asking me what mechanism would make this work. People's unhappiness has very little impact on whether policies work. Otherwise, we wouldn't be having this discussion, as the things I refuse to defend would not be happening in the first place.
- oldmanjay 10y ago
  You said > Your country, by electing someone with an unpleasant set of views on race/religion, has implicitly given free reign to people with even more unpleasant views on those to do whatever they want and not fear repercussions because... after all, they've been told they're in the majority now. If you want these people to not feel free to express their opinions then you want some other thing. Feel free to explain what, if I misconstrued.
  - scrollaway 10y ago
    I think you might be reading "to do whatever they want" far too generously, unless you consider death threats (and worse) to be free expression of opinions that should be protected.
    - 10y ago