5 ms·

>Exactly what everyone said when Patriot Act was passed I've been seeing plenty of Americans cheering on temporary safety over essential liberty since then, an

by vlian2088 4mo ago

>Exactly what everyone said when Patriot Act was passed I've been seeing plenty of Americans cheering on temporary safety over essential liberty since then, and I can't even provide examples without getting [flagged].

Terr_ 4mo ago
> I can't even provide examples [of Americans cheering on temporary safety over essential liberty] I've seen other people critiquing it over the years, perhaps it has something to do with other aspects of the delivery or message?
- inigyou 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  - Terr_ 4mo ago
    The longer things stay vague, the more I become concerned that this may be a scenario that is so common that it has an enduring meme [0], where: 1. The person claims that a broad swathe of facially reasonable and views are being rejected or forbidden in a way that is an unfair overreaction. 2. Pressed, they refuse to provide any concrete details, even in a safe context. 3. They are actually facing difficulty from a much much narrower--or entirely disjoint--set of view. In this case, OP has claimed the average HN commenter is hostile to a general class in the form of "our liberty has been improperly infringed by a false appeal to security", especially national security. I don't think that claim is credible, and I'm offering to demonstrate it by rattling off a bunch of counterexamples... However, that won't mean much if it turns out OP real grievance has some important details they are trying to keep secret. [0] https://xcancel.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1050391663552671744#m https://xcancel.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/105039166355267174...
    - graemep 4mo ago
      I think not in this particular case, and downvoting more than flagging, but I see perfectly reasonable things downvoted. In fact I often upvote things I disagree with because I think the downvotes were unfair. I have been downvoted for reasons that are not obvious to me, and sometimes for posting verifiable facts. Its hard to guess what a particular person's experiences might have been.
    - inigyou 4mo ago
      This is a pattern that exists but there's also another pattern where people downvote things they disagree with, on platforms that have downvotes. It's seen on HN and Reddit and it's thought to be the reason YouTube removed downvotes.
    - spwa4 4mo ago
      > 2. Pressed, they refuse to provide any concrete details, even in a safe context. And yet we all know why that is. We have decided that certain ideologies that are ... let's call it "easy to criticize" (because they deserve some damn serious criticism and have done enormous damage. Oh and not just one such ideology). To make things worse, in many places such discussions have been legally banned. And some of these ideologies are very visible in politics or even on the street. And discussion of such ideologies immediately devolves into pinning the blame for all that went wrong in history on a particular segment of the population. We have collectively decided such ideologies are to be considered above criticism, and you're quite right, it's not working. It used to be commonplace to bring the horrors of certain ideologies and expose them everywhere. In movies, on the TV, exposing the blatant failures and aggression of ideologies was commonplace. Depicting communist dissident prisons happened in children cartoons. Associating islam with slavery, including depicting how commonplace rape and open commercial exploitation of female slaves was in islamic nations was normal. The reality hasn't changed: IS/Daesh reintroduced slavery, as one of their first acts, but it is utterly forbidden to discuss why they might have done so. Frankly, islamophobia is just a word meant to shut down criticism of the very bad parts of that ideology, as well as the supremacism built into that faith, something that has no place in America, or anywhere on the planet. And on the other hand communist and ex-communist nations are still full of dissident prisons, but it can't be discussed anymore. What communism has to do with socialism also can't be discussed, or even that socialism has evolved over time (e.g. why socialism, was rabidly anti-immigration not 30 years ago, and the reasoning behind it) And the problem is that any suggestion of going back immediately and directly runs headfirst into extreme aggression. Hence, no discussion.
      - amanaplanacanal 4mo ago
        Everything you said about Islam has direct correlations in Christianity in fairly recent history. But, as you say, things evolve over time. Christians for the most part are now against slavery, as I would bet most Muslims are too. Countries that are no longer communist still have dissidents in prison, which would suggest that is not the fault of communism, but other ideologies still rampant in those countries. I'm not sure what exactly you are saying about socialism, it has lots of proponents and implementations in different countries, it's not just one thing that I can see.
    - deleted 4mo ago
      [deleted]
    - vlian2088 4mo ago
      yep, the very first response tweet had confirmed my immediate assumption about the kind of people that 'meme' would be 'enduring' with.
  - globnomulous 4mo ago
    This is nonsense. HN is very lightly, and fairly, moderated.
    - inigyou 4mo ago
      Lightly and fairly as in: removing anything that gets 4 flags no matter what it is What gets 4 flags? Certain things. Such as inconvenient facts
      - readthedangcode 4mo ago
        Just say the facts bro
      - Cider9986 4mo ago
        You won't get flagged if you state facts without insults. Just spit it out. Even if it did get flagged because you broke the guidelines, we'd still be able to see it. Id vouch for it even if you broke the rules so you can understand better and we can see the facts
    - GJim 4mo ago
      [flagged]
      - fsflover 4mo ago
        My entire posting and submission history go against the adtech. I only get flagged when I write stupid things or off-topic.
        thunky 4mo ago
        Both of you can be correct: Valid posts get flagged frequently, enough for people to notice it. But not every, or even most, posts in this category get flagged.
        fsflover 4mo ago
  - pjc50 4mo ago
    HN will flag you for being stupidly confrontational or promoting known conspiracy theories; you can introduce facts provided you back them up with non-insane sources.
    - like_any_other 4mo ago
      In two of these posts, people might take issue with some of the sources. The rest should all be considered trustworthy by anyone. All flagged: Posts flagged for showing how politics has meddled in science (unfortunately one of those facts was overstated, as a commenter kindly alerted me to. Including the correction did not prevent flagging): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48578344 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48578344 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48524049 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48524049 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48434792 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48434792 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48434589 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48434589 Demonstration of NYTimes bias, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48164242 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48164242 Showing how an article omitted any links to Israel in its discussion of the Iran war, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48076950 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48076950 Citing a Dutch study on economic impact of immigrants, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48070799 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48070799 Showing how a study omitted data that interfered with its conclusion, only revealed due to FOIA'd emails, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47281899 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47281899 Elucidating on the nature of social media censorship, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47016171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47016171 Providing relevant context to UK's complaints about officials being banned from the US, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46615611 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46615611 Showing the racial bias of a hacktivist, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46509295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46509295 Citing a Pew survey about the expressed importance of racial identity, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45575489 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45575489 Correcting a misleading statement in an article, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44932696 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44932696
      - pas 4mo ago
mekoka 4mo ago
This isn't a specifically American phenomenon. Humans have fear buttons. If you press the right ones, a sizable portion of any population would trade in significant amount of freedom to feel safer. Those for whom it's almost pathological spend considerable effort trying to pass on their worries to others, or chasing opportunities to exert some satisfactory control. If they succeed in either goals, you get less freedom.

Terr_ 4mo ago

> I can't even provide examples [of Americans cheering on temporary safety over essential liberty] I've seen other people critiquing it over the years, perhaps it has something to do with other aspects of the delivery or message?

inigyou 4mo ago
[flagged]
- Terr_ 4mo ago
  The longer things stay vague, the more I become concerned that this may be a scenario that is so common that it has an enduring meme [0], where: 1. The person claims that a broad swathe of facially reasonable and views are being rejected or forbidden in a way that is an unfair overreaction. 2. Pressed, they refuse to provide any concrete details, even in a safe context. 3. They are actually facing difficulty from a much much narrower--or entirely disjoint--set of view. In this case, OP has claimed the average HN commenter is hostile to a general class in the form of "our liberty has been improperly infringed by a false appeal to security", especially national security. I don't think that claim is credible, and I'm offering to demonstrate it by rattling off a bunch of counterexamples... However, that won't mean much if it turns out OP real grievance has some important details they are trying to keep secret. [0] https://xcancel.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1050391663552671744#m https://xcancel.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/105039166355267174...
  - graemep 4mo ago
    I think not in this particular case, and downvoting more than flagging, but I see perfectly reasonable things downvoted. In fact I often upvote things I disagree with because I think the downvotes were unfair. I have been downvoted for reasons that are not obvious to me, and sometimes for posting verifiable facts. Its hard to guess what a particular person's experiences might have been.
  - inigyou 4mo ago
    This is a pattern that exists but there's also another pattern where people downvote things they disagree with, on platforms that have downvotes. It's seen on HN and Reddit and it's thought to be the reason YouTube removed downvotes.
  - spwa4 4mo ago
    > 2. Pressed, they refuse to provide any concrete details, even in a safe context. And yet we all know why that is. We have decided that certain ideologies that are ... let's call it "easy to criticize" (because they deserve some damn serious criticism and have done enormous damage. Oh and not just one such ideology). To make things worse, in many places such discussions have been legally banned. And some of these ideologies are very visible in politics or even on the street. And discussion of such ideologies immediately devolves into pinning the blame for all that went wrong in history on a particular segment of the population. We have collectively decided such ideologies are to be considered above criticism, and you're quite right, it's not working. It used to be commonplace to bring the horrors of certain ideologies and expose them everywhere. In movies, on the TV, exposing the blatant failures and aggression of ideologies was commonplace. Depicting communist dissident prisons happened in children cartoons. Associating islam with slavery, including depicting how commonplace rape and open commercial exploitation of female slaves was in islamic nations was normal. The reality hasn't changed: IS/Daesh reintroduced slavery, as one of their first acts, but it is utterly forbidden to discuss why they might have done so. Frankly, islamophobia is just a word meant to shut down criticism of the very bad parts of that ideology, as well as the supremacism built into that faith, something that has no place in America, or anywhere on the planet. And on the other hand communist and ex-communist nations are still full of dissident prisons, but it can't be discussed anymore. What communism has to do with socialism also can't be discussed, or even that socialism has evolved over time (e.g. why socialism, was rabidly anti-immigration not 30 years ago, and the reasoning behind it) And the problem is that any suggestion of going back immediately and directly runs headfirst into extreme aggression. Hence, no discussion.
    - amanaplanacanal 4mo ago
      Everything you said about Islam has direct correlations in Christianity in fairly recent history. But, as you say, things evolve over time. Christians for the most part are now against slavery, as I would bet most Muslims are too. Countries that are no longer communist still have dissidents in prison, which would suggest that is not the fault of communism, but other ideologies still rampant in those countries. I'm not sure what exactly you are saying about socialism, it has lots of proponents and implementations in different countries, it's not just one thing that I can see.
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
  - vlian2088 4mo ago
    yep, the very first response tweet had confirmed my immediate assumption about the kind of people that 'meme' would be 'enduring' with.
- globnomulous 4mo ago
  This is nonsense. HN is very lightly, and fairly, moderated.
  - inigyou 4mo ago
    Lightly and fairly as in: removing anything that gets 4 flags no matter what it is What gets 4 flags? Certain things. Such as inconvenient facts
    - readthedangcode 4mo ago
      Just say the facts bro
    - Cider9986 4mo ago
      You won't get flagged if you state facts without insults. Just spit it out. Even if it did get flagged because you broke the guidelines, we'd still be able to see it. Id vouch for it even if you broke the rules so you can understand better and we can see the facts
  - GJim 4mo ago
    [flagged]
    - fsflover 4mo ago
      My entire posting and submission history go against the adtech. I only get flagged when I write stupid things or off-topic.
      - thunky 4mo ago
        Both of you can be correct: Valid posts get flagged frequently, enough for people to notice it. But not every, or even most, posts in this category get flagged.
        fsflover 4mo ago
- pjc50 4mo ago
  HN will flag you for being stupidly confrontational or promoting known conspiracy theories; you can introduce facts provided you back them up with non-insane sources.
  - like_any_other 4mo ago
    In two of these posts, people might take issue with some of the sources. The rest should all be considered trustworthy by anyone. All flagged: Posts flagged for showing how politics has meddled in science (unfortunately one of those facts was overstated, as a commenter kindly alerted me to. Including the correction did not prevent flagging): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48578344 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48578344 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48524049 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48524049 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48434792 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48434792 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48434589 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48434589 Demonstration of NYTimes bias, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48164242 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48164242 Showing how an article omitted any links to Israel in its discussion of the Iran war, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48076950 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48076950 Citing a Dutch study on economic impact of immigrants, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48070799 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48070799 Showing how a study omitted data that interfered with its conclusion, only revealed due to FOIA'd emails, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47281899 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47281899 Elucidating on the nature of social media censorship, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47016171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47016171 Providing relevant context to UK's complaints about officials being banned from the US, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46615611 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46615611 Showing the racial bias of a hacktivist, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46509295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46509295 Citing a Pew survey about the expressed importance of racial identity, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45575489 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45575489 Correcting a misleading statement in an article, flagged: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44932696 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44932696
    - pas 4mo ago

mekoka 4mo ago

This isn't a specifically American phenomenon. Humans have fear buttons. If you press the right ones, a sizable portion of any population would trade in significant amount of freedom to feel safer. Those for whom it's almost pathological spend considerable effort trying to pass on their worries to others, or chasing opportunities to exert some satisfactory control. If they succeed in either goals, you get less freedom.