6 ms·

"We need to make it shameful to be bigoted again" Interesting way to put it. For the past decade or so, many flavors of bigotry have been lauded and socially r

"We need to make it shameful to be bigoted again" Interesting way to put it. For the past decade or so, many flavors of bigotry have been lauded and socially rewarded. At the same time, many valid viewpoints and statements have been mislabeled as "bigotry" by the incurious and hivemind-compliant. These things are balancing out lately, but quite a lot of damage was done.

jakeydus 8mo ago
Care to elaborate on what flavors of bigotry have been lauded and socially rewarded/what valid viewpoints and statements have been mislabeled as bigotry? I feel like you're being intentionally vague to avoid taking a stance here.
- CaptWillard 8mo ago
  No, I think my stance is pretty clear. If you don't recognize the patterns of incuriosity, groupthink and misguided confidence that have permeated western society in the last ten years, nothing I say here is going to enlighten you.
  - spankalee 8mo ago
    Your stance isn't clear at all. Do you have any specifics?
  - jakeydus 8mo ago
    Ah, so you're socially conservative, support Trump but probably consider yourself a libertarian, secretly a big fan of the moves ICE has been making? I'm assuming you've used the term "liberal media" unironically in the last year. You didn't storm the capitol, but you consider the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 to be worse than January 6. Antifa is more of a danger than far-right agitators. Charlie Kirk's death hit hard. No social identity group is more persecuted than white, heterosexual, cisgender Christian men. Any of those resonate? You're welcome to correct me. EDIT: in light of another reply to this same thread I recognize that much of this comment was written sneeringly. I apologize for the snark and am leaving it as is in the interest of transparency.
    - kayamon 8mo ago
      [flagged]
      - jakeydus 8mo ago
        First of all, OP declined to elaborate and resorted to seizing the apparent moral high ground instead of defending their claims. I felt that was an invitation for conjecture. Secondly, I noted that my comment was made in less than good faith in the edit I left. I stand by the underlying concepts though. It is my impression that OP is a conservative who is afraid to come out as such in a public forum. This bias (I do not use the word pejoratively here) influences their opinion they shared. Third, I invited OP to illustrate where I am wrong. When someone makes strong statements about the morality of a group and refuses to share their own beliefs on the subject, I believe it’s appropriate to assume they are biased in some way. If I say “all devs are brain dead keyboard monkeys” and I’m a dev, that context is important to understand my statement. Based on Capt’s comment, I made the above assumptions and shared them as I was feeling snarky and felt that they (if true) would be relevant to the larger discussion. Finally, I'm sure I disagree with you on many things but we can disagree without being rude. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        kayamon 8mo ago
        you could have just said 'yes'.
        jakeydus 8mo ago
        You made an accusation so I responded.
    - CaptWillard 8mo ago
      Out of respect for your effort to keep it civil, I'll answer some of that: I'm a liberal as defined up until 2012 or so. Never been socially conservative at all. I'm not a libertarian, as I do support some social safety nets. That being the case, I am strongly against open borders and unchecked fraud. You're actually right about a lot of the rest (minus the snark.)
  - jacquesm 8mo ago
    [flagged]
    - jakeydus 8mo ago
      I'm sure I disagree with Willard on just about everything but we can disagree without being rude. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - deleted 8mo ago
    [deleted]
sprucevoid 8mo ago
> These things are balancing out lately What measures and data do you base that claim on? https://www.cgdev.org/blog/update-lives-lost-usaid-cuts https://www.cgdev.org/blog/update-lives-lost-usaid-cuts "lives lost based on the decline in outlays (current spending) may be in the range of 500,000 to 1,000,000 and potential lives lost based on the decline in obligations (commitments to future spending) are between 670,000 and 1,600,000." What is your best estimate of deaths due to "woke" or whatever you consider the scourge of the "past decade" to be? How many visas revoked due to the holder being not woke enough? How many people were deported from the US for being insufficiently woke? And so on. "Woke" may not be what you meant. Whatever you meant, present your measure and data.
- A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 8mo ago
  Sure. People only lost their jobs and what not ( which in US means.. well, slow, and without health insurance, likely unpleasant demise ). Totally different. On this very forum, I had someone tell me in a very subtle way that it is a good idea that I stay quiet if I know what is good to me. But pendulum swings. It always does. Only difference is,we are forcing people to live up to the world they have ushered in. I hope you said thank you, because wokeness got you to this very spot.
  - sprucevoid 8mo ago
    On the one hand ~1,000,000 deaths and on the other hand some people lost their jobs and you got a mean comment online? > lost their jobs ... which in US means ... slow, and without health insurance, likely unpleasant demise Those you would label "woke" are famously supporters of universal health care. Universal as in would cover everyone including every single Jan 6 participant. On the one hand people striving for health care for all. On the other hand https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/nov/20/hospitals-shutdown-trump-healthcare-cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/nov/20/hospitals-s... > we are forcing people to live up to the world they have ushered in No, wht you are doing is supporting an administration killing ~1,000,000 people and taking away health care from everyone, including people in the group you identify with.

jakeydus 8mo ago

Care to elaborate on what flavors of bigotry have been lauded and socially rewarded/what valid viewpoints and statements have been mislabeled as bigotry? I feel like you're being intentionally vague to avoid taking a stance here.

CaptWillard 8mo ago
No, I think my stance is pretty clear. If you don't recognize the patterns of incuriosity, groupthink and misguided confidence that have permeated western society in the last ten years, nothing I say here is going to enlighten you.
- spankalee 8mo ago
  Your stance isn't clear at all. Do you have any specifics?
- jakeydus 8mo ago
  Ah, so you're socially conservative, support Trump but probably consider yourself a libertarian, secretly a big fan of the moves ICE has been making? I'm assuming you've used the term "liberal media" unironically in the last year. You didn't storm the capitol, but you consider the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020 to be worse than January 6. Antifa is more of a danger than far-right agitators. Charlie Kirk's death hit hard. No social identity group is more persecuted than white, heterosexual, cisgender Christian men. Any of those resonate? You're welcome to correct me. EDIT: in light of another reply to this same thread I recognize that much of this comment was written sneeringly. I apologize for the snark and am leaving it as is in the interest of transparency.
  - kayamon 8mo ago
    [flagged]
    - jakeydus 8mo ago
      First of all, OP declined to elaborate and resorted to seizing the apparent moral high ground instead of defending their claims. I felt that was an invitation for conjecture. Secondly, I noted that my comment was made in less than good faith in the edit I left. I stand by the underlying concepts though. It is my impression that OP is a conservative who is afraid to come out as such in a public forum. This bias (I do not use the word pejoratively here) influences their opinion they shared. Third, I invited OP to illustrate where I am wrong. When someone makes strong statements about the morality of a group and refuses to share their own beliefs on the subject, I believe it’s appropriate to assume they are biased in some way. If I say “all devs are brain dead keyboard monkeys” and I’m a dev, that context is important to understand my statement. Based on Capt’s comment, I made the above assumptions and shared them as I was feeling snarky and felt that they (if true) would be relevant to the larger discussion. Finally, I'm sure I disagree with you on many things but we can disagree without being rude. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - kayamon 8mo ago
        you could have just said 'yes'.
        jakeydus 8mo ago
        You made an accusation so I responded.
  - CaptWillard 8mo ago
    Out of respect for your effort to keep it civil, I'll answer some of that: I'm a liberal as defined up until 2012 or so. Never been socially conservative at all. I'm not a libertarian, as I do support some social safety nets. That being the case, I am strongly against open borders and unchecked fraud. You're actually right about a lot of the rest (minus the snark.)
- jacquesm 8mo ago
  [flagged]
  - jakeydus 8mo ago
    I'm sure I disagree with Willard on just about everything but we can disagree without being rude. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- deleted 8mo ago
  [deleted]

sprucevoid 8mo ago

> These things are balancing out lately What measures and data do you base that claim on? https://www.cgdev.org/blog/update-lives-lost-usaid-cuts https://www.cgdev.org/blog/update-lives-lost-usaid-cuts "lives lost based on the decline in outlays (current spending) may be in the range of 500,000 to 1,000,000 and potential lives lost based on the decline in obligations (commitments to future spending) are between 670,000 and 1,600,000." What is your best estimate of deaths due to "woke" or whatever you consider the scourge of the "past decade" to be? How many visas revoked due to the holder being not woke enough? How many people were deported from the US for being insufficiently woke? And so on. "Woke" may not be what you meant. Whatever you meant, present your measure and data.

A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 8mo ago
Sure. People only lost their jobs and what not ( which in US means.. well, slow, and without health insurance, likely unpleasant demise ). Totally different. On this very forum, I had someone tell me in a very subtle way that it is a good idea that I stay quiet if I know what is good to me. But pendulum swings. It always does. Only difference is,we are forcing people to live up to the world they have ushered in. I hope you said thank you, because wokeness got you to this very spot.
- sprucevoid 8mo ago
  On the one hand ~1,000,000 deaths and on the other hand some people lost their jobs and you got a mean comment online? > lost their jobs ... which in US means ... slow, and without health insurance, likely unpleasant demise Those you would label "woke" are famously supporters of universal health care. Universal as in would cover everyone including every single Jan 6 participant. On the one hand people striving for health care for all. On the other hand https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/nov/20/hospitals-shutdown-trump-healthcare-cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/nov/20/hospitals-s... > we are forcing people to live up to the world they have ushered in No, wht you are doing is supporting an administration killing ~1,000,000 people and taking away health care from everyone, including people in the group you identify with.