5 ms·
Yeah it's fascist. I'll say it. It fucking disgusts me. I used to fight it but it's impossible. There's no critical thinking happening. People don't stand for c
by dcow 6y ago
Yeah it's fascist. I'll say it. It fucking disgusts me. I used to fight it but it's impossible. There's no critical thinking happening. People don't stand for civil liberties and freedom anymore. I know it sounds jaded and depressing, but I honestly don't know what to do. The more you fight it the more ostracized you become. When people speak up against the absurdity that is PC culture, they need to be supported. But how can they when everyone's company has a chief diversity officer now? The argument has been that private institutions can do what they want because they are ruled only by the laws of efficient markets. Hospitals don't have to employ smokers as nurses, and so Google doesn't have to employ white male bigots, right? Wrong. I don't understand how private institutions are allowed to skirt the constitution just because it's convenient. That's _not_ justice. A corporation can't murder someone just because it's a private institution. So why are institutions allowed to silence freedom of expression? Why have we institutionalized oppressive mono-culture? What justice is being served? Certainly we've let the pendulum swing far enough. If we're all riding the same train, then what does social justice look like and how do we know when it has been achieved? When have we demonetized enough videos to make everyone happy? When have we de-platformed enough injustice to satisfy the warriors?
- dang 6y agoPlease don't take HN threads further into flamewar. If you lead with "Yeah it's fascist" and "it fucking disgusts me", you're leaving the path of curious conversation, and these threads unfortunately tend not to be self-correcting that way. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- dcow 6y agoPlease, dang, who am I flaming? I'm agreeing with the parent. I'm frustrated. Am I not allowed to present a passionate viewpoint on NH? I mean no disrespect I'm genuinely confused how to respond to your comment. Should I delete mine because I used the word fascist? I absolutely believe the social tendency we're seeing is intolerant and definitionally fascist. It promotes a unified notion of culture and the policies we've seen manifest as a result of it are harmful to freedom of expression. I didn't attack anyone personally and I am presenting an honest, non-trolling, viewpoint with no intention to needlessly provoke anybody.
- dang 6y agoIt's not that you were flaming anybody in particular, thankfully. But the combination of generic rhetoric and high indignation is a marker of flamewar. It's not even that what you posted is so bad—it's just that it reliably leads to worse threads. It's like an expected value calculation (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22expected%20value%22&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...).
- s8923 6y agoI have to say I find these to replies very ironic. (Unless that's ignorant and I'm triggering someone with that, in which case I'll delete this post.)
- cycrutchfield 6y agoI don’t think you understand the constitution or bill of rights as well as you think you do.
- dcow 6y agoWhen you can get fired for something you do in your spare time because another employee says it bursts their bubble, then we’ve crossed into a realm where individuals are no longer free to express themselves because their life, liberty, and ability to pursue happiness is at stake. Yes I know that’s from The Declaration of Independence and not The Constitution. FFS my roommate’s company banned custom emoji in Slack because some committee got trolled by 4chan into thinking :pepe: constitutes hate speech. I’m not making this up...
- cycrutchfield 6y agoNone of that has anything to do with the constitution or bill of rights, which talk about the enumerated powers of the government and the rights of the people that the government may not infringe upon. If you have an issue with your employer, find a new job.
- dcow 6y agoYes the point of our founding documents is exactly to outline a set of rights that citizens collectively enjoy and which shall not be impinged upon. It's not simply the classic "government vs private" dichotomy. We've had freedom of expression cases hit the supreme court related to what students at a public school can wear on a t-shirt. Clearly a scenario much more complex than the government explicitly impinging upon freedom of expression. > If you have an issue with your employer, find a new job. I used to say that too. But there's a catch. Our government sets economic policy. Economic policy governs citizens' ability to find and obtain work, ultimately their ability to prosper. If the economic policy is "anything goes" then we will see and have seen rise of economic machines that suppress freedom of expression in the service of increasing shareholder value. The questions I think we should be asking is "does this make sense?" and, "have the goals outlined in the constitution been effectively achieved?". If government has enacted policy that yields an environment where people are not actually free to express themselves, is this not a failure of government to secure those basic freedoms? I'd be a lot more comfortable telling people not to bother with oppressive employers if, for example, we had a concept of UBI so that people could feasibly sustain themselves in absence of a private economic machine writing their paycheck.
- loopz 6y agoLots of words, but no actual content. Many are frustrated, but it needs constructive channeling.
- dcow 6y agoThere is plenty of content. I’ve asked a few questions that I can never seem to get thoughtful answers to. Care to answer one?