4 ms·

This is a common malicious misrepresentation of conservative commentary in general: even a slightly counter-progressive reading of history (maybe things haven't

This is a common malicious misrepresentation of conservative commentary in general: even a slightly counter-progressive reading of history (maybe things haven't just gotten better and better in every possible way) is often painted as wanting to turn back the clock in the most extreme and extremely plausible of ways. Search old HN to see discussion about Curtis Yarvin to see this.

pnutjam 5y ago
No, it's common for conservatives to hide behind half-truths and misdirection.
- prionassembly 5y ago
  Now, be nice.
margalabargala 5y ago
I think this is a reasonable representation, though. The idea behind voting is to say "I think this way is the best way", right? So if Thiel is saying "that way was not the best way", then presumably if the issue came to a vote today, he would vote against. It's true that he's not advocating for turning back the clock, but I think it's fair to say he wants to turn back the clock, in that he has expressed his opinion that he would prefer to live in a world where it were so.
- prionassembly 5y ago
  It's possible to hold the opinion that it'd be better if we had waited 10 or 20 years more. Large-scale societal changes -- even ones you think are well past due -- are filled with Chesterton fences.
wbsss4412 5y ago
Is it not reasonable to summarize Thiels comments as “as a result of women obtaining the vote, america has become worse off”? Taking the leap to presume that he thinks it would be better if women never got the right to vote, isn’t that unreasonable.
- zozbot234 5y ago
  It's deeply unfair, because Thiel never pretended to comprehensively summarize the consequences of women's suffrage, and sum them up as an overall judgment of the sort "America has become better/worse off". His argument is strictly about the prospects for the formerly better-represented variety of libertarian/classical liberal politics. Even if you think "less capitalism" is per se undesirable, there can be countervailing benefits.

pnutjam 5y ago

No, it's common for conservatives to hide behind half-truths and misdirection.

prionassembly 5y ago
Now, be nice.

margalabargala 5y ago

I think this is a reasonable representation, though. The idea behind voting is to say "I think this way is the best way", right? So if Thiel is saying "that way was not the best way", then presumably if the issue came to a vote today, he would vote against. It's true that he's not advocating for turning back the clock, but I think it's fair to say he wants to turn back the clock, in that he has expressed his opinion that he would prefer to live in a world where it were so.

prionassembly 5y ago
It's possible to hold the opinion that it'd be better if we had waited 10 or 20 years more. Large-scale societal changes -- even ones you think are well past due -- are filled with Chesterton fences.

wbsss4412 5y ago

Is it not reasonable to summarize Thiels comments as “as a result of women obtaining the vote, america has become worse off”? Taking the leap to presume that he thinks it would be better if women never got the right to vote, isn’t that unreasonable.

zozbot234 5y ago
It's deeply unfair, because Thiel never pretended to comprehensively summarize the consequences of women's suffrage, and sum them up as an overall judgment of the sort "America has become better/worse off". His argument is strictly about the prospects for the formerly better-represented variety of libertarian/classical liberal politics. Even if you think "less capitalism" is per se undesirable, there can be countervailing benefits.