Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by noelwelsh 3433 days ago
Imagine you're a person who was strongly against "[b]ombing predominately Muslim countries, overthrowing governments[,] and covert black sites where Muslims get tortured". Now imagine that the US has just elected a president far more conservative (and volatile!) than his predecessor, and a result there is a widespread movement for progressive political change, in line with your beliefs, from people who are normally not engaged in the political process. Do you:

a) bitch and moan at the johnny-come-latelys climbing onto your bandwagon; or

b) accept that society reacts in a non-linear way and use the opportunity to actually achieve something meaningful.

3 comments

What you call "bitch and moan" can be a useful reminder of how people tent do overestimate what happens in proximity and overlook what happens in a remote location.
c) bitch and moan at the candidate at your side that isn't listening to your ideals?

There's a deep level on hypocrisy here, and that people (against both bombing and closing) are really not trying to fix this, otherwise they would have started sooner.

This is the third time in a row that the US public votes against the candidate supported by the Pentagon. Yet, the non-warmonger is a complete asshole...

(By the way, I'm watching from a safe distance, not participating on this stuff.)

Why does it have to be a and b only. Why not both or add c and d to the list.

He brought a valid point it seems but it was "bitching and moaning". And gave him a binary choice to pick between.

What is the outcome of accepting that point? "You didn't complain when the government did worse things, so now you can't complain ever about anything?" The implication of accepting that logic would seem to be that we just give up. How does that help?
It is possible that this situation would add frustration for on lookers who notice that a large group of people accepted (or did not SEEM to care) about the killing and torturing of people, but all of a sudden are taking the high ground against a 90 day ban on immigration.

For SOME people it would be hard to accept the opinion of such people?

I find myself falling into this sometime... Is it a cognitive bias?

edit: Its hard for me to think about these issues with large fear based reactions from both sides and the hysteria the media is putting out.

> The implication of accepting that logic would seem to be that we just give up. How does that help

Not necessarily it could be also "pay attention harder from now on not to make the same mistake", "this is jumping on the outrage bandwagon more than actual outrage", "let's see what happened before so we don't make the same mistakes", "let's hear what others think about this" (as this is a public discussion forum).