Hacker News Reader

Comment by breadbreadbread | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

I think you should have cooled off for a bit before posting this emotion-laden comment. I would suggest that the people you should be angry with are the ones behind the singular corporate uniparty which pits us against each other by creating false narratives and rhetoric that spread through our media ecosystem.

> I'm kinda done with listening to the other side at this point.

Don't let the propaganda win, always be willing to listen.

>I would suggest that the people you should be angry with are the ones behind the singular corporate uniparty which pits us against each other by creating false narratives and rhetoric that spread through our media ecosystem.

Thats a two way street buddy. I can't listen to the other side if they are blabbering on about their own false narrative. This comment section is full of people who think that its the lefts fault and are absolutely incapable of looking at their own party. I don't know how to explain to you that I do not give a shit about Democrats or Liberal media or the "singular corporate uniparty", let it all burn and I will still be fighting for LGBT rights and there will still be people who think I shouldn't exist.

There will always be people who think you shouldn't exist, that is true. But parent comment is suggesting that if you let it all burn down those people would likely turn out to be only a small minority, easily dismissed, rather than a unified bloc of 50% of brainwashed america.

I don't think the GOP is a unified bloc. I think it is beholden to a vocal minority without whom they wouldnt win elections because running on their last 20 years of policy alone hasnt worked. If we destroyed the current political parties and had everyone in government rerun as independents, that vocal minority would still find a political foothold.

Perhaps! Depends on how you set up the system, I think.

Similarly, I also do not give a shit about the GOP. Or any party for that matter. They can come to me if they want my vote.

Where we differ I guess is in degree of nihilism - I don't want to see everything burn and I'm happy to listen to other people's perspectives. I'm just a mildy intelligent ape and don't have everything figured out yet. I don't think throwing in the towel is a better solution than persevering and standing up for your values though. Thank you for listening! :)

I'm in agreement here. How are people supposed to reach across the aisle and fight our common enemy when the other side of the aisle is completely unwilling to make this sort of introspective conclusion?

The question is whether it's true that the other side of the aisle is unwilling to make introspective conclusions, or if they actually are but you've been affected by the misperceptions and miscalibrations the source article describes. For example, Social Security privatization has entirely dropped off the radar in recent years - what happened there if not an introspective conclusion that it was a bad idea?

Trump said it was a stupid idea (and he was right).

I think they make a lot of good points, and the post doesn't sound too emotionally charged to me.

Frankly, the left should start to go lower, and speak more emotionally. It turns out that clinical, sterile statements are not a good way to sway a majority, and they don't make good sound-bites.

At some point, you have to fight fire with fire to avoid becoming yet another victim of the paradox of tolerance.

Your response to “America is polarized because of misperceptions” is to double down on polarization and misperceptions claiming in fact, we don’t have enough of either?

I didnt say that "we don’t have enough of either"

Admittedly I was a bit rambley because i am scared for the safety of myself and others in this political climate. And everytime someone tries to "diagnose" the problem, they do so by treating the left and the right as the same, as value-neutral, as though they are two people on a tennis court following the same rules hitting a ball back and forth. I think this fundamentally misses the fact that both sides use vastly different tactics and have different standards for truth. I think that the values of each side cannot be put on the same line ("I think cops should be held accountable" and "democrats stole the election" are not equal and opposite positions). I think both sides are playing completely different games and each can claim the other is losing/winning/cheating, that is the problem... not individuals misperceptions.

Everyone is scared, even the other side. They are just different fears. That's why its so vital to talk to your neighbors and to those who are different. To listen and to try to change hearts. Especially important is to see why people order their beliefs the way they do. They also think that values cannot be put on the same line ("I think babies should have the right to life" and "republicans stole the election from Gore" are not equal and opposite positions).

The hierarchy of needs is different on both sides; they are mostly incompatible and each side not only will, but _must_ violate the other's definition of justice (abortion is a perfect example of this, defined not by the act itself, but by the conflicting definitions/hierarchy of life and of rights).

I think social media is the problem. You used to have to get along with those around you. Now you can just bubble yourself on the internet, no matter how niche your position is. I am glad to have friendships all across the political spectrum -- we can always bond over being screwed by the system at large instead of the nebulous "other side".

So there is your problem: you don't see the right as being people, yet want the right to see you as a person.

i think thats a false equivalency. First of all I see them as people, I just see them as people who dont care about my personhood. Second of all, my value judgement of the right is based on the actions they take against my personhood, whereas their value judgement of me is based on.... who I am? who I love? the clothes I wear?

Seeing people as persons, judged and viewed as individuals, has been one of the major contention between the center/center right and the left. The two sides that been fighting hardest to push identity politics away from the political discussion is generally the same group that view the left and the far right as being two sides of the same coin.

If the goal is getting people to see you as a person and the strategy you are deploying to reach that goal is pushing people away, then it might be worth looking into the effectiveness of that strategy.

I shouldn't need to strategize to be seen as a human. But yeah go ahead and blame queer people for people thinking they are subhuman.

You are misunderstanding and lashing out. Please don't.

Politics should not require strategy and neither the left nor right should see others as subhumans. Everyone is human living in the now and should be treated with respect and rights.

Human being are not a gender, a color, a sexual orientation, or a political object to be attacked. They are not a religion, ethnic origin, age or demographic. Human individuals are human. Reducing people down to single bits of information is reducing people to be less than human.

Notice how the person you're replying to conflated two extremely different forms of "dehumanization." Calling an attacker an attacker isn't dehumanizing them. This comment section isn't worth your energy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com