4 ms·

>3) temporary, while they rewrite materials from “Secretary Powell, a Black man” style that emphasizes immutable characteristics What? Did it ever occur to yo

by rl3 2y ago

>3) temporary, while they rewrite materials from “Secretary Powell, a Black man” style that emphasizes immutable characteristics What? Did it ever occur to you that the fact some of these veterans are minorities is historically relevant given a climate of abject racism and sexism that persisted well into the 20th century, if not throughout the majority of it? Precisely because of their "immutable characteristics," to use your parlance. Here’s an excerpt from Charles C. Rogers’ Wikipedia page: ”He attended the town's race-segregated elementary school for "colored children," and then attended the all-black DuBois High School in Mount Hope, West Virginia.[7][8]” That’s rough. Let's read some more: "In 1951, Charles Rogers joined the US Army as a second lieutenant through the Army ROTC program at West Virginia State College.[7] The Army was still segregated when he joined and his first assignment was an all-black unit stationed in Bavaria; the executive order commanding racial desegregation of the U.S. military went into effect six months later.[9] By 1954, after Rogers had been denied a path to becoming a chemical engineer with the Army, he submitted his resignation, in part because of a "'clear pattern' of discrimination..." Huh, seems relevant. This is the same man that went on to earn the Congressional Medal of Honor some years later. But hey, let’s language police a deceased war hero's official bio because it mentions he’s Black, and otherwise defend the folks issuing idiotic orders that amount to historical erasure. Supporting this shit via way of whining about malicious compliance is a disgrace. You’re on the wrong side of history. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/16/defense-department-black-medal-of-honor-veteran https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/16/defense-depa... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Calvin_Rogers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Calvin_Rogers

rl3 2y ago
This comment went from +5 to 0 almost 24 hours later. Racists win! Perhaps the bots have hate in their hearts.
- defrost 2y ago
  I upvoted the comment for the first part that made a case for the minority status of specific veterens being as important a part of their story as the details of how a hill was taken are to the specific story of other specific veterans. I wasn't taken with the snark and shade thrown in the second part of that comment, and I dare say that others here on HN would have downvoted for that alone regardless of which side of any specific debate you chose to argue. It's not just 'Racists' or those with an opposing view that will downvote you here on HN, you will also get judged on the strength and presentation of your comment as if it were part of a debate club exchange.
  - rl3 2y ago
    Thank you, and well put. >... and I dare say that others here on HN would have downvoted for that alone regardless of which side of any specific debate you chose to argue. That's fair. In fact, I used to be that person. I will say in recent years it's become far more common to see latent mass downvotes, but it's probably just some dynamic I'm not properly accounting for, perhaps latent attention on a submission tends to be the very type of user you just described. On the other hand, bot overlords attempting to shape the narrative probably realized a long time ago that the very early and very late phases are the best time to do said shaping. I'm just confused since this time I didn't even say nothin' unflattering about the PLA. >It's not just 'Racists' or those with an opposing view that will downvote you here on HN, you will also get judged on the strength and presentation of your comment as if it were part of a debate club exchange. I know you're just the messenger with regard to this point, but what irks me is that while this style is time-tested for tech topics and sadly works, for real-world topics—at times—it comes off as a grotesque form of whataboutism that can feel utterly insensitive if not detached from reality. A great example is the recent news with USAID. No submission about this on HN made it to triple digit upvotes. The stakes in terms of human suffering are a few million dead people, per year. The dude who shuttered the agency was a product of the tech community, and our little debate club format here can't even handle discussing that news. It's shameful.
- readthenotes1 2y ago
  I'd have downvoted it for assuming I "support this shit".

by rl3 2y ago

rl3 2y ago

This comment went from +5 to 0 almost 24 hours later. Racists win! Perhaps the bots have hate in their hearts.

defrost 2y ago
I upvoted the comment for the first part that made a case for the minority status of specific veterens being as important a part of their story as the details of how a hill was taken are to the specific story of other specific veterans. I wasn't taken with the snark and shade thrown in the second part of that comment, and I dare say that others here on HN would have downvoted for that alone regardless of which side of any specific debate you chose to argue. It's not just 'Racists' or those with an opposing view that will downvote you here on HN, you will also get judged on the strength and presentation of your comment as if it were part of a debate club exchange.
- rl3 2y ago
  Thank you, and well put. >... and I dare say that others here on HN would have downvoted for that alone regardless of which side of any specific debate you chose to argue. That's fair. In fact, I used to be that person. I will say in recent years it's become far more common to see latent mass downvotes, but it's probably just some dynamic I'm not properly accounting for, perhaps latent attention on a submission tends to be the very type of user you just described. On the other hand, bot overlords attempting to shape the narrative probably realized a long time ago that the very early and very late phases are the best time to do said shaping. I'm just confused since this time I didn't even say nothin' unflattering about the PLA. >It's not just 'Racists' or those with an opposing view that will downvote you here on HN, you will also get judged on the strength and presentation of your comment as if it were part of a debate club exchange. I know you're just the messenger with regard to this point, but what irks me is that while this style is time-tested for tech topics and sadly works, for real-world topics—at times—it comes off as a grotesque form of whataboutism that can feel utterly insensitive if not detached from reality. A great example is the recent news with USAID. No submission about this on HN made it to triple digit upvotes. The stakes in terms of human suffering are a few million dead people, per year. The dude who shuttered the agency was a product of the tech community, and our little debate club format here can't even handle discussing that news. It's shameful.
readthenotes1 2y ago
I'd have downvoted it for assuming I "support this shit".