[dang]

On HN that point is unsubstantive because it's generic. We've learned from long experience that generic ideological discussions go nowhere interesting. Worse, users compensate for the inability to say anything new or interesting by fulminating, which leads to rants, incivility, and flamewars. That's how you get to arguments that population X deserved atrocity Y in one or two hops, and then outraged responses and outraged responses to outraged responses.

It's quite a reliable effect, which is why we're so clear about asking people not to do it.

[mmjaa]

Seems to me that its something that should be written up somewhere, since it is such valuable knowledge. I mean, I've read the posting guidelines, but your succinct description of the effect is far more useful.

However, it has to be stated that the entire basis of American society started with the Declaration of Independence, which frames the argument in entirely substantive terms leading to the conclusion that there is no government without its people - thus the people are responsible for their government whether they like it or not.

I feel that this point is valid in this conversation, because there is most definitely groupthink involved in not taking any responsibility, whatsoever, for ones governments' actions. Especially in the HN crowd, this is a vital issue and one that is no doubt bound to create diversion. But, doesn't that mean we need to continue the discussion, not censor it?