Hacker News Reader

Comment by jenkinsj | Hacker News Reader

A classic. The part when the agitator-clown-carnival barker yells "Folks I'm just an average American but I'm an American American! {{insert-ad-libbed-racist-tirade}}". Good thing we defeated nonsense like this long ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGAqYNFQdZ4&feature=youtu.be...

View on HN

It wasn't a racist tirade. It was a tirade against everyone who the fictional person felt was different from him as a method of identifying who he believed to be taking away his opportunities - just by those people existing.

See the consequent side-conversation here, https://youtu.be/vGAqYNFQdZ4?t=319. The crowd rejected him, the more he spoke.

Today's news is full of exactly the same attitude displayed by this person. Why are people not rejecting this today?

Because the propaganda machine serves the suckers' self-centric worldview first and foremost, "unites" them, galvanizes them, and exploits their selfishness and greed to weaponize them against "the other".

That's what is so insidious about it, and the only real defense for those of us who are "the other" is deplatforming and throwing a wrench into the propaganda machine.

You are debunking something I didn't claim.

Can you answer the question I posed, "Today's news is full of exactly the same attitude displayed by this person. Why are people not rejecting this today?"

Because the people with the same attitude as that guy are—mindboghlingly—in power.

There are plenty of people who reject that rhetoric. That's what BLM is, as a currently-relevant, specific example.

The problem is the aforementioned undermining and exploitation of selfish and self-serving attitudes and actions has led to an unreasonably large base on the other side, giving the illusion (at least to you) that nobody is rejecting it.

Agitators and racists are still around today.

Whoosh?

Nope. The comment I responded to was a low-quality comment, and it irked me that it was at the top. I repeated the same obvious point, only stripped of the sarcasm to show that without the sarcasm, it's a pretty bare statement. If you think that my restatement is facile, then you must be able to recognize that the previous attempt at the same point is, too. Its payload differs only in the sarcasm attached to it, and there's no value in the sarcasm itself.

Gee, it would be a real improvement if our modern racist clowns were articulate orators, instead of the drooling simpletons we have to put up with these days.

Their guy got elected. What does that say about your team.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com