5 ms·

> Given the recent surge in nationalistic sentiment among young people in the tech community in the last decade What?

by Molaxx 8y ago

jakeogh 8y ago
Gen Z is pretty based. Nothing fundamentally wrong with liking your country. The common "nationalism is bad" thing is a long term well funded push towards a truly awful idea; global government. All enemies, foreign and domestic and all that.
- mythrwy 8y ago
  I think a level of global governance is a pretty darn good idea and not because of some well funded push either. Just can't imagine any people living or dead I'd like to see in charge of the whole globe, particularly any politicians or bureaucrats I'm aware of, so hoping AI improves soon. I imagine the ideal situation being loose global governance coupled with city/county level governance. That way if people want to wear funny hats or forbid cheese with dye in it or pray to aliens fine. But no slavery, war nor suppression of fundamental rights anywhere on the face of the globe sounds pretty good to me. Along with improved efficiency of trade and resource allocation.
  - jakeogh 8y ago
    Hey, I applaud you for at least admitting it (and using the correct term:)
  - Angostura 8y ago
    Tell me more about hats.
  - dmix 8y ago
    > But no slavery, war nor suppression of fundamental rights anywhere on the face of the globe sounds pretty good to me. It never just stops there. This is like expecting the vanguard government to give up control after the socialist revolution. There's more than enough history to demonstrate otherwise, and buying into that idea in 2018 is willful blindness. The smaller and more localized the governments the better IMO. There's a reason the smaller countries have the best governments: US in the 19th century-early 20th century, modern Canada and some of Scandinavia, etc. Federalism with state/provincial governments a minimal federal government and no executive branch.
    - mythrwy 8y ago
      There is no history of a universal global government and not agreeing with your unsupported opinion isn't even close to "willful blindness". Why you'd make this kind of a comment I'm not sure. But it's certainly not a response to my comment because it addresses different issues and then claims "this must always be". As far as small and localized, great, yes, I agree. However, there are issues that affect all of at a global scale. We are becoming increasingly tied together at a global scale and people's preferences probably isn't going to change that. This necessitates some kind of global rule making. If your point was that humans are corrupt, well, I agree. So not looking for the UN to take over world government, just pointing out some things to consider.
- Molaxx 8y ago
  Let me guess, it's well funded by Goerge Soros and a cabal of old Jews. But seriously, non of what you said is "well based" you should at least provide some sources when you use this term.
  - jakeogh 8y ago
    Personally, when I don't like what someone said, I don't smear them with antisemitism. Buy hey, each to his own. I have noticed that's a common go-to when anyone points out having sovereign countries is a good thing, maybe they just cant argue it on the merits. I'll leave it here, since it's non-HN stuff.
    - Molaxx 8y ago
      I never said sovereign states aren't a good idea. I believe they are, but I also believe the nationalistic sentiment is a double edged sword. But all of this has nothing to do with my comment. The point was, You fire off with unbased claims that are tainted by paranoia. As a joke I referenced similiar type of claims. I guess It was a mistake since it gave you an easy out from actually substinating your claims.
      - jakeogh 8y ago
        So you double down with a label? You asked for a cite on based, that's opinion, like saying "is awesome". I could easily go into why I think that, but it's pointless since it's not a statement of fact that one needs citations for. Maybe you want to move the goalpost to your second reply? If so, the TPP, EU, and similar pushes for a NAU (very much on hold due to the backlash aka "nationalism" in the US) are well funded examples.
        Molaxx 8y ago
        Claiming something is based literally means it's based on something. That something is usually expected to be some fact or some research. If that something is just your opinion, than it's misleading to use the term based. The whole point of my original reply to the OP was seeking citations for his claim. Why did you even reply if it was just to add an opinion? Why are you still on the whole global government thing? It has nothing to do with this discussion.
- richardjdare 8y ago
  I for one, am thoroughly tired and fed up with being expected to think of another human being from two hours flight away as some kind of alien. It's absurd when I can have face-to-face conversations with people on the other side of the world using the device in my pocket. We are already in the midst of a functionally global civilisation only no one believes in it. Here I am having effortless conversations with other humans from all over the world, yet somehow these same people are arbitrarily, absolute "others" who I might one day be expected to kill on the drum-beat and flag-wave of some demagogue who has managed to whip up the masses. The biggest disappointment of the past few years is that no one has outmanoeuvred such a played-out ethos as nationalism and the ethnic chauvinism that frequently accompanies it. The biggest surprise is that so many technologists have apparently supported it.
  - jakeogh 8y ago
    People having self-determinism is the most important feature of having sovereign countries. It's a market of competing ideas. The internet makes it possible for someone in (insert country with less freedom of expression) to see what someone in (insert country with more) has. Making it out as a "some kind of alien" us vs them thing misses the point. People immigrate, and many countries (including my country) let that happen, and they get the benefits of that. It's pretty rare to even hear about the countries that don't allow others to become citizens, although they are pretty major players.
thaumaturgy 8y ago
I was alluding to this for instance: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/03/silicon-valley-tech-alt-right-racism-misogyny/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/03/silicon-valley-... I'm a little embarrassed to reference that particular article, but it should provide enough search term fertilizer for you to find other articles on the subject if you're interested.
- Molaxx 8y ago
  Thanks

> Given the recent surge in nationalistic sentiment among young people in the tech community in the last decade What?

by Molaxx 8y ago

> Given the recent surge in nationalistic sentiment among young people in the tech community in the last decade What?

Gen Z is pretty based. Nothing fundamentally wrong with liking your country. The common "nationalism is bad" thing is a long term well funded push towards a truly awful idea; global government. All enemies, foreign and domestic and all that.

mythrwy 8y ago
I think a level of global governance is a pretty darn good idea and not because of some well funded push either. Just can't imagine any people living or dead I'd like to see in charge of the whole globe, particularly any politicians or bureaucrats I'm aware of, so hoping AI improves soon. I imagine the ideal situation being loose global governance coupled with city/county level governance. That way if people want to wear funny hats or forbid cheese with dye in it or pray to aliens fine. But no slavery, war nor suppression of fundamental rights anywhere on the face of the globe sounds pretty good to me. Along with improved efficiency of trade and resource allocation.
- jakeogh 8y ago
  Hey, I applaud you for at least admitting it (and using the correct term:)
- Angostura 8y ago
  Tell me more about hats.
- dmix 8y ago
  > But no slavery, war nor suppression of fundamental rights anywhere on the face of the globe sounds pretty good to me. It never just stops there. This is like expecting the vanguard government to give up control after the socialist revolution. There's more than enough history to demonstrate otherwise, and buying into that idea in 2018 is willful blindness. The smaller and more localized the governments the better IMO. There's a reason the smaller countries have the best governments: US in the 19th century-early 20th century, modern Canada and some of Scandinavia, etc. Federalism with state/provincial governments a minimal federal government and no executive branch.
  - mythrwy 8y ago
    There is no history of a universal global government and not agreeing with your unsupported opinion isn't even close to "willful blindness". Why you'd make this kind of a comment I'm not sure. But it's certainly not a response to my comment because it addresses different issues and then claims "this must always be". As far as small and localized, great, yes, I agree. However, there are issues that affect all of at a global scale. We are becoming increasingly tied together at a global scale and people's preferences probably isn't going to change that. This necessitates some kind of global rule making. If your point was that humans are corrupt, well, I agree. So not looking for the UN to take over world government, just pointing out some things to consider.
Molaxx 8y ago
Let me guess, it's well funded by Goerge Soros and a cabal of old Jews. But seriously, non of what you said is "well based" you should at least provide some sources when you use this term.
- jakeogh 8y ago
  Personally, when I don't like what someone said, I don't smear them with antisemitism. Buy hey, each to his own. I have noticed that's a common go-to when anyone points out having sovereign countries is a good thing, maybe they just cant argue it on the merits. I'll leave it here, since it's non-HN stuff.
  - Molaxx 8y ago
    I never said sovereign states aren't a good idea. I believe they are, but I also believe the nationalistic sentiment is a double edged sword. But all of this has nothing to do with my comment. The point was, You fire off with unbased claims that are tainted by paranoia. As a joke I referenced similiar type of claims. I guess It was a mistake since it gave you an easy out from actually substinating your claims.
    - jakeogh 8y ago
      So you double down with a label? You asked for a cite on based, that's opinion, like saying "is awesome". I could easily go into why I think that, but it's pointless since it's not a statement of fact that one needs citations for. Maybe you want to move the goalpost to your second reply? If so, the TPP, EU, and similar pushes for a NAU (very much on hold due to the backlash aka "nationalism" in the US) are well funded examples.
      - Molaxx 8y ago
        Claiming something is based literally means it's based on something. That something is usually expected to be some fact or some research. If that something is just your opinion, than it's misleading to use the term based. The whole point of my original reply to the OP was seeking citations for his claim. Why did you even reply if it was just to add an opinion? Why are you still on the whole global government thing? It has nothing to do with this discussion.
richardjdare 8y ago
I for one, am thoroughly tired and fed up with being expected to think of another human being from two hours flight away as some kind of alien. It's absurd when I can have face-to-face conversations with people on the other side of the world using the device in my pocket. We are already in the midst of a functionally global civilisation only no one believes in it. Here I am having effortless conversations with other humans from all over the world, yet somehow these same people are arbitrarily, absolute "others" who I might one day be expected to kill on the drum-beat and flag-wave of some demagogue who has managed to whip up the masses. The biggest disappointment of the past few years is that no one has outmanoeuvred such a played-out ethos as nationalism and the ethnic chauvinism that frequently accompanies it. The biggest surprise is that so many technologists have apparently supported it.
- jakeogh 8y ago
  People having self-determinism is the most important feature of having sovereign countries. It's a market of competing ideas. The internet makes it possible for someone in (insert country with less freedom of expression) to see what someone in (insert country with more) has. Making it out as a "some kind of alien" us vs them thing misses the point. People immigrate, and many countries (including my country) let that happen, and they get the benefits of that. It's pretty rare to even hear about the countries that don't allow others to become citizens, although they are pretty major players.

thaumaturgy 8y ago

I was alluding to this for instance: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/03/silicon-valley-tech-alt-right-racism-misogyny/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/03/silicon-valley-... I'm a little embarrassed to reference that particular article, but it should provide enough search term fertilizer for you to find other articles on the subject if you're interested.

Molaxx 8y ago
Thanks