3 ms·

As someone from post-communist country, I find tone of the article a bit creepy. He has to 'explain himself' to whom? And for what? We had single party system

by thr423 10y ago

As someone from post-communist country, I find tone of the article a bit creepy. He has to 'explain himself' to whom? And for what? We had single party system for 50 years, it did not worked out that well. > suggest that Mr. Thiel was not even a gay man, because he did not “embrace the struggle.” Political preference is more important than sexual orientation, when deciding if someone is gay???? wtf?

Aloha 10y ago
I don't like very much that some people in the gay community are trying to define us by our sexuality. Thiel seems to believe (like I do) that sometimes you need to sacrifice some of your own progress in the short term, for a greater good in the long term. Not that I really like Trump very much, I get why people voted for him though.
ryandamm 10y ago
That sounds logical absent any context, but context matters. Thiel took a very public stance on a very controversial figure. A figure that's controversial for good reasons: things he's done, things he's said, and things he says he'll do. And Thiel's in a public role. So his actions are advertising for his various ventures. To the extent I'm a 'customer' for his various products and services, I've taken note. This is a very democratic and capitalist response, I believe. I'm also not sure why you mention a single party system. Asking a political donor and public speaker to explain his position is very democratic, and I'd expect it in a multiparty democracy, not just an explicitly two-party system like ours. In fact, in a liberal democracy, we should be working to preserve our right to demand those kinds of answers. I'm old enough to remember a time before Citizens United and Super PACs; I believe politics should be conducted in public. Do you disagree?
- thr423 10y ago
  I mentioned single party system, because obviously many people are upset he supported a 'wrong' candidate. In normal democracy political preferences and votes are private by default. It is different from actual politics, which I agree should be conducted in public. US is not liberal democracy (at least compared to most countries). I do not see you accepting and supporting a few million refugees/migrants anytime soon, you just want mexicans for a cheap labor. Incarnation rate is abysmal. You do not even have universal voting rights (selective service). And try to masturbate with frozen chicken in supermarket, in many countries you would only get a warning from police ;-)
- andrenth 10y ago
  When was any public figure called to explain themselves for voting Obama?

by thr423 10y ago

Aloha 10y ago

I don't like very much that some people in the gay community are trying to define us by our sexuality. Thiel seems to believe (like I do) that sometimes you need to sacrifice some of your own progress in the short term, for a greater good in the long term. Not that I really like Trump very much, I get why people voted for him though.

ryandamm 10y ago

That sounds logical absent any context, but context matters. Thiel took a very public stance on a very controversial figure. A figure that's controversial for good reasons: things he's done, things he's said, and things he says he'll do. And Thiel's in a public role. So his actions are advertising for his various ventures. To the extent I'm a 'customer' for his various products and services, I've taken note. This is a very democratic and capitalist response, I believe. I'm also not sure why you mention a single party system. Asking a political donor and public speaker to explain his position is very democratic, and I'd expect it in a multiparty democracy, not just an explicitly two-party system like ours. In fact, in a liberal democracy, we should be working to preserve our right to demand those kinds of answers. I'm old enough to remember a time before Citizens United and Super PACs; I believe politics should be conducted in public. Do you disagree?

thr423 10y ago
I mentioned single party system, because obviously many people are upset he supported a 'wrong' candidate. In normal democracy political preferences and votes are private by default. It is different from actual politics, which I agree should be conducted in public. US is not liberal democracy (at least compared to most countries). I do not see you accepting and supporting a few million refugees/migrants anytime soon, you just want mexicans for a cheap labor. Incarnation rate is abysmal. You do not even have universal voting rights (selective service). And try to masturbate with frozen chicken in supermarket, in many countries you would only get a warning from police ;-)
andrenth 10y ago
When was any public figure called to explain themselves for voting Obama?