3 ms·
>I suspect that no matter how abhorrent the view is, I can start an in-person discussion if there is scope for discussion¹. Go ahead, state them here. I will br
by Bakary 6y ago
>I suspect that no matter how abhorrent the view is, I can start an in-person discussion if there is scope for discussion¹. Go ahead, state them here. I will bring the arguments up in person.
I don't need to be convinced, I am sure you can come up with arguments for any topic. My point is more along the lines that what stops debates in real life isn't edginess, extreme views in and of themselves, or the lack of arguments. After all, many people enjoy the feeling of camaraderie that comes from sharing purportedly taboo topics with people they don't know all that well yet. It's just that what is actually abhorrent as measured by people's actual rejection of a discussion has more to do with calling into question the status or material wealth of their own class. For example, looking at a typical high-salary liberal in the tech sector, they generally hold a mix of standard pro-equity beliefs, some more discreet randian/ancap beliefs about separating themselves from what they see as lower classes and the meddling government, and a strong taboo surrounding an actual decrease in their social or effective capital.
Of course, this is all an intuitive reasoning based on anecdotal experience, so we might just be butting anecdotal realities at each other.
- renewiltord 6y agoSure, but the topic of this thread is the idea that there is such a monoculture in Silicon Valley that mentioning these ideas will get you cancelled. I think that is wholly untrue. If there is a monoculture, then there are ideas that are abhorrent to that monoculture. I will attempt, at my own risk, to bring up these ideas and see if I'm cancelled if someone out there will just state them instead of talking in vague terms about these automatic blackball ideas. We can test this hypothesis. I am volunteering. There is no risk to anyone else. I don't see why no one is taking me up on this. Or rather, I do see why.
- Bakary 6y agoTo get back to the topic of the thread, I do not think it is a rigid monoculture. In this sense, I agree with you. I see it more as a spectrum. I don't think that you will be cancelled wherever you go, either, merely that it will be much more difficult to strike up a debate or to keep it going. People tend to just glaze over and change the topic to something more fun or pretend-taboo, but not much more than that. If you do decide to test it out, I don't predict that anything remarkable will happen beyond an awkward lull in the conversation. My entire point is that I was surprised because of all the beliefs you mentioned having tested out in a social setting, all seemed to sit squarely within that spectrum (distancing from other classes, technocratic solutions to social ills, desire to bypass the government... etc.). Some examples of ideas that would probably be less well received: - Far-left principles involving redistribution of tech worker capital - Explicit racism instead of the condescending or implied version - Anything to do with reversing gentrification or having poor people move next to their homes Basically anything that would upset someone who is both socially liberal on the surface but has a discreet cynical side and a strong material incentive to keep the status quo going. In other words, a neoliberal. Beyond that, there's not much else I was looking to add or test out.
- renewiltord 6y agoAh, well, this is a position I can easily avoid arguing with considering much of it is likely correct. I'm sure I'll get arguments out of those but no cancelling so I'm content with that level of agreement.