Hacker News Reader

Comment by tclancy | Hacker News Reader

> technical issues and social issues really don't mix

I don’t think that’s true in the least. I think it’s true there are no technical solutions to social problems, but any and all technology comes from people forming societies and seeking solutions.

This comment feels the same as people saying “Stick to sports” about athletes talking politics. Everything is political. If you don’t think something is, it tends to be because one is insulated from the politics that affect it.

View on HN

There's a clear line, and it is when it starts to involve other people. Example: reverse engineering the firmware on your thermostat so you can use it after Google shuts down - technical problem. Not releasing it because you're worried about DMCA and/or Google lawsuits - social problem.

> Everything is political

This is such a tedious worldview

Maybe everything is political, but it doesn't have to be that way

"there are only:

Two races: white and "political" Two genders: Male and "political" Two hair styles for women: long and "political" Two sexualities: straight and "political" Two body types: normative and "political"

https://twitter.com/emmahvossen/status/1138841342921060354?l...

I wonder whether people who disagree about this are talking at crossed purposes. I think there's politics in a narrower sense (concerning partisanship and state intervention) and politics in a wider sense (concerning power relations and decision making). To depoliticise things in the former sense (by depolarising and deregulating) isn't to depoliticise them at all in the latter sense. In society, arguably everything is economic, legal, psychological, etc. Presumably, what people mean when they say "everything is political" is that politics in the wider sense is both important and on this list.

> Presumably, what people mean when they say "everything is political" is that politics in the wider sense is both important and on this list

What they mean in my experience is "everything must be viewed as political propaganda"

I see. I disagree with them if they think everything really is political propaganda, but I think in a sense everything is political (in the wider sense) in its causes and consequences, so perhaps it might as well be propaganda, even if those involved don't think of it that way.

To return to your previous comment that "everything is political" is a tedious worldview, maybe there's a possible compromise. We could accept the idea that "non-political" everyday things have a (small) political significance, while never (or rarely) engaging with that political significance in any specific instance.

> To return to your previous comment that "everything is political" is a tedious worldview

It is tedious specifically because of the "in the wider sense" you put in parens

It is an overly broad definition of political to the point of uselessness and absurdity

Edit; for example, consider the case of a child throwing a ball for their dog.

The child is not political. The dog is not political. Yes, you can say that there's politics in letting people own pets like dogs. There are politics in having a public space where children are allowed to play fetch with their dogs. There are politics involved in the parents deciding to have children in the first place, or where they choose to live and work.

Yes, "everything is political" is true.

It's also just tedious

> It is an overly broad definition of political to the point of uselessness and absurdity

I don't think it's useless or absurd, just not usually applicable. After all, each action has a specific political significance.

> It's also just tedious

Fair enough, but couldn't we say the same about many other things? For example, Brownian motion might not usually warrant our attention, but it's there for when we decide it is of interest.

Any interaction between three or more people is inherently political.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com