3 ms·

There's a dead comment on this thread that encapsulates the problem in a nutshell, though probably not the way he intended. One side of the debate refuses to ac

There's a dead comment on this thread that encapsulates the problem in a nutshell, though probably not the way he intended. One side of the debate refuses to accept the other side's right to have different beliefs, and accuses them of treason, being puppets of a foreign state, or various other crimes and immoralities. Trust requires that parties either respect each other, or at least not disrespect each other, and that both parties be willing to communicate. You can't have trust when your counterparts just spends all day slandering you.

troughway 6y ago
And downvoting comments to be dead and flagging them just reinforces their message further. Keep it up HN. Maybe someday your moral superiority will finally shine through.
- dang 6y ago
  I just asked you to stop posting crap comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24735720 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24735720. Perhaps you didn't see that before posting this one. This sort of dross is not what this site is for, and if you can't or won't use HN as intended, we're going to have to ban you.
topkai22 6y ago
A major shift in American social order I’ve seen in my life time is the move from the centrality of “tolerance” to the centrality of “acceptance.” While there are many good reasons for this, it is also a recipe for conflict and distrust. When a person is presented with another person with views or behaviors very different from their own, asking them to simply tolerate the other and not interfere with their life or treat them differently is almost always manageable within a belief system. However, acceptance, not just agreeing to not interfere but embrace many of all aspects of the other is sometimes impossible. A dedicated pro-choice activist who believes reproductive choice is central to women’s rights cannot fully accept a religious believer who is certain abortions are morally reprehensible. A person that believes that traditional American Protestant values are central to the success of the nation cannot accept a textbook claiming that many of those values are flawed and lead to white supremacy without giving up some of their core beliefs.
JohnBooty 6y ago
Easy to say, harder to solve. It's a chicken-and-egg scenario. You can't work with the other person unless you trust them. But how do you trust them when their actions are untrustworthy? Looking at the current political situation, a percentage of the slander is 100% justified. It's not all paranoia -- sometimes the other person really is out to get you (or is at least spectacularly unconcerned about you)

troughway 6y ago

And downvoting comments to be dead and flagging them just reinforces their message further. Keep it up HN. Maybe someday your moral superiority will finally shine through.

dang 6y ago
I just asked you to stop posting crap comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24735720 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24735720. Perhaps you didn't see that before posting this one. This sort of dross is not what this site is for, and if you can't or won't use HN as intended, we're going to have to ban you.

topkai22 6y ago

A major shift in American social order I’ve seen in my life time is the move from the centrality of “tolerance” to the centrality of “acceptance.” While there are many good reasons for this, it is also a recipe for conflict and distrust. When a person is presented with another person with views or behaviors very different from their own, asking them to simply tolerate the other and not interfere with their life or treat them differently is almost always manageable within a belief system. However, acceptance, not just agreeing to not interfere but embrace many of all aspects of the other is sometimes impossible. A dedicated pro-choice activist who believes reproductive choice is central to women’s rights cannot fully accept a religious believer who is certain abortions are morally reprehensible. A person that believes that traditional American Protestant values are central to the success of the nation cannot accept a textbook claiming that many of those values are flawed and lead to white supremacy without giving up some of their core beliefs.

JohnBooty 6y ago

Easy to say, harder to solve. It's a chicken-and-egg scenario. You can't work with the other person unless you trust them. But how do you trust them when their actions are untrustworthy? Looking at the current political situation, a percentage of the slander is 100% justified. It's not all paranoia -- sometimes the other person really is out to get you (or is at least spectacularly unconcerned about you)