28 ms·

I'm not sure what Tan's specific beef is, I could never endorse violent rhetoric in politics, but the level of avoidable human misery caused by the dysfunction

I'm not sure what Tan's specific beef is, I could never endorse violent rhetoric in politics, but the level of avoidable human misery caused by the dysfunction of politics in San Francisco is sickening. If you can walk through the Tenderloin without becoming utterly enraged at the people responsible, there's a piece of your soul missing.

archagon 3y ago
“Those responsible” is a rather nebulous group in this case.
ajross 3y ago
> I could never endorse violent rhetoric in politics In literally the next sentence: > the level of avoidable human misery caused by the dysfunction of politics [...] sickening [...] utterly enraged [...] there's a piece of your soul missing So you'll deploy extreme emotional hyperbole, but not "violent rhetoric"? Seems like those are two rather nearby points on the same spectrum, no? Tan just slipped a bit off the edge. If you're going to deny someone's soul, it's not that big a leap to wish them dead.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > Seems like those are two rather nearby points on the same spectrum, no? I don't think so, no. Those two things are miles apart.
  - ajross 3y ago
    Only according to external rules about what you're supposed to say. The emotional content of the rhetoric seems pretty identical. No one thinks Garry Tan was actually wishing death on anyone, he was expressing anger and doing that by invalidating the target's existence. "You should die" and "you have a piece of your soul missing" are coming from the same place, they both mean "you're worthless". It's just that Tan forgot the rules in the heat of the moment. And so would the grandparent poster after a few drinks, I suspect. To wit: cool the fuck down, everyone. Shitposting on the internet is a slippery slope to an accidental death threat.
hindsightbias 3y ago
Many were enraged with by the soulless tech gentrification of the city. But they couldn't compete so they had to move. Some don't have the means to move. It must be sickening for many to have to deal with the externalities. Or they can just agree with Gary that correlation is never causation.

archagon 3y ago

“Those responsible” is a rather nebulous group in this case.

ajross 3y ago

> I could never endorse violent rhetoric in politics In literally the next sentence: > the level of avoidable human misery caused by the dysfunction of politics [...] sickening [...] utterly enraged [...] there's a piece of your soul missing So you'll deploy extreme emotional hyperbole, but not "violent rhetoric"? Seems like those are two rather nearby points on the same spectrum, no? Tan just slipped a bit off the edge. If you're going to deny someone's soul, it's not that big a leap to wish them dead.

JohnFen 3y ago
> Seems like those are two rather nearby points on the same spectrum, no? I don't think so, no. Those two things are miles apart.
- ajross 3y ago
  Only according to external rules about what you're supposed to say. The emotional content of the rhetoric seems pretty identical. No one thinks Garry Tan was actually wishing death on anyone, he was expressing anger and doing that by invalidating the target's existence. "You should die" and "you have a piece of your soul missing" are coming from the same place, they both mean "you're worthless". It's just that Tan forgot the rules in the heat of the moment. And so would the grandparent poster after a few drinks, I suspect. To wit: cool the fuck down, everyone. Shitposting on the internet is a slippery slope to an accidental death threat.

hindsightbias 3y ago

Many were enraged with by the soulless tech gentrification of the city. But they couldn't compete so they had to move. Some don't have the means to move. It must be sickening for many to have to deal with the externalities. Or they can just agree with Gary that correlation is never causation.