3 ms·

This is a bizarre article. If a society is terrible because seven zillion witches live there, then how are witch-hunts wrong in this metaphor? If these offsho

This is a bizarre article. If a society is terrible because seven zillion witches live there, then how are witch-hunts wrong in this metaphor? If these offshoot communities full of outcasts are as horrific as he admits, why shouldn't we ban the people that make it that way from our communities? Why is he so willing to trust these same people when they say they're fighting for "fairness"? How does he manage to identify some of the worst forces in conservatism, the ones that convinced me to become what many would call "far-left", and come to the conclusion that people are being too hard on them? This author has a very, very strange worldview.

brigandish 5y ago
> If a society is terrible because seven zillion witches live there, then how are witch-hunts wrong in this metaphor? Isn't the insight we're to take regarding witch hunts, as moderns able to look back across history, that the people accused of being witches weren't witches, and what was really happening (among other things) was violent intolerance for those with a different way of life, and the indiscriminate use of power? That's what makes witch hunts wrong in any metaphor. > How does he manage to identify some of the worst forces in conservatism, the ones that convinced me to become what many would call "far-left", and come to the conclusion that people are being too hard on them? Because intolerance is wrong, certainly to the degree we see now. I'm sure you might feel like responding with "they started it" but not only has the author covered that, it's also no excuse.
- a_shovel 5y ago
  In this metaphor, witches stand for openly racist trolls, flat-earthers, hardline anti-vaxxers, and self-confessed nazis. Terrible people that any decent community doesn't want. And the fact that there's a lot of them breaks the metaphor, since there weren't any witches in the actual witch hunts; it's not clear what the takeaway is supposed to be. The targeting of innocent people is what makes a metaphorical witch-hunt bad. "Intolerance" without specifying what one is being intolerant against is just a bare negative connotation unassociated with any meaning. Some things ought to be tolerated, and some things absolutely must not be tolerated.
  - commandlinefan 5y ago
    > there weren't any witches Well, hang on - there weren't any people who could literally turn you into a toad, but I'm sure there were as many witches (people who believed in that stuff) then as there are now.
    - krapp 5y ago
      >but I'm sure there were as many witches (people who believed in that stuff) then as there are now. There weren't any witches the way witches were defined back then, which was people who entered into pacts with the devil to gain satanic powers to wage war against Christianity and undermine the community. It was a conspiracy theory not unlike the satanic panic of the 1980s or the red scare.
  - brigandish 5y ago
    > "Intolerance" without specifying what one is being intolerant against is just a bare negative connotation unassociated with any meaning. Some things ought to be tolerated, and some things absolutely must not be tolerated. I'm using Popper's definition provided in his short but often misquoted (certainly on HN) paradox of tolerance, that violence and other coercive means should not be used against those who are willing to debate and not use violence to further their arguments/goals. The content of those ideas is irrelevant. > In this metaphor, witches stand for openly racist trolls, flat-earthers, hardline anti-vaxxers, and self-confessed nazis. Terrible people that any decent community doesn't want. Who made you the moral arbiter? As J.S. Mill points out repeatedly in On Liberty, those who will judge what is right and wrong with such certainty that they would deny others the right to speak contrary to these "certainties" are only saying that they are certain of what they say, and they are not infallible. > The targeting of innocent people is what makes a metaphorical witch-hunt bad. The targeting of anyone based on disagreement or some misplaced certainty in a hierarchy of morality based on disagreement is what makes a witch hunt bad.

brigandish 5y ago

> If a society is terrible because seven zillion witches live there, then how are witch-hunts wrong in this metaphor? Isn't the insight we're to take regarding witch hunts, as moderns able to look back across history, that the people accused of being witches weren't witches, and what was really happening (among other things) was violent intolerance for those with a different way of life, and the indiscriminate use of power? That's what makes witch hunts wrong in any metaphor. > How does he manage to identify some of the worst forces in conservatism, the ones that convinced me to become what many would call "far-left", and come to the conclusion that people are being too hard on them? Because intolerance is wrong, certainly to the degree we see now. I'm sure you might feel like responding with "they started it" but not only has the author covered that, it's also no excuse.

a_shovel 5y ago
In this metaphor, witches stand for openly racist trolls, flat-earthers, hardline anti-vaxxers, and self-confessed nazis. Terrible people that any decent community doesn't want. And the fact that there's a lot of them breaks the metaphor, since there weren't any witches in the actual witch hunts; it's not clear what the takeaway is supposed to be. The targeting of innocent people is what makes a metaphorical witch-hunt bad. "Intolerance" without specifying what one is being intolerant against is just a bare negative connotation unassociated with any meaning. Some things ought to be tolerated, and some things absolutely must not be tolerated.
- commandlinefan 5y ago
  > there weren't any witches Well, hang on - there weren't any people who could literally turn you into a toad, but I'm sure there were as many witches (people who believed in that stuff) then as there are now.
  - krapp 5y ago
    >but I'm sure there were as many witches (people who believed in that stuff) then as there are now. There weren't any witches the way witches were defined back then, which was people who entered into pacts with the devil to gain satanic powers to wage war against Christianity and undermine the community. It was a conspiracy theory not unlike the satanic panic of the 1980s or the red scare.
- brigandish 5y ago
  > "Intolerance" without specifying what one is being intolerant against is just a bare negative connotation unassociated with any meaning. Some things ought to be tolerated, and some things absolutely must not be tolerated. I'm using Popper's definition provided in his short but often misquoted (certainly on HN) paradox of tolerance, that violence and other coercive means should not be used against those who are willing to debate and not use violence to further their arguments/goals. The content of those ideas is irrelevant. > In this metaphor, witches stand for openly racist trolls, flat-earthers, hardline anti-vaxxers, and self-confessed nazis. Terrible people that any decent community doesn't want. Who made you the moral arbiter? As J.S. Mill points out repeatedly in On Liberty, those who will judge what is right and wrong with such certainty that they would deny others the right to speak contrary to these "certainties" are only saying that they are certain of what they say, and they are not infallible. > The targeting of innocent people is what makes a metaphorical witch-hunt bad. The targeting of anyone based on disagreement or some misplaced certainty in a hierarchy of morality based on disagreement is what makes a witch hunt bad.