4 ms·

I'm curious about this dissent you speak of. Could you share some examples of it that you have seen or would like to see? Edit: the question was asked in since

I'm curious about this dissent you speak of. Could you share some examples of it that you have seen or would like to see? Edit: the question was asked in sincerity. I haven't seen any such dissent but I live in a bubble. The only conservative dissent I've seen in the last 4 years has been been republicans leaving the party over Trump.

yakireev 6y ago
Go to /r/all and try to find the first pro-T. post and the first "orange man bad" post. If you don't find any pro-T. posts quickly, then this is your example. We know from the election results that about half of the U.S. voters prefer R. party or T. in particular. This is a lot - this can't be a fringe group by definition of "fringe". In 2016, scrolling through reddit you could see it. There was a contested election, there were supporters from both sides on reddit, noisy and visible. In 2020, you'll be hard-pressed to find some pro-T. content unless you know where to look (I don't, and won't bother), it's all "orange man bad" now. He probably is, but come on. So, reddit somehow shut off the half of its home country from participating in political discussion on their website. They're probably in their own right, but this is scary shit.
- pstuart 6y ago
  I need to tread carefully here, but this is the kind of political discussion that HN doesn't want. I'm interested in discussing policy, and the application of same. Tribal warfare politics is ugly and uninteresting. Are you religious? Shall I try to talk you out of your faith? Because that's what discussing T is to his followers. From my vantage point (and I'm not alone in this), it's both fascinating and horrifying but above all, frustrating, because there's no possibility of real dialog. Maybe the reason you don't see anything positive about T where you describe is because there isn't a whole lot to say in that regard?
  - yakireev 6y ago
    > Maybe the reason you don't see anything positive about T where you describe is because there isn't a whole lot to say in that regard? Maybe. Or maybe not. How do I know? Not reddit, but I bookmarked this example a few years ago. It is a very little thing, but very showing. Remember when T. was trying to negotiate some deal with North Korea? One of the things which came out of it was DPRK returning some remnants of U.S. soldiers from the Korean war back to the U.S. I consider the New Yorker to be one of the best pieces of journalism which the U.S. has to offer (no irony here). Here are two articles from there: one is about that story, the remnants of soldiers coming back, another one is about Diet Coke. They were on the front page of their website on the same day, and I clicked both. 1: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/waiting-for-a-box-of-bones-from-north-korea https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/waiting-for-a-box-o... 2: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-decline-and-fall-of-diet-coke-and-the-power-generation-that-loved-it https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-decli... One of them mentions T, another one does not. Can you guess which one? Can you guess whether it is a "positive" mention? So, now back to your question: > Maybe the reason you don't see anything positive about T where you describe is because there isn't a whole lot to say in that regard? Maybe. Or maybe not. How do I know? I'm not from the U.S., but I guess that you are, so you tell me. For now, I can tell you that I lost a lot of trust in the U.S. media, but maybe you can change my mind. I'm not a T. follower, so (according to you) there might be a possibility of a dialog.
    - pstuart 6y ago
      The 2 articles you cite are interesting. I'd argue that the NK article was fine as it -- it was about the soldiers long story coming to a close. Was it by virtue of the actions of T? Sure, I'll give him that. Did he need to be specifically praised for that in the context? No, it wasn't about him, it was about the soldiers. The second article is a "culture" piece and the inclusion of T in that is a head scratcher. I was not impressed by it (regardless of the random T tidbit). That's a sample size of 2, and while both could be arguable evidence for your position, it's not of much to work with. You say you're not a T. follower, but you imply that "the media" is not fair to him. Were you aware of any of his conduct in these past 4 years? Nothing out of the ordinary? Are you aware that he's actively trying to overthrow the election that he lost? Does that seem ok to you? Are you aware of Bush v. Gore? I could go on and on if you wished. But the more important thing is: if I am correct and I'm unable to persuade you then where does that leave us? How can we fix a problem that "doesn't exist"?

yakireev 6y ago

Go to /r/all and try to find the first pro-T. post and the first "orange man bad" post. If you don't find any pro-T. posts quickly, then this is your example. We know from the election results that about half of the U.S. voters prefer R. party or T. in particular. This is a lot - this can't be a fringe group by definition of "fringe". In 2016, scrolling through reddit you could see it. There was a contested election, there were supporters from both sides on reddit, noisy and visible. In 2020, you'll be hard-pressed to find some pro-T. content unless you know where to look (I don't, and won't bother), it's all "orange man bad" now. He probably is, but come on. So, reddit somehow shut off the half of its home country from participating in political discussion on their website. They're probably in their own right, but this is scary shit.

pstuart 6y ago
I need to tread carefully here, but this is the kind of political discussion that HN doesn't want. I'm interested in discussing policy, and the application of same. Tribal warfare politics is ugly and uninteresting. Are you religious? Shall I try to talk you out of your faith? Because that's what discussing T is to his followers. From my vantage point (and I'm not alone in this), it's both fascinating and horrifying but above all, frustrating, because there's no possibility of real dialog. Maybe the reason you don't see anything positive about T where you describe is because there isn't a whole lot to say in that regard?
- yakireev 6y ago
  > Maybe the reason you don't see anything positive about T where you describe is because there isn't a whole lot to say in that regard? Maybe. Or maybe not. How do I know? Not reddit, but I bookmarked this example a few years ago. It is a very little thing, but very showing. Remember when T. was trying to negotiate some deal with North Korea? One of the things which came out of it was DPRK returning some remnants of U.S. soldiers from the Korean war back to the U.S. I consider the New Yorker to be one of the best pieces of journalism which the U.S. has to offer (no irony here). Here are two articles from there: one is about that story, the remnants of soldiers coming back, another one is about Diet Coke. They were on the front page of their website on the same day, and I clicked both. 1: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/waiting-for-a-box-of-bones-from-north-korea https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/waiting-for-a-box-o... 2: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-decline-and-fall-of-diet-coke-and-the-power-generation-that-loved-it https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-decli... One of them mentions T, another one does not. Can you guess which one? Can you guess whether it is a "positive" mention? So, now back to your question: > Maybe the reason you don't see anything positive about T where you describe is because there isn't a whole lot to say in that regard? Maybe. Or maybe not. How do I know? I'm not from the U.S., but I guess that you are, so you tell me. For now, I can tell you that I lost a lot of trust in the U.S. media, but maybe you can change my mind. I'm not a T. follower, so (according to you) there might be a possibility of a dialog.
  - pstuart 6y ago
    The 2 articles you cite are interesting. I'd argue that the NK article was fine as it -- it was about the soldiers long story coming to a close. Was it by virtue of the actions of T? Sure, I'll give him that. Did he need to be specifically praised for that in the context? No, it wasn't about him, it was about the soldiers. The second article is a "culture" piece and the inclusion of T in that is a head scratcher. I was not impressed by it (regardless of the random T tidbit). That's a sample size of 2, and while both could be arguable evidence for your position, it's not of much to work with. You say you're not a T. follower, but you imply that "the media" is not fair to him. Were you aware of any of his conduct in these past 4 years? Nothing out of the ordinary? Are you aware that he's actively trying to overthrow the election that he lost? Does that seem ok to you? Are you aware of Bush v. Gore? I could go on and on if you wished. But the more important thing is: if I am correct and I'm unable to persuade you then where does that leave us? How can we fix a problem that "doesn't exist"?