3 ms·

I think that is also largely colored by the fact that one «side» in modern US politics is objectively literally a collection of «bad guys». It makes it a bit ha

I think that is also largely colored by the fact that one «side» in modern US politics is objectively literally a collection of «bad guys». It makes it a bit hard to have serious political discourse when one of the sides is seeemingly trying to burn the house down rather than lose. Also there was a ton of political stuff in the bush era as well. My theory is that you just dont remember it because there was still a solid foundation of political decorum and respect on both sides at that time. Disclaimer: I am not american.

josteink 4y ago
> the fact that one «side» in modern US politics is objectively literally a collection of «bad guys» None of those emphasised words means what you think they mean. The fact that some people have been radicalized to believe stuff like this is more likely the root of the problems we’re having today. In that regard your comment is what I would objectively consider a bad comment on HN (and against the site guidelines too), but it was still useful in the broader sense of the discussion.
- eclipxe 4y ago
  olivermuty is right.
- vehemenz 4y ago
  In what way has the parent poster been "radicalized" compare to, say, the average Trump supporter? If everything is radical, then nothing is radical.
BeetleB 4y ago
> It makes it a bit hard to have serious political discourse when one of the sides is seeemingly trying to burn the house down rather than lose. Your parent is asking for a place where there is little to no political discussion, not a place to have meaningful political discussion. With the good old phpBB forums, they'd often dedicate one subforum for political/flamebait content, and it was allowed only in there. As a user, you simply didn't read that subforum if you didn't care for it. Specifically, on those forums, you had to actively seek those venues to have these discussions. Today it seems you have to work to avoid these discussions.
- fleddr 4y ago
  Also known as intersectionalism. Used to be a meaningless academic word. Now even discussing the baking of cookies turns into a political struggle.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

josteink 4y ago

> the fact that one «side» in modern US politics is objectively literally a collection of «bad guys» None of those emphasised words means what you think they mean. The fact that some people have been radicalized to believe stuff like this is more likely the root of the problems we’re having today. In that regard your comment is what I would objectively consider a bad comment on HN (and against the site guidelines too), but it was still useful in the broader sense of the discussion.

eclipxe 4y ago
olivermuty is right.
vehemenz 4y ago
In what way has the parent poster been "radicalized" compare to, say, the average Trump supporter? If everything is radical, then nothing is radical.

BeetleB 4y ago

> It makes it a bit hard to have serious political discourse when one of the sides is seeemingly trying to burn the house down rather than lose. Your parent is asking for a place where there is little to no political discussion, not a place to have meaningful political discussion. With the good old phpBB forums, they'd often dedicate one subforum for political/flamebait content, and it was allowed only in there. As a user, you simply didn't read that subforum if you didn't care for it. Specifically, on those forums, you had to actively seek those venues to have these discussions. Today it seems you have to work to avoid these discussions.

fleddr 4y ago
Also known as intersectionalism. Used to be a meaningless academic word. Now even discussing the baking of cookies turns into a political struggle.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]