14 ms·
A movement that cannot be criticized cannot achieve positive goals
- subroutine 6y agoTop post on hn with 0 comments; seems fitting given the topic. edit: welp, this comment is now completely irrelevant.
- shard972 6y agodang banned anyone with an original opinion from the right under the guise of civility
- unanswered 6y agoAnd yet he hardly needs to given that any such opinions will be flagkilled in seconds. It's pure spite.
- PurpleFoxy 6y agoThis is why I view HN via a telegram bot that posts the top links. Let’s me see what was flagged.
- beaconstudios 6y agoYou can also turn on "showdead" in your profile settings. I always browse with showdead on.
- gcannonkjp 6y agoIs that why every RMS post gets nuked from orbit no matter the comment count?
- arolihas 6y agoRMS?
- gcannonkjp 6y agoRichard M. Stallman
- arolihas 6y agoThat’s a little harsh. Politically charged arguments are just not in the spirit of HN in dang’s opinion
- beaconstudios 6y agoI agree with the idea of having a space where we aren't constantly culture warring, but you have to bear in mind that if you ban political speech then you still inherently permit status quo political speech. And the status quo here is California liberalism.
- mlthoughts2018 6y agoPosts that masquerade as “legitimate dissenting opinions just not getting a fair shake from the left by golly” but which really seek to undermine structures by which systemic racism can possibly be called out and held accountable for harm (like the framework of microaggressions) deserve to be flagged and shut down. They don’t serve any free speech or intellectual honesty purpose to preserve discourse and the psychological safety to disagree, and they are roundly disingenuous tools for filibustering actual legit discourse and progress. It’s just taking crass tools of hate groups and dressing them up with five dollar words and armchair discussion of academic freedom of expression, when really it’s just hostile noise jamming against progress.
- beaconstudios 6y agoYou have no idea what systemic racism is, or what it means for it to be systemic, or how to solve systemic problems. Most of the social justice arguments I've seen about it also have no idea about how to deal with systemic problems. Just thought I'd address that part. Everything else you wrote is word salad.
- mlthoughts2018 6y agosounds suspiciously actually like you don’t know what systemic racism is...
- dang 6y agoIdeologues of every flavor say that - they just swap in $hated-object to complain about. The irony is how isomorphic all these enemies are. Plenty of examples at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26148870 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26148870, and there are a lot more where those came from.
- el-salvador 6y agoI expect many comments here will be made using new accounts.
- subroutine 6y agoimo hn is fairly moderate when it comes to social issues. I think the user base (being mostly tech/eng/stem ppl) approach social issues with a similar logical approach they use in their most aspects of their work/lives; sometimes they/we can be critical to a fault (but I'd take that over left/right political extremes any day). Am I totally off? I'm interested to hear how others would rate hn on a scale of 1-10 (lower = more liberal).
- reducesuffering 6y agoCollectively, HN is more classically liberal than anything. There are some strong leftists and some strong libertarians, but generally Marx or Ayn Rand aren't regarded too highly. Centrist liberal enlightenment values are much more en vogue; think Biden, Macron, Trudeau, Merkel, The Economist, free markets but some government is useful, climate change is real. Generally anti-trumpism but also anti-"woke"/left. A 1-dimensional scale is missing quite a lot in terms of politics. But if you mean classically liberal, it's a 2 out of 10. If you mean US liberal-conservative politics, it's a 3 out of 10.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- subroutine 6y agoI tend to agree with your assessment; 'classically liberal' is a good way to put it. > free markets but some government is useful, climate change is real, anti-trump, anti-woke. yep that describes me. However as a 'classical liberal' I personally like Obama's politics over Biden, Macron, Trudeau, and Merkel. Also I enjoy reading both Marx and Rand.
- verdverm 6y agonon-non-coiners should give this a read and reflect too
- vinay427 6y ago> The problem is that he attempted to question the ideological firmaments of contemporary anti-racist training. These firmaments are protected with aggressive viciousness precisely because they cannot withstand scrutiny. Had Bhattacharya merely scoffed at them, or even if he had been outright condescending and dismissive, he probably would not have received such a severe punishment. The problem was that he was right, and his accusers knew it. This line of reasoning doesn't seem logical to me, but perhaps someone can explain it to me. I don't see how responding with "aggressive viciousness" leads to a conclusion that one knows their position doesn't make sense and that they are in the wrong. This reminds me of reasoning I might associate with a children's playground: "you got mad when I said it, so the rumor must be true!"
- strangeattractr 6y agoNo that's not playground reasoning. If someone points out a contradiction in your reasoning and your only response is to label their pointing out of a contradiction 'dangerous', you are quite literally showcasing the hollowness of your argument.
- vinay427 6y agoSomeone choosing to respond by labeling a contradiction as "dangerous" does not mean there is no proper response, and certainly doesn't (to me) literally showcase the hollowness of an argument. I genuinely don't understand this reasoning, which to me seems like a massive leap.
- strangeattractr 6y agoI'd just like to clarify - you are saying their inability to produce a counterpoint is irrelevant to their argument because there might exist a possible counterpoint not yet articulated that validates their argument?
- vinay427 6y agoEssentially, yes. In other words, I wouldn't endorse their line of argument or discussion, but I also wouldn't use it to dismiss the point being argued.
- baggy_trough 6y agoSee also https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/some-principles-and-observations https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/some-principles-and-obs...
- mssundaram 6y agoThank you for that, great read
- mlthoughts2018 6y agowoof, more like white hot garbage
- mvzvm 6y ago"it should fucking terrify you that a movement that’s been tasked with addressing pressing social problems is designed in such a way that any substantial criticism is met with aggressive punishment. " Couldn't agree more. As someone very liberal that is also exhausted of wokeness, of the constant normalization of racism against whites, and against asians (as model minorities), this hits the nail on the head.
- lawwantsin17 6y agoAnyone who says something should terrify me is trying to terrify me and should be ignored.
- silicon2401 6y agoSame; the worst about this, imo, is the duplicity and hypocrisy. So many people today are using the very tactics that they criticize: division, judgment, hatred, prejudice, exclusion, so on and so on
- mlthoughts2018 6y agoWhat terrifies me are the people shooting and killing asians, cops shooting and killing black people, white evangelicals choosing to believe in QAnon over vaccine science... Maybe after we get a break from widespread hate groups SHOOTING AND KILLING THESE PEOPLE ON A PRACTICALLY WEEKLY BASIS AT THIS POINT, TRYING TO LITERALLY RAM OPPOSING POLITICAL PARTY BUSES OFF THE ROAD, AND LITERALLY PERPETRATING INSURRECTION AGAINST THE CAPITOL THREE MONTHS AGO AT THE EMPHATIC BEHEST OF A SITTING PRESIDENT then I can crack open a cold one, sink back in my recliner and merely be “fucking terrified” of some overblown depiction of over reaching in the name of political correctness.
- undoware 6y agoWhat I find worrisome about this piece: 1. it at no point mentions what the fellow is actually alleged to have said. I'm sure I could find out with a few clicks, but what's up with that? 2. This is mostly an anxiety-rant about an entire political movement-of-movements that, for the most part, has nothing to do with the specifics of this anecdotal case. How is this front-page HN material? Sample size?? Connection with something other than ~feelings~ to leftist tendencies more generally? Like, IDK, this does not seem up to our normal burden-of-proof standards. Not to put too fine a point on it, I think we are showing our bias, allowing mediocre content that we like here....for ~reasons~.... to bubble up without due scrutiny. Wisdom-of-crowds requires a wise crowd. I doubt ours here.
- robertlagrant 6y ago> it at no point mentions what the fellow is actually alleged to have said Did you not read the article? It has extensive quotes.
- unanswered 6y agoThis is HN, "don't read TFA" is rule #2.
- Epenthesis 6y agoThe case was filed more than 2 years ago, but I can't find any follow ups. Does anyone know if there have been more recent developments? t the very least, has UVa issued a response of any sort?
- d3nj4l 6y agoI looked it up, and there’s been a motion to dismiss that was partially granted, but the case is still ongoing as far as I can see.
- prepend 6y agoI found this case from March 31st. [0] UVA filed a motion to dismiss all four counts, judge dismissed three and refused one, so it’s carrying forward. Seems weird that the state attorney general is defending the university. Is that normal? Also this was a second year med school student and the “professional conduct complaint” was filed by a professor. So these are all adults, not kids involved. [0] https://casetext.com/case/bhattacharya-v-murray https://casetext.com/case/bhattacharya-v-murray
- dgfitz 6y agoFlagged. How predictable.
- mlthoughts2018 6y agoThankfully this getting flagged is still routine. Can you imagine how sickening a place this would be if this kind of post didn’t get flagged? It’s horrific, yet parading around as if it was merely legit discourse that is snubbed unfairly by the left.
- the_optimist 6y agoThis is simply the best kind of humor: ambiguous parody
- DoreenMichele 6y agoIf you attempt to engage critically with a (specific person) regardless of how thorough and respectful you may be....(etc etc -- it won't go over well). Conversely, if you don’t provide specifics, you’ll be accused of making stuff up. This is an issue I have thought a great deal about. It isn't peculiar to any particular issue. I think it is a product of the internet age, where we can talk about and also talk with virtually anyone on the planet in real time. I have wrestled with this a lot because I find social stuff interesting. If I talk about a particular person in order to have a concrete example, I'm in danger of doing real harm to that person. If I don't cite a real world example, people may not believe it or may not be able to comprehend my point. One of my solutions is I talk about myself a lot. The result: I get accused of being a narcissist and attention monger who "makes everything about me." ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- SkipperCat 6y agoThis whole article reads like a Kafkaeque horror story. Such a shame that this is what parts of the social justice movement have become. I say "some parts" because it is a subset. There are lots of people in the progressive movement who are not this crazy. And, in the same manner, there are conservatives who disavow QAnon and it ilk. Still, sadly there's too many on either side... Hopefully the pendulums will swing back to the center.
- tryonenow 6y agoQAnon is fringe. Social Justice is mainstream progressivism. There is no QAnon equivalent to diversity and inclusion policy/training in industry or academia. It is not socially acceptable to discuss QAnon except critically. There is no comparison here, this is the thrust of the social justice movement, and even if one accepts that a minority of progressives believe in this sort of extremism, the unfortunate fact is that it is being forced into society from the top down, with training, quotas, "mental health," and the like.
- SkipperCat 6y agoA majority of social justice is mainstream progressivism. $15/hr min wage, higher taxes on the 1%, etc. But there is a subset of the left which has gone nuts. This article is a prefect example of it. And the fringe left doesn't have to mirror QAnon, but if they're both espousing their own "truths" without the scrutiny of facts, then they're both wrong. Totally agree with you on your statement "There is no QAnon equivalent to diversity and inclusion policy/training in industry". The private sector is a lot more grounded than academia. Mostly for the better, sometimes for the worse.
- lawwantsin17 6y agoif you can't criticize "the boogie man left" then what is this piece but evidence against it's main point. have you been cancelled yet? it's all a smoke screen by the right. Twitter doesn't cancel things, the people's history get them fired. For fucks sakes. We're supposed to be intelligent and we're getting swindled by a smoke screen? IN 2121? After a pandemic and a con man president? THIS misdirection is what you choose to write about?
- whimsicalism 6y agoI think there is a distinction between holding the belief that `racism exists and is evidentially relatively prevalent in day-to-day life` and the `set of beliefs associated with corporate/academic D&I training`, which include many of the things criticized in this article. They also tends to be class-blind. Where I think this article goes wrong, however, is when by conflating the two. The "Left" is a broad category. Certainly, some might conflate criticism with "violence", but I think it is a markedly conservative trend to try to conflate corporate D&I training with the Left writ large.
- throwaway823882 6y ago"Again, none of what I have described is an exaggeration" But it could well be a selective presentation of the evidence in order to make your case. There's a reason journalists are at least supposed to attempt to show the other side: so the reader doesn't get snowed, and the writer can keep some small measure of objectivity. Since that hasn't happened here, one should assume this portrayal is not accurate.
- prepend 6y agoBased on reading the court docs [0] OP’s account doesn’t seem selective. There’s audio of the event that led to the complaint and it sounds spot on to how it was described in the blog. The court docs include lots of info but we’ll need to see the end result. But it seems like the blog post is accurate and UVA is being totally stupid and will waste a lot of money losing this case. [0] https://casetext.com/case/bhattacharya-v-murray https://casetext.com/case/bhattacharya-v-murray
- throwaway823882 6y agoFirst off, does every court case's records show 100% the true story? If this were true, wouldn't every court case in history be completely incontrovertible? I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that just because it's been through court does not mean that the whole story is evidenced in court record. But IANAL. Second, the article goes into things that happened after the audio confrontation, and it's claimed that those are the things that led to his dismissal. I would want to know more about those things, and not just whatever evidence has been accepted by the court, or the interpretation told by this article.
- prepend 6y agoI don’t think anyone is claiming it’s 100% true or complete. But there is literally audio recording of the precipitating event that led to the court case. We probably will never know everything. But from what we know now, that’s helpful for forming opinions. The case wasn’t dismissed, and it was explicitly not dismissed and continues. 3/4 counts were dismissed. But one was not, thus its continuing. It’s inaccurate to say that the case was dismissed. And of course we want to know more, that’s a given. But in this situation we already know a lot.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- alphabettsy 6y agoI’ll give the guy the benefit of the doubt. The outcome is slightly mischaracterized with regard to who’s in agree about the facts. There’s clearly some unresolved issues about what exactly happened as the brief makes clear. Exactly what was said at the hearing following the event was not recorded and the events following are a he said, she said according to the judges opinion. I believe there shouldn’t have been a hearing in the first place. If it’s true that he was argumentative and disrespectful towards those in authority that’s always a good way to get yourself in trouble regardless if you’re right or wrong. My thoughts are that there probably shouldn’t have been a hearing and that he handled it poorly even though it shouldn’t have happened. Should that be blamed on “the left’s” intolerance? Idk.
- Blikkentrekker 6y ago> The hardest part of talking about malignant trends on the broad left is that, well, you’re not allowed to talk about them. It’s no exaggeration to say that criticism has become fully conflated with violence. If you attempt to engage critically with a left-liberal writer–regardless of how thorough and respectful you may be, and regardless of how powerful, public, or insulated the subject of the criticism–you will be accused of dismissing and erasing the writer, of inciting violence against the writer, and of committing some form of genocide against whichever identity groups the writer belongs to. Such boogyman victim complex that also only singles out only one particular ideology, showing it's colors, most likely. Yes, I've certainly engaged those too absorbed in politics to be able to handle criticism, whatever the political allegiance might be, but most persons are far more reasonable than what the article makes anything out to be. A minority of persons does what the article describes, and this certainly isn't isolated to this so-called “broad left”. — that the writer singles out that alone is reason to be suspicious. > You’d think a group that obsesses over power differentials and their own marginalization would have some grasp of this. Regardless of which side you fall into with this particular culture war, it should fucking terrify you that a movement that’s been tasked with addressing pressing social problems is designed in such a way that any substantial criticism is met with aggressive punishment. Many groups obsess over power differentials and everyone who argues politics from such “groups” seems to consider himself the victim and oppressed. They all have their cherry picked statistics to show it, and they all ignore the statistics of the other side and the statistics deal with matters that are so divergent from one another that it's really impossible to tell who has it “worse”, but all are convinced it is they. This isn't isolated to the so-called “broad left”; this is a function of special interest group politics. Also, it has to be said, I estimate a 95% chance this article is both written by someone inside of the U.S.A., who also failed to even consider that a world outside of the U.S.A. exists when writing it. — it carries the stench of this style.
- someelephant 6y agoPeople with ptsd will find many comments or behaviors aggressive. All the training in the world won't take away that persons pain. Sadly, the people with ptsd will still have it even if a hundred people are punished after interacting with them.
- beervirus 6y agoPeople who self-diagnose / pretend to have ptsd will pretend to find many comments or behaviors aggressive.
- someelephant 6y agoPerhaps I'm naive but I think few people pretend to have that kind of pain. They do indeed have it. It might not arise from a truly traumatic experience but when somebody is under stress they do often react badly to people seen as threats. And people under stress see threats everywhere.
- type0 6y ago> It might not arise from a truly traumatic experience... If it is not from life threatening situation it's not PTSD, it can be a serious case of anxiety disorder but you shouldn't confuse those.
- someelephant 6y agoIt's an interesting question. Is a traumatic experience created in your mind different from one that occurred in the natural world. On the surface perhaps but on a neurological level I don't know.
- Causality1 6y agoThe fact it's so difficult to differentiate between the mission statement of an informal group and their actual behavior only adds to the problem. Maybe a group behaves well in your locality but badly in someone else's. How are we to tally up thousands of incidents and say "Oh ok this group has a 90% positivity rate so you should feel friendly towards them."? It's impossible.
- enw 6y agoWhy was this flagged?
- quelsolaar 6y agoI dont know. Maybe someone is trying help prove the point of the article?
- beej71 6y agoProbably because it's quite arguably not hacker news.
- rvz 6y agoOne reason is that it encourages wrong-think in healthy discussions. /s Questioning why something is flagged is also against the 'HN Hivemind'. Now get in line. /s
- beervirus 6y agoBecause words are violence now.
- AnimalMuppet 6y agoPolitics is generally off topic. Things that are likely to give rise to flame wars are also generally discouraged. You may agree or disagree on whether this particular one is worth discussing, but that's probably the general idea behind the flagging.
- d3nj4l 6y ago
- jshmrsn 6y agoIt’s seems like there’s a gap in this story, at least as it’s presented by the article. The article says he was baited into a meeting, and then two weeks after the meeting was when the real trouble began. Did he in fact say something genuinely unconscionable during that meeting? If so, saying you were “baited” isn’t automatic immunity. So much of what the article says makes me want to pick up the pitch forks, but it’s also clear this article has an anti-left goal in mind, so I’d like to understand more before letting myself get emotional about it. I say it has an anti-left goal, because it’s framing the issue of community ostracization on the basis of different beliefs as a specifically left issue. Go try talking about the benefits of socialism in a far right community and see how that goes.
- angry_octet 6y agoI agree, it is framed as a problem with Left thought, but all movements have their sacred cows and dogma. Except I don't think nuanced criticism of Trump economic policy is going to result in anything more than being called a soy boy -- they are insensitive to criticism like that. In contrast, academia has long and twisty schemes of thought. But previously if you were 'wrong' you just didn't get any grant money or significant publications and pretty soon you had to leave (if you didn't have tenure, but even if you did you could lose students, lab/office space, favourite subjects). Now, having divergent opinions can result in something akin to bees ejecting an intruder from the hive. I don't believe that this particular case is representative though; far more often it seems like nothing is done.
- spoonjim 6y agoYou do realize that the point of the follow up meeting is to bait the heretic into saying something truly unconscionable? It’s like trying to get bitten by a dog so you can put it down: punish it for something non-transgressive, confusing them; threaten severe consequences, scaring them; and then initiate conflict to extract the maximally emotional response.
- tanseydavid 6y ago>> it’s also clear this article has an anti-left goal in mind I feel that positioning things in terms of PRO vs ANTI is not accurate or helpful in many cases, including this one. Is reasoned criticism necessarily ANTI in nature? I do not think so.
- maroonblazer 6y agoI thought Scott Lilienfeld spelled out very clearly the problems with microaggressions in his paper "Microaggressions: Strong Claims, Inadequate Evidence". It's behind a paywall but the gist can be read here: https://aeon.co/essays/why-a-moratorium-on-microaggressions-policies-is-needed https://aeon.co/essays/why-a-moratorium-on-microaggressions-... In the paper he suggested areas for further study that could affirm the idea, but I've not seen any, based on the Google Scholar search I set up.
- happytoexplain 6y agoThis is petty identity politics framed as a criticism of petty identity politics.
- EarthLaunch 6y agoYes, it's a low quality article. I agreed with the title, but after reading it decided not to upvote. When I returned to read comments, it's flagged.
- ta20210405 6y agoNo, it's a high quality article. I agreed with the title, but after reading it decided to upvote. When I returned to read comments, it's flagged.
- happytoexplain 6y agoDon't you think your mocking the parent's words is petty? That's the kind of attitude I was criticizing.
- mvzvm 6y agoWhy was this flagged @dang?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- astrange 6y agoIsn't it because people flagged it? They aren't required to provide a reason. Usually these get taken down because there is nothing new to say about them.
- poormystic 6y agoThis post works for me. Why has it been flagged? Is this an example of self-fulfilling prophecy?
- beervirus 6y ago>[flagged] Well that’s pretty on-message. Well done, thin skinned HNers.
- mc32 6y agoSo much for intellectual curiosity and finding answers to open questions in academia. This is a sad turn of events where asking for evidence is evidence of maliciousness rather than revealing fraud or vacuousness on the side of the person making the claims. If someone makes a claim they certainly should be capable of response. And the institution using outrageously euphemistic language when calling for discipline. What fragile institutions. This is terrible and taking us to nowhere fast. Even victims of rape and assault are called as witnesses and aren’t spared, but here, questioning a poor argument is grounds for discipline because it called into question the basis for an ideology with weak underpinnings.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- GoodJokes 6y agoThe author also doesn’t provide much insight into patterns of behavior either. That being said, everything that is written I agree with...but I also still have no faith in the full details of the situation.
- spoonjim 6y agoHonestly this Bhattacharya fellow seems either monumentally stupid or monumentally brave. In today’s left-aligned milieus like academia, challenging whatever is coming out of the racial outrage industry is like spitting on Kim Il-Sung’s statue in Pyongyang.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- tim333 6y ago>The hardest part of talking about malignant trends on the broad left is that, well, you’re not allowed to talk about them. Personally I'm exposed to loads of talking about malignant trends on the broad left, or at least the woke bit. Maybe it's just who I follow on twitter etc but I see far more criticism of woke than I see actual wokeness. Titania McGrath (satire) is quite funny if you enjoy jokes about that. https://mobile.twitter.com/TitaniaMcGrath https://mobile.twitter.com/TitaniaMcGrath
- sleepysysadmin 6y agoRight now nobody can discuss politics. Where there was once a chance to influence or change a mind that's impossible now. For that very same reason that's why the source of political knowledge is comedians ONLY. From the left-wing mass media you have your typical comedians like stephen colbert. In the podcast scene you have folks like Joe rogan. On the right wing you have folks like steven crowder. They are all comedians. Only comedians are allowed to criticize or discuss politics. Which is only true in the USA. Outside the USA? Hell Canada just to the north actively fines comedians for jokes. RCMP arrest book authors. Canada once had a ton of fantastic comedians but they have basically been forced to leave the country.
- throwawa998876 6y ago"The hardest part of talking about malignant trends on the broad left is that, well, you’re not allowed to talk about them. It’s no exaggeration to say that criticism has become fully conflated with violence. If you attempt to engage critically with a left-liberal writer–regardless of how thorough and respectful you may be, and regardless of how powerful, public, or insulated the subject of the criticism–you will be accused of dismissing and erasing the writer, of inciting violence against the writer, and of committing some form of genocide against whichever identity groups the writer belongs to." ITT: a bunch of people talking about malignant trends on the left and somehow not being accused of genocide!
- yerwhat01010 6y ago"This issue can be discussed openly without fear of consequence", said throwaway998876
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- readonthegoapp 6y agoI'm assuming this is satire The first graph is about how criticism on and of the left is akin to literal physical violence Thats a fox news talking point
- tanseydavid 6y agoThis notion of words as violence is not new and it is certainly not satire. I have heard it stated as matter-of-fact many times over the past 10+ years by other people in the Bay Area.
- dekhn 6y agoDamn. I really liked the argument like that Battacharya was following. I've been in a similar situation where I explain to people that constantly trying to avoid microaggressions is a waste of time, for the same reasons he raises. In general, the article makes a great point about how the current politically correct movement (and to be honest every PC movement I've seen so far) is unwilling to hear any questioning of its ideological bases.
- proc0 6y agoIt's simply a form of control. You can't reason around it because it's not meant to be reasoned with, only submitted to. The #1 red flag in any rotten organization is the punishment of inquiry. Questions are a threat when there is something to hide.