Hacker News Reader

Comment by dylan604 | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

this here ^ is a common propaganda trick: we group all the people who do peacefully picket and exercise their freedom of speech (as well as free-market choices) with a small number of extremists who resort to violence, and so discredit the entire movement.

I've noticed when the Reds are targets of this, they fight back with paranoia and call the violent ones "plants", "paid instigators", or "false flag operation".

I'd like to believe people can still be reasonable and say "nah, I agree with the sentiment but I don't condone those methods. Nice try though."

No, this is a hold yourself to a higher standard "trick". Selling of stock, walking a picket line, setting fire to property. One of these things is not like the other. Being unwilling to admit that it is happening is not good either.

For all of the millions that support MAGA but did not invade the capital, it rightly brought criticism of the movement that those that did support. The same is true when people perform violent acts of protest for any group. The violent acts will always garner the most attention while diminishing the effectiveness of the non-violent acts. Doesn't matter red/blue/purple.

I just seem to be different because I'm willing to acknowledge the fact rather than trying to write some diatribe to sweep it under the rug

So guilt by association? Wow.

This is pure authoritarian shtick.

Not every association infers guilt, but some absolutely do (and should).

The phrase I used means something specific:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

I'm very aware.

That it can be a fallacy does not mean it is always a fallacy.

Sometimes, guilt by association is warranted.

Do you think the people who are setting fire to Teslas are the same people trading Tesla stock? Even remotely close to the same kind of people?

Doesn't matter that they are not. It is happening, and it is always going to be grouped together because the end goal is the same. Like it or not, that's what happens in the real world.

Your empty smear just reinforces his point.

Those who are in the "out" group get one treatment, the "in" group gets the opposite.

If we are talking specifically about Mahmoud Khalil, who has 0 criminal charges yet risks deportation, do you have any sources for your claim?

I think you are referring Roman candles, which are definitely not a crime.

The definition of "terrorism" is a bit fluid right now.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/19/trump-musk-f...

> France’s research minister said a French scientist was denied entry to the US this month after immigration officers at an airport searched his phone and found messages in which he had expressed criticism of the Trump administration.

> “I learned with concern that a French researcher” on assignment for the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS) “who was traveling to a conference near Houston was denied entry to the United States before being expelled”, Philippe Baptiste, France’s minister of higher education and research, said in a statement on Monday to Agence France-Presse published by Le Monde. “This measure was apparently taken by the American authorities because the researcher’s phone contained exchanges with colleagues and friends in which he expressed a personal opinion on the Trump administration’s research policy,” the minister added.

https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250320-us-denies-ent...

> US agents found messages about the treatment of scientists under the new US administration that "showed hatred towards Trump and could be qualified as terrorism", the same source said.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com