5 ms·
Sounds like Antifa, or the right wing equivalent. Before the swarm of downvotes, everyone think about what happens when we decide to use violence to impose thei
by S_A_P 7y ago
Sounds like Antifa, or the right wing equivalent. Before the swarm of downvotes, everyone think about what happens when we decide to use violence to impose their point of view. The government should be our client, not our ruler. We should be able to protest and be heard without fear.
- classicsnoot 7y agoI'm sorry you have been censored. Controlled opposition and provocation are tried and true methods for controlling narrative and spin balancing. Unfortunately, the silicon valley bubble crowd can neither be disabused of their fantastical notions of reality nor can they accept that their unwashed heros may in fact be a part of the machine they tacitly support.
- dang 7y agoI'm the person who moderated the above bit, and I'm pretty confused about who my unwashed heroes are and what machine I support.
- joaomacp 7y ago> The government should be our client, not our ruler Unfortunately, that has never happened in history.
- yasp 7y agoWhy is that a more likely theory than them being government sponsored?
- greenhatman 7y agoI think he's implying that Antifa is government sponsored as well.
- vkou 7y agoAntifa doesn't impose a point of view at gunpoint. It is resistance to fascism - which is the quintessential point of view that is, inevitably, imposed at gunpoint, first with the protection of the police, and later, with the apparatus of the police. The last time that viewpoint held mainstream support, sixty million people were killed - and it had to be put down, at gunpoint.
- chachachoney 7y agoIt's a nonsensical comparison unless you're well versed in doublespeak.
- dang 7y agoPlease don't take HN threads further into ideological flamewar. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- classicsnoot 7y agoYou are always so quick to shut down discussion. You always ring the flame war warning bell, then I watch people of a "certain" political flavor signal and counter signal their righteousness when it comes to climate change or any other settled topic. Maybe you guys should just add a "no unpopular or uncomfortable thoughts" rule instead of pretending you are saving the discussion from certain doom by soft censoring unpopular opinions. This is just my opinion, as well it is a dead'd thread, so please don't shadow ban me. Again.
- dang 7y agoWe ask people not to do generic ideological discussion because it's boring and not what HN is for. A good example is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19987774 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19987774. We don't need that here—it has all been repeated millions of times, is all predictable, and therefore is all off topic. We do eventually ban users who keep doing that on HN, so please stop. Shadowban means banning someone without telling them. When we banned you before, we told you at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10883352 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10883352 and discussed with you later over email.
- dondawest 7y agoYou are always SO quick to shut down discussion but the guy you’re replying to is not flaming anyone and he is making really interesting points
- dang 7y agoThe issue isn't that the commenter was flaming a particular person but that the comment was going into a generic ideological tangent. That's a classic flamewar zone and off topic here. I'm sorry to tell you that it's off topic since you find it interesting, but we don't have much choice but to build firewalls around HN. Highly-charged political topics would take over very quickly otherwise; they are more impassioned and inflammatory (and important, arguably) than anything else that gets discussed here. By the way, I'm sorry that I didn't have a chance to respond to you in earlier threads. I saw your comments and would normally have been happy to answer, but ran out of time.