4 ms·

That majority of people can afford to focus on work or put in their 8 hours and go back to their families thanks to a "vocal minority" which was able to convinc

by blub 7y ago

That majority of people can afford to focus on work or put in their 8 hours and go back to their families thanks to a "vocal minority" which was able to convince others in the past to fight for new rights and for what's right. Obviously some people think there's more to life than cashing a large paycheck and writing code. "Not interested in politics" is an euphemism for clueless and easy to manipulate by those that are.

BeetleB 7y ago
>That majority of people can afford to focus on work or put in their 8 hours and go back to their families thanks to a "vocal minority" which was able to convince others in the past to fight for new rights and for what's right. That it is due to a vocal minority doesn't mean it is due to this vocal minority. Not all vocal minorities are equal, and nor should all vocal minorities be treated alike. Freedom of speech is a great thing. That doesn't mean everyone exercising their freedom to speak results in a positive.
- mAEStro-paNDa 7y ago
  >That it is due to a vocal minority doesn't mean it is due to this vocal minority. Not all vocal minorities are equal, and nor should all vocal minorities be treated alike. This is obvious and should go without saying. The parent comment gave an example of a positive consequence of an instance of this so-called "vocal minority", since the grandparent comment left no room for any positive angle on this. I'm seriously confused how this translates into treating all "vocal-minorities" equally or that they all result in a positive.
  - BeetleB 7y ago
    >since the grandparent comment left no room for any positive angle on this. I do not see this. Grandparent said "a vocal minority", which I interpret as a specific vocal minority. Like when someone says "there is a vocal person in my team who is obnoxious" - it does not imply that all vocal people in all teams are obnoxious. My point was the example given by the person I responded to is kind of irrelevant. Yes, vocal minorities have done great things for many, many people. The GP to my comment was not talking about those, and listing positive vocal minorities that exist or have existed is irrelevant.
    - mAEStro-paNDa 7y ago
      My interpretation of the initial comment you replied to was that pointing out that there are consequences of "vocal minorities" in the past that have led to great improvements and considering such examples almost always have significant pushback implies the possibility that perception is misplaced. However, I see where you are coming from and thank you for clarifying.
    - blub 7y ago
      It's not irrelevant at all. The ex-Google poster was using the fact that only a minority of Google employees are fighting for those causes to dismiss their views. I countered by saying that vocal minorities were able to achieve great things in the past, so implicitly their arguments should be evaluated on their merit.
- blub 7y ago
  I was drawing a comparison between the people inside Google fighting against e.g. censorship and military contracts and others which fought similar fights before them. I did not say that the same vocal minority is responsible for all progress. Neither did I say that all vocal minorities are alike. All of this should be blindingly obvious to any adult, unless they're trying to twist words, be pedantic or generally argue in bad faith.
mieseratte 7y ago
> "Not interested in politics" is an euphemism for clueless and easy to manipulate by those that are. Or a polite way of saying "I fundamentally disagree with you but don't feel like getting into a debate at work, please leave me alone." That there exists a vocal minority does not mean they are right. There exists vocal minorities calling for the dissolution of most of your most fundamental rights.
- scruple 7y ago
  > "I [snip] don't feel like getting into a debate [snip], please leave me alone." I do this for all manner of things, including political discussions at work. That other people don't hold this as a default position is astounding to me.
- blub 7y ago
  My comment was posted on an article about Google, so it follows that it's connected to the minorities inside Google which were fighting against e.g. a censored search engine in China or military contracts. Notably absent on their list of demands was the dissolution of most of anyone's fundamental rights.
Chazprime 7y ago
"Not interested in politics" is an euphemism for clueless and easy to manipulate by those that are. Conversely, there are also those who are "too political" and want to bring their politics into every aspect of their lives and the lives of those around them. People like this can be as toxic as those they are speaking out against.

by blub 7y ago

BeetleB 7y ago

>That majority of people can afford to focus on work or put in their 8 hours and go back to their families thanks to a "vocal minority" which was able to convince others in the past to fight for new rights and for what's right. That it is due to a vocal minority doesn't mean it is due to this vocal minority. Not all vocal minorities are equal, and nor should all vocal minorities be treated alike. Freedom of speech is a great thing. That doesn't mean everyone exercising their freedom to speak results in a positive.

mAEStro-paNDa 7y ago
>That it is due to a vocal minority doesn't mean it is due to this vocal minority. Not all vocal minorities are equal, and nor should all vocal minorities be treated alike. This is obvious and should go without saying. The parent comment gave an example of a positive consequence of an instance of this so-called "vocal minority", since the grandparent comment left no room for any positive angle on this. I'm seriously confused how this translates into treating all "vocal-minorities" equally or that they all result in a positive.
- BeetleB 7y ago
  >since the grandparent comment left no room for any positive angle on this. I do not see this. Grandparent said "a vocal minority", which I interpret as a specific vocal minority. Like when someone says "there is a vocal person in my team who is obnoxious" - it does not imply that all vocal people in all teams are obnoxious. My point was the example given by the person I responded to is kind of irrelevant. Yes, vocal minorities have done great things for many, many people. The GP to my comment was not talking about those, and listing positive vocal minorities that exist or have existed is irrelevant.
  - mAEStro-paNDa 7y ago
    My interpretation of the initial comment you replied to was that pointing out that there are consequences of "vocal minorities" in the past that have led to great improvements and considering such examples almost always have significant pushback implies the possibility that perception is misplaced. However, I see where you are coming from and thank you for clarifying.
  - blub 7y ago
    It's not irrelevant at all. The ex-Google poster was using the fact that only a minority of Google employees are fighting for those causes to dismiss their views. I countered by saying that vocal minorities were able to achieve great things in the past, so implicitly their arguments should be evaluated on their merit.
blub 7y ago
I was drawing a comparison between the people inside Google fighting against e.g. censorship and military contracts and others which fought similar fights before them. I did not say that the same vocal minority is responsible for all progress. Neither did I say that all vocal minorities are alike. All of this should be blindingly obvious to any adult, unless they're trying to twist words, be pedantic or generally argue in bad faith.

mieseratte 7y ago

> "Not interested in politics" is an euphemism for clueless and easy to manipulate by those that are. Or a polite way of saying "I fundamentally disagree with you but don't feel like getting into a debate at work, please leave me alone." That there exists a vocal minority does not mean they are right. There exists vocal minorities calling for the dissolution of most of your most fundamental rights.

scruple 7y ago
> "I [snip] don't feel like getting into a debate [snip], please leave me alone." I do this for all manner of things, including political discussions at work. That other people don't hold this as a default position is astounding to me.
blub 7y ago
My comment was posted on an article about Google, so it follows that it's connected to the minorities inside Google which were fighting against e.g. a censored search engine in China or military contracts. Notably absent on their list of demands was the dissolution of most of anyone's fundamental rights.

Chazprime 7y ago

"Not interested in politics" is an euphemism for clueless and easy to manipulate by those that are. Conversely, there are also those who are "too political" and want to bring their politics into every aspect of their lives and the lives of those around them. People like this can be as toxic as those they are speaking out against.