[daxorid]

The larger point is that TPTB tend to ban groups that want communists thrown from helicopters, but are absolutely fine with groups that want fascists thrown from helicopters.

There's a fundamental imbalance in how the standard is applied, and it's clearly ideological.

[ghostbrainalpha]

I understand your point. I lean conservative myself, but go with me on this.

If the people that liberals want thrown from helicopters ( fascists ), are only in that group because they want to throw people from helicopters....

Isn't that the same logic as "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun"? The liberal subs HATE, HATE groups. They aren't calling for random white people, religious people, or fiscally responsible people to be thrown from helicopters.

[aaron-lebo]

I've had one too many brushes with r/politics where "liberals" hated people because they were the wrong gender and race. The liberal and conservative subs alike have plenty of people who hate the other side for no good reason.

[traverseda]

Sure. Of course the communists tend to be very "you'll be first up against the wall when the revolution comes".

Both sides of that fight seem to have legitimate cause to claim self-defense.

>They aren't calling for random white people, religious people, or fiscally responsible people to be thrown from helicopters.

No, but they do seem to be a hair away from actively endorsing subjugation. A lot of them seem to have already taken steps to make sure that that demographic can't have a voice in their movement. They also seem to have set the precedent that any criticism of their activism from outside their movement makes you an enemy. I get the feeling that a lot of them would do all those terrible things, if they could. There are fundamental tenets of the movement that give people an excellent excuse to do horrible things.

Instead, we could just, not? I liked the "judge people by the content of their character, not the colour of their skin" thing we had going on. That's an easy rule to enforce, but less so when you start carving out special exceptions that mostly benefit your voter base.

[jackmott]

You are supposed to throw fascists from helicopters.

[sctb]

This account has a history of uncivil and/or unsubstantive comments, and since you've ignored our requests to stop we've banned the account.

[aaron-lebo]

abstaining from jokes about murdering people is usually a good rule. It is a joke, right?

[Veelox]

I'm not sure if you are serious or joking...

[briholt]

Any HN mods want to jump in here and suggest maybe HN is a tech forum and not the appropriate place to promote political violence? Or perhaps this brand of hate and hysteria has completely infected this community as well.

[sctb]

You're right, it's not OK. But adding your own flavor of inflammation doesn't help. The way we can improve threads here is to 1) flag and downvotes comments that violate the guidelines, 2) comment civilly and substantively. Add information and insight. The way to do that is patiently and thoughtfully. Slow down and resist responding reflexively—it almost always makes things worse instead of better. If you notice something egregious, feel free to email us at [e-mail] so you can be sure we'll see it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[briholt]

This is cute, but I now see comments endorsing this brand of hate and hysteria (albeit with a less violent flair) on HN everyday. If you're going to suggest that you haven't noticed this trend over the past year or two then frankly your request for reporting is disingenuous.

In line with the original top comment, why don't you publicly declare that you you'll treat discrimination/slander of whites/men/conservatives/scientists/free-speech-advocates on this platform just as harshly as you would any other group instead of asking me to send you a dozen emails per day.

[dijit]

I disagree, I think you can tell them they're wrong and list the reasons why $proposed_ideology is better, but talking down to people and considering murder for believing something is absolutely abhorrent behaviour.

FWIW, I hate the left and the right movements in equal strides, the left want me to feel terrible for being born a straight white male in a western post-colonial society, the right want the poor and under-priviliged to suffer and horde things like medical care.

Understanding that there is a grey-scale and that ideologies are not absolute is the only way to proceed in my opinion. Being polarised only turns into fighting because nobodies view gets represented properly instead both sides put up strawmen.

[vidarh]

I agree strongly with your first paragraph, and disagree strongly with your second.

Ironically to me, your second paragraph illustrates why your first paragraph matters: As someone belonging firmly on "the left" your description does not fit me at all, at least not in my view.

The problem, then, when someone wants to go to extremes in treating anyone over their perceived ideology is defining what it means to belong to or support said ideology sufficiently strongly to warrant that extreme action.

And hence I do agree with your last paragraph.

[dijit]

It's incredibly unpopular today not to buy into even the most extreme left. You can tell by the fact my comment, which was entirely neutral is being downvoted.

Twitter is rife with absolute venom if you even suggest a term such as "mansplaining" is sexist.