4 ms·

"anyone who can think critically leans towards the Democratic party" isn't something anyone who's actually intelligent would ever say.

homefree 1y ago
It's exactly what a partisan reddit midwit would say and they're overrepresented when it comes to Elon Musk hatred. There used to be less of that on HN, my theory is younger accounts that are more politically extreme/lefty are now here as the younger generation graduates school and posts more on HN. There's some historical irony too since communism came out of highly educated academic elites and is responsible for an enormous amount of death and value destruction. Ideological driven academics that think they're better than everyone are particularly good at crafting insane ideologies someone outside of that insular community would not, then leveraging institutional and cultural power to force it on everyone else. The woke and gender ideologies share similar origins, same for DEI. It's a political and ideological monoculture and it's a dangerous mixture of incredibly confidently smug and wrong. Worth picking up Peter Thiel's first book which goes into this in some detail (he wrote it pretty young, observing the early start of this when he was at Stanford). It's wildly prescient and was from the mid 90s iirc.
- ggm 1y ago
  Do you think Pew research is a democrat shill body? https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2016/04/26/a-wider-ideological-gap-between-more-and-less-educated-adults/ https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2016/04/26/a-wider-ideo... I'm very midwitted. 50% of the planet is below the mean after all..
  - homefree 1y ago
    What is "education"? Is it degrees? There are a lot of problems with this. It's hardly a sign that someone "thinks critically". A lot mediocre students I knew in school stayed on to do more school because they were not able to do something else. A lot of degrees and classes are frankly bullshit and this problem has gotten worse since the 60s - the details matter. Time wasted studying pseudo-intellectual nonsense doesn't imply someone has a better understanding of the world than someone else (often the opposite) - just that they wasted time getting indoctrinated in a particular culture (often subsidized by others if not the taxpayer). What about the people doing interesting and useful things in society, building stuff, creating wealth - what these people think matters a lot more than someone that got a PHD on olfactory ethics. Not all education is equal. Even then, the meta analysis matters less than the details of the actual underlying argument. Appeal to authority and experts is a poor substitute for rigorous good faith debate of the actual issues. There's a reason William F. Buckley said he would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people listed in the phone book than by the faculty members from Harvard. "I am obliged to confess that I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University. Not, heaven knows, because I hold lightly the brainpower or knowledge or generosity or even the affability of the Harvard faculty: but because I greatly fear intellectual arrogance, and that is a distinguishing characteristic of the university which refuses to accept any common premise." So it's not that I dispute the data that there's a lefty bias in universities (there obviously is), I dispute what that actually means.
    - ggm 1y ago
      > So it's not that I dispute the data that there's a lefty bias in universities (there obviously is), I dispute what that actually means. The issue at hand isn't perceived bias in universities, it's voting tendencies of people who have higher education. PS, this conversation is a waste of both of our times. I won't be continuing it. Because there is no good faith either side. I'm certainly not going to display any and I aver you aren't either, but you can judge for yourself.
      - homefree 1y ago
        > The issue at hand isn't perceived bias in universities, it's voting tendencies of people who have higher education. Arguably they go hand in hand, take young people and immerse them in a political/ideological monoculture for four formative years and it's not surprising many come out saying the same things and voting the same way all of their professors did, there's a lack of viewpoint diversity. Most people are mimetic, exposure to the best arguments from an intellectually diverse curriculum would be great but that's not what universities (broadly) are today. It's very hard to think for yourself, even harder when immersed in a place where ideological conformity is rigidly enforced. FWIW I thought your comment was in good faith, we just don't agree.
- ActorNightly 1y ago
  Thanks for proving my point by demonstrating you can't comprehend reality. You assume that anything anti conservative must be in the Bernie Sanders camp of full left. In reality, the modern democrats are pretty much the exact center. Any sensible traditional right leaning policy like free market capitalism, gun ownership, and immigration enforcement is already part of the liberal Democratic platform. The reason that what I said holds true should be self evident. One of the cornerstone of modern conservativism is small government and reduced government spending. Yet Trump is pretty much doing the exact opposite of this. So to to even begin talking about why conservatism is valid, you have a LONG bridge to cross of somehow proving that Trump objectively the better choice, which at this point would require exceptionally extraordinary evidence. Another way of testing intelligence is basically to ask the question - what concrete evidence would it take for you to change your mind to the opposite view on a certain subject? For the question of what is better for society, Democrats and their policies vs Republicans and their policies, no conservative can provide a clear answer on what would it take for them to change their mind.
  - homefree 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - ActorNightly 1y ago
      >If Trump had lost Iran would probably have a nuclear weapon Random thing to be concerned about, and also very fringe evidence of "probably". > The democrat's failure on immigration broadly (both at the border and on policy) is also something driving people away from them. Immigration was never an issue - unemployment was at a record low especially after Covid, and crime was on its way down. Democrats had a bill that targeted immigration reform, which included provision for more funding to CBP and most importantly immigration hearings so that we can actually separate the people who are illegal versus people who are truly under refugee status and shown that they are willing to work and contribute. Trump told the Republicans to veto the bill because the immigration issue would make him look good in elections. You fell for it. >Compare the extreme competence/political capability of someone like Elon Musk You mean the guy that funded a candidate, that within 4 months told him to fuck off while passing the BBB that removed a major source of funding for his company? You mean the guy that bet Sam Harris 1mil after saying US wouldn't see more than 35k cases of Covid, only to reneg on the bet and block Sam? Good one chief. >The left has pushed identity based culture issues around DEI and gender ideology that have had serious negative effects up to and including surgical operations on children due to gender affirming care A) Don't lump democrtats with the left. B) Surgical operations on children for gender affirmg care is a non issue, the number of these is incredibly small (and no, the argument Democrats would have increase this doesn't fly). As for DEI, you have to prove with numbers that this was harming American companies and institutions, in terms of economic impact or other factors. >Also when it comes to guns, I live in California - the democrats are hardly the gun friendly party. State politics =/= government politics. States have their right to enforce additional laws. Thats in the Constitution. And again, above all, even if Im completely wrong on all of this, you still have a convicted felon who tried to coup the government, whos name was on the Epstein list with evidence of him being at parties, with Project 2025 thats halfway complete, who does dictator shit every single week. It would take an extraordinary amount of evidence to prove that Kamala was the worst choice. Part of me really hopes that republicans win in 2026 and 2028, because as bad as things are now, they can get much much worse. Because people like you need to really suffer in daily lives to ever understand that Republican policies can lead to lives where you are concerned about being able to feed your kids instead of having the privilege to worry about tiny issues like DEI.
michaelmrose 1y ago
It is. The opposition is getting ready to crater the economy whilst building concentration camps to be filled by the klan army he's putting together whilst gutting both our constitutional protections and ability to remove what ammounts to a senile version of Hitler. They are doing so much damage to institutions and ultimately to people that their loss in 2028 will be damned near inevitable leaving them no course of action to stay out of prison other tha what they have already outlined which is to end democracy. There is no substantial opposition from the Republicans singly or in groups. They are barely willing to verbally chastise him and none dare vote in a meaningful way that would impact his plans. They were barely willing to admit he wasn't pres in 2021 when he was nothing.
ActorNightly 1y ago
Yes because it makes perfect sense to vote for convicted felon, most likely a child molester, who tried to coup the government when he lost in 2025, with Project 2025 behind his back. That act alone pretty much disqualifies you from being able to talk about intelligence in the first place.
- natch 1y ago
  Four false turds packaged up in haughty fake outrage does not mean you have given us a golden truth. The democrats chose an unimaginably bad candidate and snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
  - ActorNightly 1y ago
    Ah yes, the whole lawsuit where Trumps legal team argued that he in fact did submit a slate of fraudlent electors, but argued that he had the right to do so because he was immune from legal prosecution, is totally false, despite being all documented in publicly available court proceedings. Also this https://www.project2025.observer/en https://www.project2025.observer/en So please understand that when you claim that these things are false, it is absolutely ok for people to assume you are mentally ill. Because you chose to live in a world inside your head instead of actual reality.
    - natch 1y ago
      That’s fine if you assume that! I definitely am not 100% perfect. Thanks for the link I’ll take a look.

homefree 1y ago

It's exactly what a partisan reddit midwit would say and they're overrepresented when it comes to Elon Musk hatred. There used to be less of that on HN, my theory is younger accounts that are more politically extreme/lefty are now here as the younger generation graduates school and posts more on HN. There's some historical irony too since communism came out of highly educated academic elites and is responsible for an enormous amount of death and value destruction. Ideological driven academics that think they're better than everyone are particularly good at crafting insane ideologies someone outside of that insular community would not, then leveraging institutional and cultural power to force it on everyone else. The woke and gender ideologies share similar origins, same for DEI. It's a political and ideological monoculture and it's a dangerous mixture of incredibly confidently smug and wrong. Worth picking up Peter Thiel's first book which goes into this in some detail (he wrote it pretty young, observing the early start of this when he was at Stanford). It's wildly prescient and was from the mid 90s iirc.

ggm 1y ago
Do you think Pew research is a democrat shill body? https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2016/04/26/a-wider-ideological-gap-between-more-and-less-educated-adults/ https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2016/04/26/a-wider-ideo... I'm very midwitted. 50% of the planet is below the mean after all..
- homefree 1y ago
  What is "education"? Is it degrees? There are a lot of problems with this. It's hardly a sign that someone "thinks critically". A lot mediocre students I knew in school stayed on to do more school because they were not able to do something else. A lot of degrees and classes are frankly bullshit and this problem has gotten worse since the 60s - the details matter. Time wasted studying pseudo-intellectual nonsense doesn't imply someone has a better understanding of the world than someone else (often the opposite) - just that they wasted time getting indoctrinated in a particular culture (often subsidized by others if not the taxpayer). What about the people doing interesting and useful things in society, building stuff, creating wealth - what these people think matters a lot more than someone that got a PHD on olfactory ethics. Not all education is equal. Even then, the meta analysis matters less than the details of the actual underlying argument. Appeal to authority and experts is a poor substitute for rigorous good faith debate of the actual issues. There's a reason William F. Buckley said he would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people listed in the phone book than by the faculty members from Harvard. "I am obliged to confess that I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University. Not, heaven knows, because I hold lightly the brainpower or knowledge or generosity or even the affability of the Harvard faculty: but because I greatly fear intellectual arrogance, and that is a distinguishing characteristic of the university which refuses to accept any common premise." So it's not that I dispute the data that there's a lefty bias in universities (there obviously is), I dispute what that actually means.
  - ggm 1y ago
    > So it's not that I dispute the data that there's a lefty bias in universities (there obviously is), I dispute what that actually means. The issue at hand isn't perceived bias in universities, it's voting tendencies of people who have higher education. PS, this conversation is a waste of both of our times. I won't be continuing it. Because there is no good faith either side. I'm certainly not going to display any and I aver you aren't either, but you can judge for yourself.
    - homefree 1y ago
      > The issue at hand isn't perceived bias in universities, it's voting tendencies of people who have higher education. Arguably they go hand in hand, take young people and immerse them in a political/ideological monoculture for four formative years and it's not surprising many come out saying the same things and voting the same way all of their professors did, there's a lack of viewpoint diversity. Most people are mimetic, exposure to the best arguments from an intellectually diverse curriculum would be great but that's not what universities (broadly) are today. It's very hard to think for yourself, even harder when immersed in a place where ideological conformity is rigidly enforced. FWIW I thought your comment was in good faith, we just don't agree.
ActorNightly 1y ago
Thanks for proving my point by demonstrating you can't comprehend reality. You assume that anything anti conservative must be in the Bernie Sanders camp of full left. In reality, the modern democrats are pretty much the exact center. Any sensible traditional right leaning policy like free market capitalism, gun ownership, and immigration enforcement is already part of the liberal Democratic platform. The reason that what I said holds true should be self evident. One of the cornerstone of modern conservativism is small government and reduced government spending. Yet Trump is pretty much doing the exact opposite of this. So to to even begin talking about why conservatism is valid, you have a LONG bridge to cross of somehow proving that Trump objectively the better choice, which at this point would require exceptionally extraordinary evidence. Another way of testing intelligence is basically to ask the question - what concrete evidence would it take for you to change your mind to the opposite view on a certain subject? For the question of what is better for society, Democrats and their policies vs Republicans and their policies, no conservative can provide a clear answer on what would it take for them to change their mind.
- homefree 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - ActorNightly 1y ago
    >If Trump had lost Iran would probably have a nuclear weapon Random thing to be concerned about, and also very fringe evidence of "probably". > The democrat's failure on immigration broadly (both at the border and on policy) is also something driving people away from them. Immigration was never an issue - unemployment was at a record low especially after Covid, and crime was on its way down. Democrats had a bill that targeted immigration reform, which included provision for more funding to CBP and most importantly immigration hearings so that we can actually separate the people who are illegal versus people who are truly under refugee status and shown that they are willing to work and contribute. Trump told the Republicans to veto the bill because the immigration issue would make him look good in elections. You fell for it. >Compare the extreme competence/political capability of someone like Elon Musk You mean the guy that funded a candidate, that within 4 months told him to fuck off while passing the BBB that removed a major source of funding for his company? You mean the guy that bet Sam Harris 1mil after saying US wouldn't see more than 35k cases of Covid, only to reneg on the bet and block Sam? Good one chief. >The left has pushed identity based culture issues around DEI and gender ideology that have had serious negative effects up to and including surgical operations on children due to gender affirming care A) Don't lump democrtats with the left. B) Surgical operations on children for gender affirmg care is a non issue, the number of these is incredibly small (and no, the argument Democrats would have increase this doesn't fly). As for DEI, you have to prove with numbers that this was harming American companies and institutions, in terms of economic impact or other factors. >Also when it comes to guns, I live in California - the democrats are hardly the gun friendly party. State politics =/= government politics. States have their right to enforce additional laws. Thats in the Constitution. And again, above all, even if Im completely wrong on all of this, you still have a convicted felon who tried to coup the government, whos name was on the Epstein list with evidence of him being at parties, with Project 2025 thats halfway complete, who does dictator shit every single week. It would take an extraordinary amount of evidence to prove that Kamala was the worst choice. Part of me really hopes that republicans win in 2026 and 2028, because as bad as things are now, they can get much much worse. Because people like you need to really suffer in daily lives to ever understand that Republican policies can lead to lives where you are concerned about being able to feed your kids instead of having the privilege to worry about tiny issues like DEI.

michaelmrose 1y ago

It is. The opposition is getting ready to crater the economy whilst building concentration camps to be filled by the klan army he's putting together whilst gutting both our constitutional protections and ability to remove what ammounts to a senile version of Hitler. They are doing so much damage to institutions and ultimately to people that their loss in 2028 will be damned near inevitable leaving them no course of action to stay out of prison other tha what they have already outlined which is to end democracy. There is no substantial opposition from the Republicans singly or in groups. They are barely willing to verbally chastise him and none dare vote in a meaningful way that would impact his plans. They were barely willing to admit he wasn't pres in 2021 when he was nothing.

ActorNightly 1y ago

Yes because it makes perfect sense to vote for convicted felon, most likely a child molester, who tried to coup the government when he lost in 2025, with Project 2025 behind his back. That act alone pretty much disqualifies you from being able to talk about intelligence in the first place.

natch 1y ago
Four false turds packaged up in haughty fake outrage does not mean you have given us a golden truth. The democrats chose an unimaginably bad candidate and snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
- ActorNightly 1y ago
  Ah yes, the whole lawsuit where Trumps legal team argued that he in fact did submit a slate of fraudlent electors, but argued that he had the right to do so because he was immune from legal prosecution, is totally false, despite being all documented in publicly available court proceedings. Also this https://www.project2025.observer/en https://www.project2025.observer/en So please understand that when you claim that these things are false, it is absolutely ok for people to assume you are mentally ill. Because you chose to live in a world inside your head instead of actual reality.
  - natch 1y ago
    That’s fine if you assume that! I definitely am not 100% perfect. Thanks for the link I’ll take a look.