5 ms·

People should read (if they must) this in context of Greenspun's rather fanatical political ideology. His blog has plenty of samples, I don't want to link to it

by zurn 13y ago

People should read (if they must) this in context of Greenspun's rather fanatical political ideology. His blog has plenty of samples, I don't want to link to it.

macspoofing 13y ago
I've never read anything of Greenspun, other than this review. I don't know, or particularly care, what his "fanatical political ideology" is. As far as I'm concerned this essay is perfectly capable of being judged on its own merits. I am however greatly annoyed whenever someone thinks they are doing everyone else a favour by trying to dissuade others from reading an opinion (especially through vague ad hominem attacks). I don't think you need to protect anyone here from uncomfortable opinions.
- tks2103 13y ago
  "I didn't want to say anything, but, I heard this Greenspun guy is a maaaaaaaaaaaajor douche."
- corin_ 13y ago
  I'm in the same boat as you with regards not not having read anything else he's written (I glanced at a few of his political essays this morning but didn't read any thoroughly), so this comment is a general thought not specific to Greenspun. Surely every article/essay has the potential to be read differently in the context of who wrote it. If it was on the subject of, for example, Israel/Palestine, would you not want to know that it was a Palestinian campaigner who wrote about their suffering, or a Zionist who wrote about their acts of terrorism? Whether you agree or disagree with one side or the other, context is often relevant.
  - macspoofing 13y ago
    >Whether you agree or disagree with one side or the other, context is often relevant. Is it really, in this case? If Greenspun was a Neo-Nazi who was serving time for killing 12 people, would it really have changed the content of this review? I understand it would probably colour your perception of him, and certainly that's what the OP was going for, but I still think that this review stands on its own.
    - corin_ 13y ago
      I haven't actually read this review, it's not something that interested me, but I do find that (for better or for worse) I judge content on its author. Yes, if he was a Neo-Nazi who had killed 12 people, it would make me lose respect for his opinions.
      - macspoofing 13y ago
        Alright. Do you want to go and research Philip Greenspun before you decide whether or not you agree with his review?
shmulkey18 13y ago
And exactly what "fanatical political ideology" is that? Must be pretty horrible mind-poisoning stuff if you feel compelled to warn people off of his blog ("if they must"), eh?
- cma 13y ago
  ayn rand inanity
  - thatswrong0 13y ago
    Are you seriously (and erroneously) conflating libertarianism with Ayn Rand's Objectivism? And do you honestly think that, should someone have libertarian political views, we should disregard their opinion?
    - cma 13y ago
      I just answered your question; I didn't endorse disregarding his opinion.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
onemorepassword 13y ago
I've never read Greenspun, and I've stopped reading half way through. And I should have already stopped after "Silicon Valley Socialism", but I was hoping he was just joking. He wasn't. Only in America can this kind of crap not be considered extremist ideology.
- wyclif 13y ago
  Greenspun appears to be a moderate Republican. Sorry, but that hardly qualifies as "extremist ideology" anywhere in the world, let alone here in the USA.
WildUtah 13y ago
Fanatical political ideology? Greenspun's a moderate New England Republican. That's getting to be a pretty rare thing these days, but it's hardly fanatical.
- nullymcnull 13y ago
  I realize that the US is bizarro world when it comes to the political spectrum, but in most places we definitely hear alarm bells going off when an author cannot help but trot out the dead horse of 'Socialism!' in response to something as mild as the suggestion that the US could improve upon its depressingly shitty standards for mat leave. I'm no fan of Sandberg, but this review is so overburdened by the author's ideological baggage that it is nearly unreadable.

by zurn 13y ago

People should read (if they must) this in context of Greenspun's rather fanatical political ideology. His blog has plenty of samples, I don't want to link to it.

macspoofing 13y ago

I've never read anything of Greenspun, other than this review. I don't know, or particularly care, what his "fanatical political ideology" is. As far as I'm concerned this essay is perfectly capable of being judged on its own merits. I am however greatly annoyed whenever someone thinks they are doing everyone else a favour by trying to dissuade others from reading an opinion (especially through vague ad hominem attacks). I don't think you need to protect anyone here from uncomfortable opinions.

tks2103 13y ago
"I didn't want to say anything, but, I heard this Greenspun guy is a maaaaaaaaaaaajor douche."
corin_ 13y ago
I'm in the same boat as you with regards not not having read anything else he's written (I glanced at a few of his political essays this morning but didn't read any thoroughly), so this comment is a general thought not specific to Greenspun. Surely every article/essay has the potential to be read differently in the context of who wrote it. If it was on the subject of, for example, Israel/Palestine, would you not want to know that it was a Palestinian campaigner who wrote about their suffering, or a Zionist who wrote about their acts of terrorism? Whether you agree or disagree with one side or the other, context is often relevant.
- macspoofing 13y ago
  >Whether you agree or disagree with one side or the other, context is often relevant. Is it really, in this case? If Greenspun was a Neo-Nazi who was serving time for killing 12 people, would it really have changed the content of this review? I understand it would probably colour your perception of him, and certainly that's what the OP was going for, but I still think that this review stands on its own.
  - corin_ 13y ago
    I haven't actually read this review, it's not something that interested me, but I do find that (for better or for worse) I judge content on its author. Yes, if he was a Neo-Nazi who had killed 12 people, it would make me lose respect for his opinions.
    - macspoofing 13y ago
      Alright. Do you want to go and research Philip Greenspun before you decide whether or not you agree with his review?

shmulkey18 13y ago

And exactly what "fanatical political ideology" is that? Must be pretty horrible mind-poisoning stuff if you feel compelled to warn people off of his blog ("if they must"), eh?

cma 13y ago
ayn rand inanity
- thatswrong0 13y ago
  Are you seriously (and erroneously) conflating libertarianism with Ayn Rand's Objectivism? And do you honestly think that, should someone have libertarian political views, we should disregard their opinion?
  - cma 13y ago
    I just answered your question; I didn't endorse disregarding his opinion.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

onemorepassword 13y ago

I've never read Greenspun, and I've stopped reading half way through. And I should have already stopped after "Silicon Valley Socialism", but I was hoping he was just joking. He wasn't. Only in America can this kind of crap not be considered extremist ideology.

wyclif 13y ago
Greenspun appears to be a moderate Republican. Sorry, but that hardly qualifies as "extremist ideology" anywhere in the world, let alone here in the USA.

WildUtah 13y ago

Fanatical political ideology? Greenspun's a moderate New England Republican. That's getting to be a pretty rare thing these days, but it's hardly fanatical.

nullymcnull 13y ago
I realize that the US is bizarro world when it comes to the political spectrum, but in most places we definitely hear alarm bells going off when an author cannot help but trot out the dead horse of 'Socialism!' in response to something as mild as the suggestion that the US could improve upon its depressingly shitty standards for mat leave. I'm no fan of Sandberg, but this review is so overburdened by the author's ideological baggage that it is nearly unreadable.