4 ms·

And the people on the wrong side of history want to talk and talk and talk. They want to stall for time. And every individual who doesn't get a shot to talk and

And the people on the wrong side of history want to talk and talk and talk. They want to stall for time. And every individual who doesn't get a shot to talk and shape the culture feels like they've been robbed and their ideas and beliefs suppressed. They're just ignorant of the fact that these issues have been talked about, at length, ad nauseam, for decades, centuries even. And they don't understand that they don't have anything new to offer, they only have their ignorance. There's no particular reason to tolerate it forever. And when folks who are apparently ignorant of the subject history get pissy because no one has the time to entertain their ignorant BS, that's a personal problem. Rail against it all you want, it's a losing battle.

mnglkhn2 9y ago
:) Your comment must be something that came out of an AI bot: right down the middle, ambiguous to the max. Saying nothing with so many words :) and with the right amount of righteous indignation. Love it! It proves my point actually.
- hobs 9y ago
  Let me simplify it for you. People espousing hate because of their trash opinions that have already been consigned to the dustbins of history are not going to have their crappy thoughts entertained by those who have moved beyond that stupidity.
  - mnglkhn2 9y ago
    It is obvious that you guys on the left share the same manuals, since you also come up with the "history's dustbin" and "trash opinions". You learn your words and hammer them consistently. At least you get props for that. :) No pressure to exhibit coherent and consistent argumentation.
    - hobs 9y ago
      There is no argument, racism and sexism are bad ideas that were entertained widely in the past and are not up for debate anymore as potentially positive influences or the correct way to consider the world. I could have been referencing chattel slavery and your words would be currently for it. You can take whatever you like from my statement (and clearly are) but you calling me "the left" and pretending I was indoctrinated by some entity indicates your mind is as closed as you intimate mine is.
      - dang 9y ago
        Please don't post this sort of tit-for-tat, even when someone else is (or seems to be) wrong and posting bad comments. It only makes the thread worse.
    - dang 9y ago
      Would you please stop using HN primarily for political and ideological battle? Doing that not only goes against HN's mandate—intellectual curiosity and thoughtful discussion—it actively destroys those things. We have to protect HN against this, and for that we have the 'primarily' test I just described, i.e. when accounts use HN primarily for this, we ban them.
Bartweiss 9y ago
> There's no particular reason to tolerate it forever. > Rail against it all you want, it's a losing battle. All moral argument aside, this is only true while you're winning. "I don't have to try to persuade you, so suck it up" can enforce ideas, but doesn't spread them. So if there ever comes a day where 51% and rising of people disagree with you, the reason to 'tolerate it' is that you don't have a choice and you've burned all the bridges that could have gotten you somewhere. I'm not even saying that to condemn using the tactic. More than 99% of Americans accept that the Holocaust happened. I am fully content to leave the <1% of deniers on the wrong side of history, and hope never to deal with them. (Though even there, we ought to be mindful of vigilance and outreach. Without communication, without teaching, that number might well rise.) My point is only that it's incredibly common for people to find ideological bubbles where they mistake who is going to lose the battle. There were plenty of communists and Confederates and fascists who trusted that their opponents just had "a personal problem" and would lose in the end. If an idea has been discussed "for decades, centuries even", are you really so sure that the arc of history has finally settled matters in your favor right now? Are you convinced that you're guessing better than the people who considered the matter settled 50 years ago? 100? Burning goodwill to root out dissent in your strongholds is a thing to do after you win the larger battle. After November 2016, it is absolutely baffling to me when people on the left say "they're history, they lose, the time for talking is past". That was not the result, that is not who is in power. And so I do not want the time for talking to be past! I think that might go very, very poorly for a lot of people I quite like!
dang 9y ago
Would you please stop posting ideological rants to HN? It reliably leads to tedious flamewars, and we're hoping for something better than that here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
- mnglkhn2 9y ago
  I'm all for something better. Can you detail some more what you have in mind? Especially since you seem to be the one making decisions on what is appropriate. Thought police much?! Plus, you seem to have a leftist ideological bent, moderating off even mild stuff that might not fit your personal preferences.

mnglkhn2 9y ago

:) Your comment must be something that came out of an AI bot: right down the middle, ambiguous to the max. Saying nothing with so many words :) and with the right amount of righteous indignation. Love it! It proves my point actually.

hobs 9y ago
Let me simplify it for you. People espousing hate because of their trash opinions that have already been consigned to the dustbins of history are not going to have their crappy thoughts entertained by those who have moved beyond that stupidity.
- mnglkhn2 9y ago
  It is obvious that you guys on the left share the same manuals, since you also come up with the "history's dustbin" and "trash opinions". You learn your words and hammer them consistently. At least you get props for that. :) No pressure to exhibit coherent and consistent argumentation.
  - hobs 9y ago
    There is no argument, racism and sexism are bad ideas that were entertained widely in the past and are not up for debate anymore as potentially positive influences or the correct way to consider the world. I could have been referencing chattel slavery and your words would be currently for it. You can take whatever you like from my statement (and clearly are) but you calling me "the left" and pretending I was indoctrinated by some entity indicates your mind is as closed as you intimate mine is.
    - dang 9y ago
      Please don't post this sort of tit-for-tat, even when someone else is (or seems to be) wrong and posting bad comments. It only makes the thread worse.
  - dang 9y ago
    Would you please stop using HN primarily for political and ideological battle? Doing that not only goes against HN's mandate—intellectual curiosity and thoughtful discussion—it actively destroys those things. We have to protect HN against this, and for that we have the 'primarily' test I just described, i.e. when accounts use HN primarily for this, we ban them.

Bartweiss 9y ago

> There's no particular reason to tolerate it forever. > Rail against it all you want, it's a losing battle. All moral argument aside, this is only true while you're winning. "I don't have to try to persuade you, so suck it up" can enforce ideas, but doesn't spread them. So if there ever comes a day where 51% and rising of people disagree with you, the reason to 'tolerate it' is that you don't have a choice and you've burned all the bridges that could have gotten you somewhere. I'm not even saying that to condemn using the tactic. More than 99% of Americans accept that the Holocaust happened. I am fully content to leave the <1% of deniers on the wrong side of history, and hope never to deal with them. (Though even there, we ought to be mindful of vigilance and outreach. Without communication, without teaching, that number might well rise.) My point is only that it's incredibly common for people to find ideological bubbles where they mistake who is going to lose the battle. There were plenty of communists and Confederates and fascists who trusted that their opponents just had "a personal problem" and would lose in the end. If an idea has been discussed "for decades, centuries even", are you really so sure that the arc of history has finally settled matters in your favor right now? Are you convinced that you're guessing better than the people who considered the matter settled 50 years ago? 100? Burning goodwill to root out dissent in your strongholds is a thing to do after you win the larger battle. After November 2016, it is absolutely baffling to me when people on the left say "they're history, they lose, the time for talking is past". That was not the result, that is not who is in power. And so I do not want the time for talking to be past! I think that might go very, very poorly for a lot of people I quite like!

dang 9y ago

Would you please stop posting ideological rants to HN? It reliably leads to tedious flamewars, and we're hoping for something better than that here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html

mnglkhn2 9y ago
I'm all for something better. Can you detail some more what you have in mind? Especially since you seem to be the one making decisions on what is appropriate. Thought police much?! Plus, you seem to have a leftist ideological bent, moderating off even mild stuff that might not fit your personal preferences.