5 ms·

And this type of person seems to be exactly why Ruby Central did what it did: To save the projects from being misused as protest tools by histrionic people that

And this type of person seems to be exactly why Ruby Central did what it did: To save the projects from being misused as protest tools by histrionic people that make sweeping derogatory remarks about other people whose benign opinions they dislike. I am not affiliated with either “side” so I allow myself this small outburst of my own because I see no receipts and the tone of this blog post set the stage for it.

throwawayqqq11 1y ago
This is the decay of the current political discourse. World views that disparage human beings where previously condemned but the overton window slowly shifted the topic of eg. "degenerates" back into the public. Even though we are thankfully not quite there to talk openly about a final solution (that time might come!). It started with "edgy humor" and ambigous statements and slowly increased in misantrophy and number. Ofc it is predominantly the political right that, openly or indirectly, revolves around conservative identity politics and in turn is more susceptible to disgust driven out-group biases. But this behaviour can be seen on the political left too. As a reaction to the right communicating in dog whistles, they got kind of conditioned on it too and that is IMO the prime motivator of this blog post. Jared White could have done a better job by collecting more examples of such "hate speech" but to be pedantic here, DHH -- like any reasonable person -- should avoid ambiguity and take a big step back from any ambiguous public communication or at least clarify. When this open, clear and construstive communication doesnt happen, you can observe stuff like this. Name calling and blame around "banalities". Its just the surfacing part of a bigger conflict, which can be hard to pin point since one side is (intentionally) ambiguous/evasive/ignorant. Reading DHHs quoted X post is a good example of deteriorating communication: > @dhh: While the rest of the tech world has mostly moved on from the nonsense of the early 2020s, there are still a few ardent ideologues fighting the last war on Reddit, believing that ridiculous accusations like “nazi” and “fascist” still carry any weight I wouldnt put a text together, where (1) i am not adressing the other sides concerns, (2) frame them negatively and (3) normalize allegations, others take very serious (nazi, fascism) as wheightless when i am in charge of managing (and uniting) a community. This is a serious red flag.
- simianparrot 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - throwawayqqq11 1y ago
    I am not a propnent of cencorship or loose labeling as nazi etc. too. Identity politics is unfortunately also part of the left, which allows right wing media to manipulate the gullible by mis-portraying the left with dislikeable stereotypes of LGBTQ/communism/violence etc. > we have enough of this So do i. But what to do about it? Having a clear, open and hopefully constructive conversation about > we need to reduce immigration would take one of two pathes (once we have agreed on that migration is required). Either the problems with migrants are inherent to them or to the society they grew up in. Its the nature vs nurture debate. Path 1 would be the dehumanising, simple-minded right wing "pill". Path 2 is the complex left stance about wealth distribution leading to better social mobility, more stable families, strengthening institutions, communities and democracies, blablabla. Which path would you take? Would it be too much, if id call trump a nazi or could you still politically align yourself with someone who does? You didnt state "we need to reduce _criminal_ migration." Trump campaigned against criminal mexicans and is now deporting any hard working migrant, even when they are welcome in the local community and valuable members of society. ... like a racist? Maybe even a nazi? I am tired of not having clear, open and constructrive conversations about self-critizing topics with people. I think, my previous post described the the political conversation matter pretty good and suprisingly not that inflamatory and all you responded was basically "but look at what the left does!" I think you cannot imagine how often i got such a reply from right wingers and how increasingly annoying it is. How do we fix this?
    - whstl 1y ago
      There are more than two paths. The older leftist path was that taking refugees was the moral thing to do, but taking immigrants to do cheap jobs was not. In the past the left was saying "the real issue is capital using migration to drive down wages and fragment worker power". Today nobody is saying that anymore, left or right, because nobody cares about neither refugees nor workers. It's just extremist positions in public discourse. Saying "economic migrant" has become a dog whistle.
AlexeyBelov 1y ago
> I am not affiliated with either “side” Then why are you carrying water for exclusively one "side"?
- simianparrot 1y ago
  I made up my own independent opinion. I’m not affiliated with any side, I just happen to personally agree with one side’s actions this time. Do I have to be neutral?

throwawayqqq11 1y ago

This is the decay of the current political discourse. World views that disparage human beings where previously condemned but the overton window slowly shifted the topic of eg. "degenerates" back into the public. Even though we are thankfully not quite there to talk openly about a final solution (that time might come!). It started with "edgy humor" and ambigous statements and slowly increased in misantrophy and number. Ofc it is predominantly the political right that, openly or indirectly, revolves around conservative identity politics and in turn is more susceptible to disgust driven out-group biases. But this behaviour can be seen on the political left too. As a reaction to the right communicating in dog whistles, they got kind of conditioned on it too and that is IMO the prime motivator of this blog post. Jared White could have done a better job by collecting more examples of such "hate speech" but to be pedantic here, DHH -- like any reasonable person -- should avoid ambiguity and take a big step back from any ambiguous public communication or at least clarify. When this open, clear and construstive communication doesnt happen, you can observe stuff like this. Name calling and blame around "banalities". Its just the surfacing part of a bigger conflict, which can be hard to pin point since one side is (intentionally) ambiguous/evasive/ignorant. Reading DHHs quoted X post is a good example of deteriorating communication: > @dhh: While the rest of the tech world has mostly moved on from the nonsense of the early 2020s, there are still a few ardent ideologues fighting the last war on Reddit, believing that ridiculous accusations like “nazi” and “fascist” still carry any weight I wouldnt put a text together, where (1) i am not adressing the other sides concerns, (2) frame them negatively and (3) normalize allegations, others take very serious (nazi, fascism) as wheightless when i am in charge of managing (and uniting) a community. This is a serious red flag.

simianparrot 1y ago
[flagged]
- throwawayqqq11 1y ago
  I am not a propnent of cencorship or loose labeling as nazi etc. too. Identity politics is unfortunately also part of the left, which allows right wing media to manipulate the gullible by mis-portraying the left with dislikeable stereotypes of LGBTQ/communism/violence etc. > we have enough of this So do i. But what to do about it? Having a clear, open and hopefully constructive conversation about > we need to reduce immigration would take one of two pathes (once we have agreed on that migration is required). Either the problems with migrants are inherent to them or to the society they grew up in. Its the nature vs nurture debate. Path 1 would be the dehumanising, simple-minded right wing "pill". Path 2 is the complex left stance about wealth distribution leading to better social mobility, more stable families, strengthening institutions, communities and democracies, blablabla. Which path would you take? Would it be too much, if id call trump a nazi or could you still politically align yourself with someone who does? You didnt state "we need to reduce _criminal_ migration." Trump campaigned against criminal mexicans and is now deporting any hard working migrant, even when they are welcome in the local community and valuable members of society. ... like a racist? Maybe even a nazi? I am tired of not having clear, open and constructrive conversations about self-critizing topics with people. I think, my previous post described the the political conversation matter pretty good and suprisingly not that inflamatory and all you responded was basically "but look at what the left does!" I think you cannot imagine how often i got such a reply from right wingers and how increasingly annoying it is. How do we fix this?
  - whstl 1y ago
    There are more than two paths. The older leftist path was that taking refugees was the moral thing to do, but taking immigrants to do cheap jobs was not. In the past the left was saying "the real issue is capital using migration to drive down wages and fragment worker power". Today nobody is saying that anymore, left or right, because nobody cares about neither refugees nor workers. It's just extremist positions in public discourse. Saying "economic migrant" has become a dog whistle.

AlexeyBelov 1y ago

> I am not affiliated with either “side” Then why are you carrying water for exclusively one "side"?

simianparrot 1y ago
I made up my own independent opinion. I’m not affiliated with any side, I just happen to personally agree with one side’s actions this time. Do I have to be neutral?