5 ms·

Loved the last paragraph, always good to end with ideas for positive action. >As cathartic as venting one’s outrage can be in the moment, it’s clear that moral

by ddq 3y ago

Loved the last paragraph, always good to end with ideas for positive action. >As cathartic as venting one’s outrage can be in the moment, it’s clear that moral grandstanding accomplishes very little beyond the fleeting satisfaction that it brings. Shaming people doesn’t seem to change their behaviour, and invoking mass shooting victims in an argument about hamburgers doesn’t move the needle on gun control. Social change doesn’t come from posting but from purposeful collective action: organizing, voting, protesting. At worst, the catharsis of grandstanding deludes us into thinking that virtuous online posturing is a meaningful form of solidarity and not a fruitless, ego-driven impulse. Tosi and Warmke argue that the purpose of recognizing moral grandstanding isn’t to get other people to knock it off; it’s to stop doing it yourself.

sublinear 3y ago
> Social change doesn’t come from posting but from purposeful collective action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slacktivism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slacktivism Slacktivism is not going anywhere.
- em-bee 3y ago
  of course not, if it wanted to go somewhere, it would have to take action ;-)
treeman79 3y ago
[flagged]
- antisyzygy 3y ago
  You seem overly concerned with that one issue. Truth is if the government wanted to do this you'd have no chance in hell resisting using your AR-15. They's suspend the constitution and the military would be deployed Stateside. You'd be an ill-equipped Russian soldier against NATO hardware like in Ukraine. 10-20 of you dead for every 1 US military member you take out. The better option is to ensure you have a Democracy, so you can rule your own selves and kick the authoritarians to the curb. Authoritarians are always the folks that instigate the things you describe, be they left or right wing.
  - pbj1968 3y ago
    Would some of the military be sympathetic to the rebellion? Would the military turn their guns on their own citizens? Would the military be able to protect their family members from people with AR-15s? People hiding in trees and caves with rifles have defeated many superior forces… including our own… twice.
    - antisyzygy 3y ago
      >Would some of the military be sympathetic to the rebellion? Would the sympathetic military members be able to seize sufficient weapons to fight back? Doubt it. Also you're suggesting a group of civilians armed with AR-15s would be able to fight back. If you believe some of the military has your back then you just undermined your own point that we need to be able to fight back with our assault rifles. >Would the military turn their guns on their own citizens? Militaries in the world have quite often turned guns on civilians before, I wouldn't put it past ours. Not at all. Especially since a lot of it's commanded over by far-right Christian Nationalists. >Would the military be able to protect their family members from people with AR-15s? The military members would be able to protect their own families, if you even knew who they were in the first place. Also it's a bit messed up you basically mentioned killing non-combatants as a tactic to be used in this hypothetical war. >People hiding in trees and caves with rifles have defeated many superior forces… including our own… twice. Uhhh I don't know about that. Vietnam was using a lot of WWII style tech. We got really advanced stuff now. We gave Ukraine our hand-me-downs nobody wanted anymore and they're absolutely dominating Russia which has more people and lots and lots of firearms. Face it, you're obsessed with guns. That's cool, I kinda get it because I own a few myself. However it's taken over your brain. You brought this very specific thing up in a much more general conversation so you must be thinking about this A LOT.
- dang 3y ago
  You've unfortunately been using HN primarily (even almost exclusively) for ideological battle. That's not allowed, and we ban accounts that do it, regardless of what they're battling for or against. I've banned this account accordingly—especially since we'd warned you many times: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35366668 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35366668 (March 2023) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32645289 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32645289 (Aug 2022) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32473348 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32473348 (Aug 2022) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29729715 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29729715 (Dec 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27053014 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27053014 (May 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25773535 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25773535 (Jan 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23785372 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23785372 (July 2020) If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
im3w1l 3y ago
> Social change doesn’t come from posting I have to disagree with this. Change happens because people want change. And they want change because they have been convinced of its benefits. Posting plays a role here.
- lapcat 3y ago
  > Posting plays a role here. Posting in sound bites? I've read books that have influenced me. But tweets? Not really.
- worrycue 3y ago
  Depends on the kind of posting IMHO. Contributing to a rational civil discussion? Maybe. Flaming, downvoting, and “collectively bullying” someone with a different opinion to enforce an echo chamber? Not so much. The latter just drives everyone who disagrees away so the likeminded can reinforce their beliefs, pat each other on the back, and feel good about themselves.
  - BHSPitMonkey 3y ago
    Through posting alone, the right-wing conspiracy movement (which QAnon is one extension of) has expanded from relative obscurity into a fairly mainstream base with millions of members worldwide over the course of only about 5 years, and has already captured in just the U.S. a number of congressional seats and at least one SCOTUS judge by the looks of it. The format has a rather persuasive appeal that (in my opinion) seems to be more effective at advancing intellectually dishonest positions and worldviews.
    - worrycue 3y ago
      I was thinking about it from the perspective of changing people’s minds. With right wing conspiracy movements, are they really converting anyone or just organising people who already lean in that direction and just need a rallying flag. To go off on a tangent, I think a lot of people believe in conspiracy theories because they choose to. To quote Alan Moore, “The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic. The truth is, that it is not the Jewish banking conspiracy or the grey aliens or the 12 foot reptiloids from another dimension that are in control. The truth is more frightening, nobody is in control. The world is rudderless.” I think we all do that to some extent, e.g. in relationships; see “positive illusions”.
nicechianti 3y ago
[dead]

by ddq 3y ago

sublinear 3y ago

> Social change doesn’t come from posting but from purposeful collective action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slacktivism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slacktivism Slacktivism is not going anywhere.

em-bee 3y ago
of course not, if it wanted to go somewhere, it would have to take action ;-)

treeman79 3y ago

[flagged]

antisyzygy 3y ago
You seem overly concerned with that one issue. Truth is if the government wanted to do this you'd have no chance in hell resisting using your AR-15. They's suspend the constitution and the military would be deployed Stateside. You'd be an ill-equipped Russian soldier against NATO hardware like in Ukraine. 10-20 of you dead for every 1 US military member you take out. The better option is to ensure you have a Democracy, so you can rule your own selves and kick the authoritarians to the curb. Authoritarians are always the folks that instigate the things you describe, be they left or right wing.
- pbj1968 3y ago
  Would some of the military be sympathetic to the rebellion? Would the military turn their guns on their own citizens? Would the military be able to protect their family members from people with AR-15s? People hiding in trees and caves with rifles have defeated many superior forces… including our own… twice.
  - antisyzygy 3y ago
    >Would some of the military be sympathetic to the rebellion? Would the sympathetic military members be able to seize sufficient weapons to fight back? Doubt it. Also you're suggesting a group of civilians armed with AR-15s would be able to fight back. If you believe some of the military has your back then you just undermined your own point that we need to be able to fight back with our assault rifles. >Would the military turn their guns on their own citizens? Militaries in the world have quite often turned guns on civilians before, I wouldn't put it past ours. Not at all. Especially since a lot of it's commanded over by far-right Christian Nationalists. >Would the military be able to protect their family members from people with AR-15s? The military members would be able to protect their own families, if you even knew who they were in the first place. Also it's a bit messed up you basically mentioned killing non-combatants as a tactic to be used in this hypothetical war. >People hiding in trees and caves with rifles have defeated many superior forces… including our own… twice. Uhhh I don't know about that. Vietnam was using a lot of WWII style tech. We got really advanced stuff now. We gave Ukraine our hand-me-downs nobody wanted anymore and they're absolutely dominating Russia which has more people and lots and lots of firearms. Face it, you're obsessed with guns. That's cool, I kinda get it because I own a few myself. However it's taken over your brain. You brought this very specific thing up in a much more general conversation so you must be thinking about this A LOT.
dang 3y ago
You've unfortunately been using HN primarily (even almost exclusively) for ideological battle. That's not allowed, and we ban accounts that do it, regardless of what they're battling for or against. I've banned this account accordingly—especially since we'd warned you many times: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35366668 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35366668 (March 2023) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32645289 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32645289 (Aug 2022) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32473348 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32473348 (Aug 2022) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29729715 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29729715 (Dec 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27053014 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27053014 (May 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25773535 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25773535 (Jan 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23785372 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23785372 (July 2020) If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

im3w1l 3y ago

> Social change doesn’t come from posting I have to disagree with this. Change happens because people want change. And they want change because they have been convinced of its benefits. Posting plays a role here.

lapcat 3y ago
> Posting plays a role here. Posting in sound bites? I've read books that have influenced me. But tweets? Not really.
worrycue 3y ago
Depends on the kind of posting IMHO. Contributing to a rational civil discussion? Maybe. Flaming, downvoting, and “collectively bullying” someone with a different opinion to enforce an echo chamber? Not so much. The latter just drives everyone who disagrees away so the likeminded can reinforce their beliefs, pat each other on the back, and feel good about themselves.
- BHSPitMonkey 3y ago
  Through posting alone, the right-wing conspiracy movement (which QAnon is one extension of) has expanded from relative obscurity into a fairly mainstream base with millions of members worldwide over the course of only about 5 years, and has already captured in just the U.S. a number of congressional seats and at least one SCOTUS judge by the looks of it. The format has a rather persuasive appeal that (in my opinion) seems to be more effective at advancing intellectually dishonest positions and worldviews.
  - worrycue 3y ago
    I was thinking about it from the perspective of changing people’s minds. With right wing conspiracy movements, are they really converting anyone or just organising people who already lean in that direction and just need a rallying flag. To go off on a tangent, I think a lot of people believe in conspiracy theories because they choose to. To quote Alan Moore, “The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic. The truth is, that it is not the Jewish banking conspiracy or the grey aliens or the 12 foot reptiloids from another dimension that are in control. The truth is more frightening, nobody is in control. The world is rudderless.” I think we all do that to some extent, e.g. in relationships; see “positive illusions”.

nicechianti 3y ago

[dead]