4 ms·

This is the most mind-bendingly deluded post I've seen on HN in a while. > individuals coming together, learning new things, and working towards a common goal

This is the most mind-bendingly deluded post I've seen on HN in a while. > individuals coming together, learning new things, and working towards a common goal the common goal here is being an asshole > if this was a nazi flag, would you feel the same way? Shia's flag said "he will not divide us" it was a message of unity that someone took down to replace with the representation of an administration with actual white nationalists as advisors. > it's a bit ironic that you bring up an attempt to shut down free speech, when that's exactly what shia did Yelling into someone's livefeed is free speech in a public place, but continuing to follow them and ultimately trespassing onto private property is harassment. Free speech isn't yelling whatever you want whenever you want. It's freedom from the government oppressing your speech. >would you feel the same if it was a nazi flag? This again? Seriously. Here's a challenge for you in the future: try to make a sound argument without simply throwing the word "nazi" in.

hex12648430 10y ago
>Shia's flag said "he will not divide us" it was a message of unity Unity that excludes almost half of the US population. I'm glad that people reacted against the passive-aggresiveness of this message when the stream was hosted in a public space. I don't condone stealing on a private property but let's not fool ourselves here, the message of this art project is reinforcing the US vs THEM mentality that is currently tearing Americans apart rather than truly trying to unify people.
- hackuser 10y ago
  > excludes almost half of the US population It does not. They are free and encouraged to join in (AFAIK). Those who embrace racial and religious discrimination, of course, might not choose the join, as the message contradicts their beliefs. But that is an old issue and red herring, the paradox of tolerance. Tolerate everyone but the intolerant, who are parasites on the social contract of tolerance.
  - mohanmcgeek 10y ago
    "he will not divide us" means that you're saying he's trying to divide you. So, you're making a claim about someone without backing it, and when people actually show up in support of him, you switch off the camera to preserve the narrative?
- lhopki01 10y ago
  What half? 19% of people in the US voted for Trump.
  - taneq 10y ago
    What? How did he get elected then?
    - maxerickson 10y ago
      Lots of people don't vote.
    - robotresearcher 10y ago
      Only about half of eligible voters voted. Of those, slightly more voted Democrat than Republican, and a distant few voted for someone else. Despite getting the second-most votes nationally, the geographic distribution of the Republican votes gained them quite a few more "electoral college votes" (i.e. winning points) than the Democrats. The electoral college system gives more power to the countryside than the cities, proportional to the population.
    - lhopki01 10y ago
      US population: 324,420,000 Number who voted for Trump: 62,985,106 Trump won 57% of the Electoral College, 46% of those who voted, 25% of the voting age population and 19% of the population as a whole. That's not half the US population.
- accountface 10y ago
  It literally says "will not divide" and you're here making a comment that specifically divides. I guess the flag really is wrong.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - nimchimpsky 10y ago
    but it also says "he". it is obviously against trump/republicans. Its a political statement He can make it, but others can disagree, thats beauty of free speech. I think trump is an imbecile, but denying his supporters free speech as you are doing, is exactly why he is popular.
  - nimchimpsky 10y ago
    but it also says "he". it is obviously against trump/republicans. Its a political statement He can make it, but others can disagree, that is the beauty of free speech. I think trump is an imbecile, but denying his supporters free speech as you are doing, is exactly why he is popular.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- 69mlgsniperdad 10y ago
  I don't think anywhere near half the country wants to be lumped into a generalization with the people yelling into that camera. Check out some of the footage on youtube.. I'm pretty sure Shia was arrested for assaulting someone who was 'memeing' the camera as well; setting the maturity bar high... It's those same people on that camera who are the ones terrorizing the streets, tearing down/burning free speech signs and assaulting those with differing views. Anyone who actually thinks that those folks are the ones denying free speech are entirely deluded. Commence down-voting.
  - beaconstudios 10y ago
    are you suggesting it's /pol/-type Trump supporters burning free speech signs, or am I misreading your comment? Because it's antifa members and black-bloc anarchists that are doing that.
    - 69mlgsniperdad 10y ago
      No, should've made it more clear apparently. I'm referring to the 'antifa' members (who are massively overrepresented) by msm; same misrepresentation/oversampling and 'echo chamber' that led to the massive Trump 'suprise.' I'm only suggesting the comment I responded to, which I agree with ignored even more then just half the population not almost half.
      - beaconstudios 10y ago
        ah gotcha. Yeah I don't think the majority of non-Trump-supporters would have anything positive to say about the rioters. It's horseshoe theory in action - there are 2 kinds of fascist; fascists and anti-fascists.
pharrington 10y ago
GP condemned the channers' game by calling it "an intimidation campaign to shutdown free speech" and "shutting down political speech they disagreed with." You are allowed to fly a nazi flag in the US. Are you actually saying you're OK with the suppression of completely legal, non-violence inciting speech you disagree with? That is the entire crux of GP's point.
- accountface 10y ago
  Free speech is more complex than simply taking the term "free speech" literally.
  - pharrington 10y ago
    That's only trivially (in the formal meaning) true, because "free speech" has no unambiguous literal meaning. The context you are referring to has repeatedly born out that American law allows private citizens to say or express anything, no matter how hateful, as long as it's not an incitement to violence nor slanders a specific party. The reasoning is pretty straight-forward. Tomorrow (or apparently literally today given the craziness of the current socio-political discourse), you and I will be considered the Nazis. Stop dodging, actually respond to what you're replying to. Do you consider capturing the hypothetical Nazi flag differently than the HSNDU flag?
    - accountface 10y ago
      >The context you are referring to has repeatedly born out that American law allows private citizens to say or express anything, no matter how hateful, as long as it's not an incitement to violence nor slanders a specific party. This is still very ambiguous. There are MANY situations where the above statement is not true. >you and I will be considered the Nazis. That's absurd. If you look back 100 years ago there are many people I would not consider a "nazi" so why would it hold true 100 years from now? Your rhetoric has very little substance. It's Godwin all the way down. >Stop dodging, actually respond to what you're replying to. Do you consider capturing the hypothetical Nazi flag differently than the HSNDU flag? I'm not dodging anything, I'm sick of people throwing around the freedom of speech like it justifies everything anyone wants to say. To answer your question: As an individual I view it very differently. BUT I don't think the government should snatch either flag, and if you're on someone else's private property doing so it should definitely be considered theft.
Oxitendwe 10y ago
>an administration with actual white nationalists as advisors Citation needed. You're probably talking about Bannon - can you explain in your own words why you think this?
ntelson1s 10y ago
>This is the most mind-bendingly deluded post I've seen on HN in a while. Then you should check out your own before you decide to act high and mighty.

hex12648430 10y ago

>Shia's flag said "he will not divide us" it was a message of unity Unity that excludes almost half of the US population. I'm glad that people reacted against the passive-aggresiveness of this message when the stream was hosted in a public space. I don't condone stealing on a private property but let's not fool ourselves here, the message of this art project is reinforcing the US vs THEM mentality that is currently tearing Americans apart rather than truly trying to unify people.

hackuser 10y ago
> excludes almost half of the US population It does not. They are free and encouraged to join in (AFAIK). Those who embrace racial and religious discrimination, of course, might not choose the join, as the message contradicts their beliefs. But that is an old issue and red herring, the paradox of tolerance. Tolerate everyone but the intolerant, who are parasites on the social contract of tolerance.
- mohanmcgeek 10y ago
  "he will not divide us" means that you're saying he's trying to divide you. So, you're making a claim about someone without backing it, and when people actually show up in support of him, you switch off the camera to preserve the narrative?
lhopki01 10y ago
What half? 19% of people in the US voted for Trump.
- taneq 10y ago
  What? How did he get elected then?
  - maxerickson 10y ago
    Lots of people don't vote.
  - robotresearcher 10y ago
    Only about half of eligible voters voted. Of those, slightly more voted Democrat than Republican, and a distant few voted for someone else. Despite getting the second-most votes nationally, the geographic distribution of the Republican votes gained them quite a few more "electoral college votes" (i.e. winning points) than the Democrats. The electoral college system gives more power to the countryside than the cities, proportional to the population.
  - lhopki01 10y ago
    US population: 324,420,000 Number who voted for Trump: 62,985,106 Trump won 57% of the Electoral College, 46% of those who voted, 25% of the voting age population and 19% of the population as a whole. That's not half the US population.
accountface 10y ago
It literally says "will not divide" and you're here making a comment that specifically divides. I guess the flag really is wrong.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- nimchimpsky 10y ago
  but it also says "he". it is obviously against trump/republicans. Its a political statement He can make it, but others can disagree, thats beauty of free speech. I think trump is an imbecile, but denying his supporters free speech as you are doing, is exactly why he is popular.
- nimchimpsky 10y ago
  but it also says "he". it is obviously against trump/republicans. Its a political statement He can make it, but others can disagree, that is the beauty of free speech. I think trump is an imbecile, but denying his supporters free speech as you are doing, is exactly why he is popular.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
69mlgsniperdad 10y ago
I don't think anywhere near half the country wants to be lumped into a generalization with the people yelling into that camera. Check out some of the footage on youtube.. I'm pretty sure Shia was arrested for assaulting someone who was 'memeing' the camera as well; setting the maturity bar high... It's those same people on that camera who are the ones terrorizing the streets, tearing down/burning free speech signs and assaulting those with differing views. Anyone who actually thinks that those folks are the ones denying free speech are entirely deluded. Commence down-voting.
- beaconstudios 10y ago
  are you suggesting it's /pol/-type Trump supporters burning free speech signs, or am I misreading your comment? Because it's antifa members and black-bloc anarchists that are doing that.
  - 69mlgsniperdad 10y ago
    No, should've made it more clear apparently. I'm referring to the 'antifa' members (who are massively overrepresented) by msm; same misrepresentation/oversampling and 'echo chamber' that led to the massive Trump 'suprise.' I'm only suggesting the comment I responded to, which I agree with ignored even more then just half the population not almost half.
    - beaconstudios 10y ago
      ah gotcha. Yeah I don't think the majority of non-Trump-supporters would have anything positive to say about the rioters. It's horseshoe theory in action - there are 2 kinds of fascist; fascists and anti-fascists.

pharrington 10y ago

GP condemned the channers' game by calling it "an intimidation campaign to shutdown free speech" and "shutting down political speech they disagreed with." You are allowed to fly a nazi flag in the US. Are you actually saying you're OK with the suppression of completely legal, non-violence inciting speech you disagree with? That is the entire crux of GP's point.

accountface 10y ago
Free speech is more complex than simply taking the term "free speech" literally.
- pharrington 10y ago
  That's only trivially (in the formal meaning) true, because "free speech" has no unambiguous literal meaning. The context you are referring to has repeatedly born out that American law allows private citizens to say or express anything, no matter how hateful, as long as it's not an incitement to violence nor slanders a specific party. The reasoning is pretty straight-forward. Tomorrow (or apparently literally today given the craziness of the current socio-political discourse), you and I will be considered the Nazis. Stop dodging, actually respond to what you're replying to. Do you consider capturing the hypothetical Nazi flag differently than the HSNDU flag?
  - accountface 10y ago
    >The context you are referring to has repeatedly born out that American law allows private citizens to say or express anything, no matter how hateful, as long as it's not an incitement to violence nor slanders a specific party. This is still very ambiguous. There are MANY situations where the above statement is not true. >you and I will be considered the Nazis. That's absurd. If you look back 100 years ago there are many people I would not consider a "nazi" so why would it hold true 100 years from now? Your rhetoric has very little substance. It's Godwin all the way down. >Stop dodging, actually respond to what you're replying to. Do you consider capturing the hypothetical Nazi flag differently than the HSNDU flag? I'm not dodging anything, I'm sick of people throwing around the freedom of speech like it justifies everything anyone wants to say. To answer your question: As an individual I view it very differently. BUT I don't think the government should snatch either flag, and if you're on someone else's private property doing so it should definitely be considered theft.

Oxitendwe 10y ago

>an administration with actual white nationalists as advisors Citation needed. You're probably talking about Bannon - can you explain in your own words why you think this?

ntelson1s 10y ago

>This is the most mind-bendingly deluded post I've seen on HN in a while. Then you should check out your own before you decide to act high and mighty.