5 ms·

If that’s what you find “most amusing”, then of course you’ll like a site like that; it’s mostly neofascist regurgitations served on a plate they call satire.

If that’s what you find “most amusing”, then of course you’ll like a site like that; it’s mostly neofascist regurgitations served on a plate they call satire. Edit - allow me to substantiate: a quick visit to their site has everything from anti-worker sentiment, anti-LGBT+, election conspiracies, COVID denialism, and an obvious support of right-wing talking points. Did they used to be more even keel? Sure, but they’ve changed their tone for the worse in the last few years.

mensetmanusman 4y ago
Satire sentiment is subjective
- boston_clone 4y ago
  edit - I’ll just not engage in the inanity of sniping at subjective definitions; my point about the site remains.
spencerflem 4y ago
hey for what it's worth I agree with you - free speech and all that but the bee is in favor of a bunch of messed up stuff. hackernews is full of right wing types
- boston_clone 4y ago
  that’s okay, I’ll continue trying to make it an uncomfortable place for them. I’ve already had the pleasure of off-boarding a neo-nazi from an old job, and spent a year in a country fighting both kinetically and ideologically against the dominant religious authoritarians. This is just a Saturday.
  - 1123581321 4y ago
    It must be depressing to go from being in a militia to arguing online.
    - boston_clone 4y ago
      It may make more sense to assume that I've always been a fan of passionate debate; now, I just don't have to carry a firearm or worry about federal oversight for public comments. Life's much better now, albeit a little less surprising ;) I guess I can only wonder what's it like to never put your life on the line for a selfless cause and only argue online, though. Any insights there?
      - 1123581321 4y ago
        Unfortunately not.
  - spencerflem 4y ago
    I'm glad you're able to. back when the supreme court was stripping rights and the hn opinion was "well it's not tecccchnically in the constitution" I had to leave. This is my first time back in a few months and it's the same reactionary anti-woke panic as before. it just makes me too sad keep up the good fight, it's a shame seeing the comment section in such a state. see you in another 4 months maybe
- the_third_wave 4y ago
  > hackernews is full of right wing types Calling people "right wing" just because they do not agree with a given narrative is one of the motors behind the polarisation of society. Just because someone acknowledges the veracity of the (small-s) science of biology and thus recognises the fact that sexually reproducing mammals like us come in two sexes [1] does not mean they are 'right wing´, they could be social democrats or communists and still realise this to be the case. Just because people see the race-baiting profiteers who make a living pushing 'critical race theory' for what they are does not make them 'right wing', there are plenty of liberals who recognise Robin diAngelo and Ibram Henry Rogers (who calls himself 'Ibram X Kendy' nowadays) for the frauds they are. The word 'right wing' does not mean 'evil' or 'wrong' nor does 'left wing' mean 'good' or 'right'. These terms have meanings which are not at all related to 'wrong', 'right', 'good' or 'bad'. They are also rather imprecise indicators of a person's political leanings since many people do not fit neatly into a 'left' or ´right' shaped box. [1] yes, yes, yes, except for the 0.18% who suffer from intersex conditions
  - boston_clone 4y ago
    gender is not the same as sex, and critical race theory is nothing more than how laws, social and political movements, and media shape, and are shaped by, social conceptions of race and ethnicity. being intentionally ignorant of those differences and definitions isn't making a great point.
    - the_third_wave 4y ago
      I did not mention anything about gender (not discussing linguistics) so why bring it up? For more on critical race theory - and critical theory from which it derives - may I suggest a visit to New Discourses' explanation of the origins and essence of this movement? https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-critical-race-theory/ https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-critical-race-theory/
      - boston_clone 4y ago
        > "Just because someone [...] recognises [sic] the fact that sexually reproducing mammals like us come in two sexes [...] does not mean they are 'right wing'." Yeah super weird, why would I bring up the most-often conflated term in right-wing discourse regarding transgender rights when you repeat their views almost verbatim? SUPER weird. I've read the New Discourses assessment, thanks for sharing. Unfortunately, it didn't really shed light on any new topic or idea, but finding the author to be a self-professed nationalist was of little surprise. If I may suggest some reading, pick up a copy of The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander. I wouldn't mind lending mine, either - I'll even cover shipping charges.

mensetmanusman 4y ago

Satire sentiment is subjective

boston_clone 4y ago
edit - I’ll just not engage in the inanity of sniping at subjective definitions; my point about the site remains.

spencerflem 4y ago

hey for what it's worth I agree with you - free speech and all that but the bee is in favor of a bunch of messed up stuff. hackernews is full of right wing types

boston_clone 4y ago
that’s okay, I’ll continue trying to make it an uncomfortable place for them. I’ve already had the pleasure of off-boarding a neo-nazi from an old job, and spent a year in a country fighting both kinetically and ideologically against the dominant religious authoritarians. This is just a Saturday.
- 1123581321 4y ago
  It must be depressing to go from being in a militia to arguing online.
  - boston_clone 4y ago
    It may make more sense to assume that I've always been a fan of passionate debate; now, I just don't have to carry a firearm or worry about federal oversight for public comments. Life's much better now, albeit a little less surprising ;) I guess I can only wonder what's it like to never put your life on the line for a selfless cause and only argue online, though. Any insights there?
    - 1123581321 4y ago
      Unfortunately not.
- spencerflem 4y ago
  I'm glad you're able to. back when the supreme court was stripping rights and the hn opinion was "well it's not tecccchnically in the constitution" I had to leave. This is my first time back in a few months and it's the same reactionary anti-woke panic as before. it just makes me too sad keep up the good fight, it's a shame seeing the comment section in such a state. see you in another 4 months maybe
the_third_wave 4y ago
> hackernews is full of right wing types Calling people "right wing" just because they do not agree with a given narrative is one of the motors behind the polarisation of society. Just because someone acknowledges the veracity of the (small-s) science of biology and thus recognises the fact that sexually reproducing mammals like us come in two sexes [1] does not mean they are 'right wing´, they could be social democrats or communists and still realise this to be the case. Just because people see the race-baiting profiteers who make a living pushing 'critical race theory' for what they are does not make them 'right wing', there are plenty of liberals who recognise Robin diAngelo and Ibram Henry Rogers (who calls himself 'Ibram X Kendy' nowadays) for the frauds they are. The word 'right wing' does not mean 'evil' or 'wrong' nor does 'left wing' mean 'good' or 'right'. These terms have meanings which are not at all related to 'wrong', 'right', 'good' or 'bad'. They are also rather imprecise indicators of a person's political leanings since many people do not fit neatly into a 'left' or ´right' shaped box. [1] yes, yes, yes, except for the 0.18% who suffer from intersex conditions
- boston_clone 4y ago
  gender is not the same as sex, and critical race theory is nothing more than how laws, social and political movements, and media shape, and are shaped by, social conceptions of race and ethnicity. being intentionally ignorant of those differences and definitions isn't making a great point.
  - the_third_wave 4y ago
    I did not mention anything about gender (not discussing linguistics) so why bring it up? For more on critical race theory - and critical theory from which it derives - may I suggest a visit to New Discourses' explanation of the origins and essence of this movement? https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-critical-race-theory/ https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-critical-race-theory/
    - boston_clone 4y ago
      > "Just because someone [...] recognises [sic] the fact that sexually reproducing mammals like us come in two sexes [...] does not mean they are 'right wing'." Yeah super weird, why would I bring up the most-often conflated term in right-wing discourse regarding transgender rights when you repeat their views almost verbatim? SUPER weird. I've read the New Discourses assessment, thanks for sharing. Unfortunately, it didn't really shed light on any new topic or idea, but finding the author to be a self-professed nationalist was of little surprise. If I may suggest some reading, pick up a copy of The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander. I wouldn't mind lending mine, either - I'll even cover shipping charges.