4 ms·

It's actually worse than just "virtue signaling". It sends a political hat-trick of bad to the right side of the political spectrum: It curtails real freedom, l

It's actually worse than just "virtue signaling". It sends a political hat-trick of bad to the right side of the political spectrum: It curtails real freedom, lectures condescendingly, and proportionally doesn't actually help. The "straw laws" are tailor made for a backlash.

yourbandsucks 8y ago
It reminds me of some of the extreme positions the NRA has taken. Like talking about arming all teachers in response to school shootings. Nobody thinks that's a good idea, whatever you think about gun rights. I'm realizing that positions like that, or this straw thing... the ideas are successful with groups because they're impractical and dumb. It's about exhibiting group fealty. I'm so devoted, I'll say things that any non-member thinks are ridiculous. It's like burning the boats behind you when you land on shore.
- tgb 8y ago
  I don't think arming teachers is a good idea but I do know people that literally do. And Betsy DeVos has apparently been floating the idea of using federal funding to purchase those guns. [1] On the flip side, I've seen an op-ed in NYT or Washington Post (I don't recall) calling for the repeal of the second amendment - and I can't imagine how incredibly stupid the person making that must be. It will never happen and yet it plays exactly into the "Obama wants to take our guns"-type arguments. Of course, that author isn't actually stupid, they just aren't motivated by gun control legislation but rather by getting themselves attention. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/22/us/politics/betsy-devos-guns.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/22/us/politics/betsy-devos-g...
  - wyldfire 8y ago
    It was in the NYT and it was by Justice John Paul Stevens [1]. I don't think it's stupid and certainly doesn't seem like a ploy for attention. Repealing the second amendment does not mean banning firearms altogether. Writing a new amendment with better scope might be an option, or relying on congress to enact sensible limits might also be an option. But I do agree with you that such an amendment would be received as "[the left] wants to take our guns." That's the challenge of politics: you have to meet that criticism head-on and be clear about what sort of policies would get changed. This is no different from debating critics of socialized medicine who quickly throw up their hands and say "Death Panels!" [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-second-amendment.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens...
    - tgb 8y ago
      You're probably right given who it was that it wasn't a call for attention. However, the more respectable, more established someone is, the worse it makes this. It's hard to brush off the claims that the left wants to take away their guns when it's not just a bizarre fringe. I do think this is qualitatively different from arguing for socialized medicine - in this analogy that would be equivalent to talking about increased mandatory background checks, increasing the ability of police to seize guns, etc. The analog of arguing for repealing the second amendment would be to actually propose making things called "death panels." I know that the slightest thing gets misconstrued by the other side (regardless of what side) but you don't have to serve it to them on a silver platter!
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- throwaway76543 8y ago
  Slatestarcodex wrote a fantastic blog on exactly this subject: "The Toxoplasma of Rage" http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/
  - digi_owl 8y ago
    Two things. firstly this got me thinking of the interplay between MLK and Malcolm X. Secondly, overton windows.
  - thinkingemote 8y ago
    Thanks for that! "Plastics" as a media thing is like "Fake News" in how it works. It's a spectacle
- njarboe 8y ago
  CGP Grey has a shortish(7 min) video with some great insights into this phenomenon[1]. Highly recommended. [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc
- mhb 8y ago
  Creating their own straw men. Sorry.
- syshum 8y ago
  >> Nobody thinks that's a good idea, whatever you think about gun rights. I am a gun rights supporter, very extreme one as I believe all gun laws on the books today are clearly violations of the pain reading of the 2nd amendment, any federal gun laws would require the passage of a constitutional amendment. I also support the idea that any teacher that has the desire to be armed for their own defense and the defense of others should be allowed to be under the law. No teacher should be forced to carry as a condition of their job however no teacher should be prevented from it by law either. That is the "extreme" NRA position you believe no one thinks is a good idea, but in fact is widely supported in libertarian circles, as well as actual gun rights circles. If you believe "no one" supports it then I would question if you exist in a echo chamber
  - GW150914 8y ago
    It feels like you’re strongly supporting his closing point: the ideas are successful with groups because they're impractical and dumb. It's about exhibiting group fealty. I'm so devoted, I'll say things that any non-member thinks are ridiculous. It's like burning the boats behind you when you land on shore. For the 99.9% who don’t define themselves through group membership as whatever version of libertarian you are, and out ideology far above practicality it’s nuts. What you’re saying however does strongly proclaim your membership in that group, sort of like a communist carrying around a little red book. The fact that it turns off everyone else is a bonus proving your devotion.
    - syshum 8y ago
      >>What you’re saying however does strongly proclaim your membership in that group, I did not really proclaim my membership in either group I mention, I stated what the opinions of people in those groups are This was done not "define myself through group membership" but to refute the position that "no one" or very few people support such a position. HN has a echo problem, most people on this site lean in a single political direction, and share a singular political view, that of the Silicon Valley left.. The point of my comment was that the entire nation does not in fact share they view and to believe "no one" shares the "extreme views" of the NRA highlights nicely that echo chamber

yourbandsucks 8y ago

It reminds me of some of the extreme positions the NRA has taken. Like talking about arming all teachers in response to school shootings. Nobody thinks that's a good idea, whatever you think about gun rights. I'm realizing that positions like that, or this straw thing... the ideas are successful with groups because they're impractical and dumb. It's about exhibiting group fealty. I'm so devoted, I'll say things that any non-member thinks are ridiculous. It's like burning the boats behind you when you land on shore.

tgb 8y ago
I don't think arming teachers is a good idea but I do know people that literally do. And Betsy DeVos has apparently been floating the idea of using federal funding to purchase those guns. [1] On the flip side, I've seen an op-ed in NYT or Washington Post (I don't recall) calling for the repeal of the second amendment - and I can't imagine how incredibly stupid the person making that must be. It will never happen and yet it plays exactly into the "Obama wants to take our guns"-type arguments. Of course, that author isn't actually stupid, they just aren't motivated by gun control legislation but rather by getting themselves attention. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/22/us/politics/betsy-devos-guns.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/22/us/politics/betsy-devos-g...
- wyldfire 8y ago
  It was in the NYT and it was by Justice John Paul Stevens [1]. I don't think it's stupid and certainly doesn't seem like a ploy for attention. Repealing the second amendment does not mean banning firearms altogether. Writing a new amendment with better scope might be an option, or relying on congress to enact sensible limits might also be an option. But I do agree with you that such an amendment would be received as "[the left] wants to take our guns." That's the challenge of politics: you have to meet that criticism head-on and be clear about what sort of policies would get changed. This is no different from debating critics of socialized medicine who quickly throw up their hands and say "Death Panels!" [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-second-amendment.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens...
  - tgb 8y ago
    You're probably right given who it was that it wasn't a call for attention. However, the more respectable, more established someone is, the worse it makes this. It's hard to brush off the claims that the left wants to take away their guns when it's not just a bizarre fringe. I do think this is qualitatively different from arguing for socialized medicine - in this analogy that would be equivalent to talking about increased mandatory background checks, increasing the ability of police to seize guns, etc. The analog of arguing for repealing the second amendment would be to actually propose making things called "death panels." I know that the slightest thing gets misconstrued by the other side (regardless of what side) but you don't have to serve it to them on a silver platter!
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
throwaway76543 8y ago
Slatestarcodex wrote a fantastic blog on exactly this subject: "The Toxoplasma of Rage" http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/
- digi_owl 8y ago
  Two things. firstly this got me thinking of the interplay between MLK and Malcolm X. Secondly, overton windows.
- thinkingemote 8y ago
  Thanks for that! "Plastics" as a media thing is like "Fake News" in how it works. It's a spectacle
njarboe 8y ago
CGP Grey has a shortish(7 min) video with some great insights into this phenomenon[1]. Highly recommended. [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc
mhb 8y ago
Creating their own straw men. Sorry.
syshum 8y ago
>> Nobody thinks that's a good idea, whatever you think about gun rights. I am a gun rights supporter, very extreme one as I believe all gun laws on the books today are clearly violations of the pain reading of the 2nd amendment, any federal gun laws would require the passage of a constitutional amendment. I also support the idea that any teacher that has the desire to be armed for their own defense and the defense of others should be allowed to be under the law. No teacher should be forced to carry as a condition of their job however no teacher should be prevented from it by law either. That is the "extreme" NRA position you believe no one thinks is a good idea, but in fact is widely supported in libertarian circles, as well as actual gun rights circles. If you believe "no one" supports it then I would question if you exist in a echo chamber
- GW150914 8y ago
  It feels like you’re strongly supporting his closing point: the ideas are successful with groups because they're impractical and dumb. It's about exhibiting group fealty. I'm so devoted, I'll say things that any non-member thinks are ridiculous. It's like burning the boats behind you when you land on shore. For the 99.9% who don’t define themselves through group membership as whatever version of libertarian you are, and out ideology far above practicality it’s nuts. What you’re saying however does strongly proclaim your membership in that group, sort of like a communist carrying around a little red book. The fact that it turns off everyone else is a bonus proving your devotion.
  - syshum 8y ago
    >>What you’re saying however does strongly proclaim your membership in that group, I did not really proclaim my membership in either group I mention, I stated what the opinions of people in those groups are This was done not "define myself through group membership" but to refute the position that "no one" or very few people support such a position. HN has a echo problem, most people on this site lean in a single political direction, and share a singular political view, that of the Silicon Valley left.. The point of my comment was that the entire nation does not in fact share they view and to believe "no one" shares the "extreme views" of the NRA highlights nicely that echo chamber