If you hate America, vote capitalist, randean individualism.
If you hate America, vote capitalist, randean individualism.
I made an account just to comment on this issue after lurking for a long time but it's surely just another pointless action because it's the same story over and over. Empathy is not common.
I used to be a republican. Or Libertarian. Blame my parents, as I do. They're dyed-in-the-wool republicans/christians, where if you have bad happen, you must have deserved it. So they dont help because you should be able to rescue yourself.
One of their most shameful moments was how horrible they talked of welfare. They qualified for it years ago, and made a big point of pride that they never took it. It to them was this huge badge of shame.
So when I had really bad times, I did take it. And instead of hiding, I said so on Facebook. Boy, my parents hated that. Pity, cause I didnt care. And that it did help me get back up.
> In the end people care about themselves and if you challenge their just-world view by suffering in front of them, or make them feel bad or guilty, they attack. The sad part is for those people nothing will change it but being forced into despair themselves and then it's too late for both of us.
Indeed. Most in this country will never see that. Or they are that, and they'll never be here to say so. Hell, even the "richies" here in HN have had many discussions about it. And one idea that is mentioned is to sell services to them - and its summarily shot down. Why? "There's no money in helping poor people. They don't have money."
> I made an account just to comment on this issue after lurking for a long time but it's surely just another pointless action because it's the same story over and over. Empathy is not common.
We're around. We aren't popular, especially around here. People who focus on empathy simply cannot become capitalists. Because they have to make decisions that preserve human-ness over money, which is completely antithetical to the idea of Venture Capitalism, Capitalists, Big Business, Disruption, and on and on.
There are, of course, token projects that try to show that this class of people care, but in all seriousness, when I stop seeing a fistfull of dollars to X project for "UBI" and briefcases of dollars to lobbying, I'll know that equation has changed.
The key to the exploit is at the heart of the core gameplay mechanic, which is that every transaction in capitalism is a codec that decimates the complex history and state of the values and liabilities of a good or service down to a single number- the price.
So hiding the abuses of others is one of the many exploits you can hide in the compression artifacts of this global codec. The key workarounds for the exploits in scalar money commerce come in the form of laws, regulations, and investigative journalism. These are all extremely high-latency, low-reliability workarounds.
Scalar money commerce was invented as a low-tech, distributed hack to solve the complex barter chain problem. It worked, but it always had issues, and it didn't scale well.
We need to evolve beyond this primitive system of commerce that decimates everything to a single number at each transaction to one that journals state with long vectors of information tracking millions of dimensions of value and liability, and that uses more sophisticated game design and graph algorithms to solve complex barter chain problems.
Blue Blood Democrats pushed Bernie off the national stage attempting to elect Hillary Clinton, leaving the disadvantaged to only vote for the candidate who offered to champion their cause (Donald Trump). I don't fault most Trump voters one bit. The superior option they had was scuttled by a power hungry candidate who lost to the worst candidate for presidency ever.
> But with their embrace of white nationalist policies and rhetoric, I think you see a lot of liberals feeling like they don't have the energy to care about all of the powerless people in this country and, instead, are focusing what limited resources they have on trying to help other oppressed groups (minorities, undocumented immigrants, etc.)
Which causes conservative America to double down on conservatives in office. Wash, rinse, repeat.
EDIT: "Undocumented immigrants" are not citizens being oppressed; they are illegally in the country and should be deported unless covered under DACA (having arrived in the US as minors).
What the DNC did in last year's primary was shameful, but...
> leaving the disadvantaged to only vote for the candidate who offered to champion their cause (Donald Trump)
Laughs...he never championed their cause. He told them all their problems were because of minorities and that he'd return the country to a time of bigotry and racism where things would magically be better because they were white. He's since taken the office of The President and used it to try to screw over poor whites in every way imaginable and tried to placate them by making it even worse for minorities. It's hard to blame under-educated people for falling for Fox News propaganda, but you still can't deny their complicity in enabling their own situation. What they did in the general election to defeat Hilary they could have done in the Primary to support Bernie. They didn't.
This stance is part of the problem.
https://www.google.com/search?q=bring+jobs+back+trump+youtub...
https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+coal+jobs+youtube
https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+carrier+jobs+youtube
He promised the disadvantaged he'd get their jobs back from Mexico and China, he promised to bring coal jobs back. Whether he did those things or not doesn't matter. That's what he promised.
> It's hard to blame under-educated people for falling for Fox News propaganda, but you still can't deny their complicity in enabling their own situation. What they did in the general election to defeat Hilary they could have done in the Primary to support Bernie. They didn't.
I don't blame undereducated people. I blame people who care more about illegal immigrants than the disenfranchised citizens suffering in poverty in the US. I blame urban liberals who have no comprehension of the plight the poor in the US are suffering through. I blame upper management of the Democratic Party, who rigged the nomination (along with super delegates) against Bernie Sanders, and I wish nothing but terrible, terrible things on those people.
EDIT: Hillary Clinton is nowhere to be found after her crushing defeat, and Bernie Sanders is still out there every day fighting for universal healthcare and other pro-citizen policies (alongside Elizabeth Warren). We suffered a terrible loss because of Clinton's vanity and pride.
All candidates promised jobs. Trump was promising jobs that either no longer really exist due to automation or are soon to be automated out of existence. Clinton and Sanders promised more forward-looking jobs without the racist overtones. It was obvious to anyone not watching Fox News which plan would be better for poor people in this country. When I said he never championed their cause, I meant he never championed the cause of the poor over the rich. He championed the cause of the white over the minority and immigrant. Sanders and Clinton were put forth visions to help the poor that were far more compelling. The problem is that those visions included black people and immigrants, so large swaths of the country dismissed them.
> I blame people who care more about illegal immigrants than the disenfranchised citizens suffering in poverty in the US
Illegal immigrants are human beings too and deserve every bit the consideration that citizens do. The same logic that you use to dismiss illegal immigrants can be used to dismiss poor people in fly-over states...they were born in poverty across some arbitrarily-drawn line and what moral obligation do we have to care for them? Well, if you believe that you have a moral obligation to care for one group, you have a moral obligation to care for the other as well. Arbitrary lines drawn on a map, whether delineating states or countries, don't change that.
> I blame urban liberals who have no comprehension of the plight the poor in the US are suffering through
You mean those same liberals that mostly voted for Sanders in the primary and Clinton in the general? Both choices were demonstrably in the interest of the poor people described in this piece. Those liberals you're blaming may not have experienced that sort of poverty (however some of us did...my mom was on welfare until I was 8 years old), but they absolutely have the interests of the poor in mind when they vote.
> I blame upper management of the Democratic Party
No arguments there...the DNC elites absolutely screwed over the country believing that no one could lose to Trump and that the demographics of this country had permanently shifted. They got their comeuppance but we're all suffering the consequences.
> Hillary Clinton is nowhere to be found after her crushing defeat
She did write a book about the election, but I think the election really pointed out just how damaging and counterproductive she and her crony wing of the Democratic party have been to progressive causes. That she's now out of the spotlight speaks more to being marginalized by those with actual elected office (like Sanders and Warren...none of them are asking her for her help) than it does to her lack of interest in trying to fix things. Too much of the country, including Democrats, hates her right now. I think there's almost universal agreement that we'd all like her to step away from public life and leave the future of this country to a new generation of politicians.
They deserve every hardship that gets them. Get screwed out of health care. Deserve it. Billionaires pocket tax breaks and then still get rid of jobs. Totally deserve it. Shitty schools for your kid, and you can't afford the nice private school even with the vouchers. I feel sorry for the kid, but the blame lies with the parents. Get fired for no reason and your union is gone. Well you wanted that right?
There is a lot of people who didn't choose this, and that is sad. The rest, they can shut up and enjoy the world they built.
At least in modern times most losing presidential candidates stay pretty quiet for some time. Also, while I guess you can call it a crushing defeat in that she lost, I will note that she did win the popular vote by a margin of several million.
As for Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren it may be relevant that both are still in office.
Would you like to blame me?
But, from my perspective, I heard very little Trump say that would affect illegal immigration (his only proposal for that was to build a wall), but I heard lots of things that sounded like heavy bigotry to me. He wanted to ban muslims, ban refugees from the very places where the US instigates wars, and generally said a lot of vile stuff.
I may have taken it all a little too personally. Trump literally advocated for banning my future wife from the US. I'm too old for DACA, but when I tried to get a passport I discovered I didn't have paperwork to get a passport. Recent changes in laws mean our families literally can't visit each other, and we are discussing what to do.
On the other hand, I imagine some people would like their mother-in-law banned from the country. It would at least make a good joke for someone.
They're not citizens being oppressed, but they are human beings being oppressed. They're often fleeing war-torn countries and, by definition, have taken a proactive action to try to escape their circumstances and the poverty that they were born into. Your lack of compassion for them whilst simultaneously descrying people's lack of compassion for similarly impoverished groups of citizens is hypocritical and borders on sociopathic. Citizenship and race are not a distinctions that have any moral standing. Suffering is suffering and either we have an moral obligation to help or we don't.
Personally, when I compare someone that's come to a foreign country and fights to get by doing under-the-table manual labor with someone with an opiate addiction on government assistance, if I have to draw the line and help one and not the other, I'm helping the one that's making a positive contribution to the country instead of leeching off the government and voting for Republicans. I feel compassion for the plights of both groups, but if there are limits to everything and I've got to be pragmatic, well, I'm not spending my limited bandwidth caring about West Virginia. The Guatemalans fleeing the drug violence that's only engulfed their country because of the addictions and failed drug policies of the US are where I'm going to focus more of my compassion. They are the ones that I see on a daily basis and who's humanity is much harder for me to ignore.
Citizenship is artificial, especially in an era where companies will ship jobs to wherever offers the cheapest labor. Suffering is universal, whether it's the Central Americans that are living in poverty in California, the Syrian refugees that I saw begging in the streets of Malaysia during my time there or the opiate addicts of West Virginia. And I have very little patience for people who try to draw a line between Americans and foreigners because suffering is somehow the normal state of being for brown people.
All humans deserve pity. A country has limited resources, and must collectively decide (by its citizenry) how those resources are spent. Citizenship entitles you to a vote. That's democracy!
> Why are you the one that gets to decide that citizens of a state that voted for the treatment they're receiving are more deserving of our help and compassion than illegal aliens in our own states?
See democracy above. Citizenship entitles you to decide the direction, actions, and fate (ideally, not always) of your country.
> Citizenship is artificial, especially in an era where companies will ship jobs to wherever offers the cheapest labor.
Clearly citizenship is not artificial if we're arguing the merits of it, and people who don't have it want it, and are willing to break the law for a close substitute.
Good chat. We don't agree, but I enjoyed the discussion. Its always helpful to explore other viewpoints. Everyone wants to see the world a better place, its just the routes we argue over.
It's like the difference between coworkers and friends. Coworkers are people you're grouped with for convenience sake. But you don't need to share any close bond with them. Friends are people you choose to associate with and for whom you care deeply. Coworkers can also be friends, but they don't have to be. My fellow citizens are like my coworkers. Many illegal aliens are like my friends. If I were to suggest to you that you should prioritize your coworkers above your friends, you'd react in much the same way that I'm reacting here when you tell me I should prioritize citizens over non-citizens.
The common thread is empathy and a desire to help those less fortunate.
I didn't see as much of a political problem as I saw a human problem.
We've all come to understand that politicians are mostly liars. And I think Trump represented what was seen as a break from the mold because he seemed authentic. He said things that you're not "supposed" to say, he acted in a way you're not "supposed" to act. In general, he seemed to be being a person and not a politician. He made lots of promises as all politicians do, but I think his behavior being far outside of the mold gave people hope and optimism that he was being genuine - that he would actually fight to bring jobs back, work to curtail foreign competition for what jobs there are, and so on.
Sanders similarly broke the mold of a politician. Polls show socialism focus tests somewhere near the apocalypse, yet Sanders openly called himself a democratic socialist. And he talked about many things that have become completely taboo in politics including the corrupting influence of banks paired with a completely myopic monetary policy, single payer healthcare systems, corporate tax avoidance (something Trump also hit on), and more. He said things you're not supposed to say, and so I think we also viewed him as breaking the mold of a politician - and being somebody that might genuinely work to do the things he is talking about.
The behavior you're describing is why it's particularly tough for the two sides to ever see eye to eye. Imagine you were one of these disenfranchised poor living threadbare and barely getting by ever since the day you were born --- and the national discussion was on how to try to treat individuals who came into the country illegally better. That sort of thing breeds resentment. That resentment in turn is then characterized as racism. And that perceived racism in turn denigrates their own position even more, which results in even more empathy for immigrants leading to even greater resentment, and so on. It's a vicious cycle.
I wish there 'domestic exchange programs.' Have a substantial number of individuals living in one side of the bubble temporarily join a family living on the other side. I think peoples' eyes would be opened if they could see we all really just want the same thing - and that's a better life for the people. The only thing we disagree on is how to get there. But somehow in this process instead of seeing eye to eye we've instead characterized those that disagree with us as something less than rational humans capable of being swayed. And as both sides refuse to communicate to the other sides rationally this sort of inhumanity becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
There seems to be a small but vocal "ayn rand" crowd mired in cynicism on this site. Somehow that if everyone "worked hard", we'd all be successful. That is true to some extent but there are only a limited number of seats in the "successful" table.
There was a story on hackernews about a scientist who did nobel prize winning work but had to drive buses for a living.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15422928
There is a lot more to success than the individual. The environment and opportunities available have a lot more to do with success than the individual.
Accepting that people can fall into poverty through no fault of their own is a crushing reality, as one would also have to accept that it can happen to them at any moment. Many choose to believe the comfortable lie rather than the uncomfortable truth.