Hacker News Reader

Comment by _7bxa | Hacker News Reader

The difference is not serving black or queer people isn't a moral judgement -- it's just discrimination (there isn't anything inherently wrong with being Black the same way there isn't anything wrong with being queer or Asian or Indian, those things aren't a choice unlike being a Nazi). At best, not serving minorities is a shitty moral judgement.

Not serving ICE is a more legitimate moral judgement because ICE has the option to change their behavior and ICE is genuinely bad.

Slippery slope is one of those silly things I see from free speech advocates. I tend not to see the bad impacts in real life because if the government isgoing to restrict free speech, they will do it regardless of what anti-hate speech laws currently exist.

View on HN

There is nothing inherently wrong with serving ICE. You might not like it, but many of your compatriots do.

I don't like what they do at all, I think it's reprehensible, backwards, and purely uncivilised. But people you utterly hate have friends too, and they see something different than you do, and we do not have a singular moral world-view.

This situation with ICE should totally change, but that change is a function of your vote, not a function of protesting against Gitlab.

I very strongly argue that there should never be a single perspective on morality, in the way that these posts suggest there should.

queue IBM and the holocaust.. I mean... wtf ???

> But people you utterly hate have friends too, and they see something different than you do, and we do not have a singular moral world-view.

So because shitty people have friends, we should throw in the towel and refrain from enforcing moral codes in our own lives, behavior, and economic decisions? That's pretty weak stuff.

People who have different views than you are “shitty”?

Some views, yes.

We're talking about concentration camps for children, not monetary policy.

Lots of people support ICE, maybe, but that doesn’t prevent a lot of people from thinking it’s inherently wrong.

The more clear cute example is weapons research. Loads of researchers and institutions outright rule out weapons research, because they find it wrong.

Besides, “inherently wrong” is a subjective thing anyways, if only by the fact some people agree to your statement and some people don’t, despite everyone having the same set of facts

So can a business refuse to serve democrats?

Yes, they can, and should have that right.

They absolutely can; political affiliation is not a protected class. Probably not good for their bottom line, though.

Do you not see the negative repercussions for businesses serving the public to be allowed to make a moral judgement on who they do business with?

If that's the case then there's no room whatsoever for capitalism to be anything other than an amoral system we should be ashamed of.

Vote with your dollar. You're allowed to make your own moral choices and refuse to contribute to evil.

Capitalism is nothing but an economic system where you own the means to production. There is no inherent morality.

Nobody has an issue with you making choices and voting with your dollars. The issue is forcing those choices on everyone else (as in a business, especially as a non-owner) through your own interpretation of morality.

I'm not an economist, but I'm pretty sure the system where workers own the means of production isn't capitalism.

It refers to "you" vs the state. You create a factory or a business or a new patent and you're responsible. You gain the profits or suffer the losses and nobody else can take it from you.

Workers are obviously not business owners, but they do own their own labor and are free to take whatever job they want, not be assigned to it from some central authority.

> There is no inherent morality.

Not inherent; we have to make it so.

Capitalism dominates, what, 80% of our waking lives? The idea that morality should only be relegated to the other 20% is madness.

Dominates? I don’t even know what means. It’s an economic system. What is the other 20% exactly?

If racists had self awareness, they wouldn't be racists.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com