Hacker News Reader

Comment by curtisblaine | Hacker News Reader

> or write a series of inflammatory text messages designed to make voters in swing states more angry about immigration

This statement is especially scary, because it implies that being against immigration is a political position that society must not allow at any cost. I bet other inflamatory text messages are allowed, as long as they benefit a certain political side.

View on HN

All of the hypotheticals were pretty poorly formed. But to be fair, it doesn't say anything for or against immigration, just "angry about immigration".

Tbh if you're angry about something you're almost certainly against it.

The problem is stirring up hatrid against one or more defined demographics to make political advantage. It is a core component of fascism's path to power.

Being against immigration is not the same as hating certain demographics though. The fact you conflate the two is a bit presumptuous, imho.

> inflammatory ... more angry ...

I did not conflate the two. The wording in the OP definitely suggests a concern about hating as opposed to being against. It is possible to be against something without being inflamed or more angry.

We should also be cognisant of where any anger is directed - is it to the policy makers in government, or to the immigrants themselves?

If you're angry about immigration, it's fair to say your anger goes towards the policy or even the very concept of it. If you're angry with immigrant you're angry with the people. Yet the author of the article chose the first, suggesting it's not ok to be against immigration.

Except of course that a lot of the 'anger about immigration' in the way you put it is thinly disguised racism or xenophobia. It is quite hard to separate these (on both sides of the debate), and so have a sensible discussion on what a good policy on immigration should be.

Having a sensible discussion is even harder when people like the article's author want to preventively censor any criticism of immigration policies by banning every tool that might help generating said criticism. You can have a sensible discussion only if both sides are able to freely express and disseminate their point of view.

“I want to outlaw my opponents political platform, but they are definitely the fascists!”

Amazing that this was said without any irony at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com