3 ms·
Per dang's nice request, let's open this up a bit and talk about why this is happening. It's now acceptable (and even lauded in the comments of this post) to do
by rpmisms 5y ago
Per dang's nice request, let's open this up a bit and talk about why this is happening. It's now acceptable (and even lauded in the comments of this post) to doxx people with the wrong opinion. What changed to make otherwise reasonable people approve of this course of action? I want to know what societal switch flipped.
I've seen it posited that it's due to the pseudo-anonymity of the internet, but that doesn't seem to fully explain it. Something has fundamentally changed to allow this level of dehumanization towards the "others".
- busterarm 5y agoThank you.
- tux1968 5y ago> Something has fundamentally changed to allow this level of dehumanization towards the "others". Nothing has changed in the level of dehumanization. It's clearly a very human failing that has played out in history time and again. The only reason it feels more prevalent, is because we've turned it inward toward what used to be a more cohesive group. So we can ask why we're breaking apart, but there's no mystery about why we dehumanize the "others" -- we always have.
- useragent86 5y agoOf course, you're right. At the same time, we may ask why American society seems to be more ideologically polarized now than at various times in recent decades. If the root cause is natural human failing, what is the second-level cause? Could it be that American society has been under a form of ideological siege and sabotage for many years, that is now coming to fruition? For example, it's documented that, as far back as the early 20th century, the USSR funded programs to demoralize American society through means as seemingly innocuous as making public art and architecture uglier. As well, Marcuse's "long march through the institutions" has now had 50 years to take effect, and polls have shown that American academia is much less ideologically diverse than in past decades, now being nearly entirely formed of those who vote for one party. There are elements of history that seem like weather, coming and going in cycles, but there are also parties taking active roles to effect certain ends, and we would be wise to be aware of their influence.
- h2odragon 5y agowe slaughtered religion, so people need some fountain of self-righteousness to drink from. The nebulous "Consensus" we're supposed to hold holy now is thin and unsatisfying gruel so more fevered flavor is needed to mask the essential blandness. we used to be able to say "you're wrong about $X, but we can still work together on $Y in agreement." That's unfashionable now. We demand inhuman purity from our idols, de-idolizing them or de-historizing their imperfections as necessary to the dictates of the moment. We expect ideological harmony from our peers, or at the very least meek acceptance of our views without any backtalk. You can think differently, as long as you're quiet about it. and don't let anyone see evidence of your deviance.
- barbacoa 5y agoNot everyone can work from home on their MacBook while wearing PJs. Let's be honest, the people who are part of this protest do not represent the socio-economic interests of those who make up HN. It really boils down to elitism. HN is mad that the working class is advocating for themselves and not busy delivering our Amazon packages and making us lattes.