Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dondawest 2373 days ago
> It has always been 'safe' to bully the nerds. No other group of people receives this level of public venomous screed.

It’s because nerds are too busy following our interests to bother attacking back. Defending oneself in general doesn’t work: attacking back does. The maxim “Never defend, always attack” is a maxim for a reason.

The only real “solution” here is to attack back and bully the people who bullied you in the first place. And is that really a solution?

If as nerds, we defend ourselves, then we stay in the frame of the bully. If we attack back, we become bullying nerds.

Society needs scapegoats. For decades and decades, nerds have been safe to pick on. It’s not until you get an extremely aggressive nerd like Bill Gates that a member of the “nerd class” even begins to defend themselves. And aggressive nerds are rare and generally self-interested. Rather than attacking back for the “nerd class” as a whole, they attack companies competing with theirs.

What is the solution to this quandary? Everyone who’s read Girard knows we need scapegoats. If not nerds — oh wait, I mean “tech Bros” — then who else can we scapegoat as a society? The answer should obviously be Wall Street IMO, but that moment seems to have passed when the Occupy movement got culturally supplanted by in-group identity politics.

IMO in order to stop the bullying, we must become bullies ourselves which poses two questions:

* do we really wanna do that?

* and would it even work since Occupy failed so dramatically?

1 comments

Nerds are at best a subculture, not a social class. And usually it's not even a subculture, but a collection of different subcultures and interests and archetypes and stereotypes, often mutually exclusive and conflicting.
The difference between a subculture and a social class is blurry at best. Many social classes are composed of different subcultures — like the nerd social class.
The difference is that subcultures are not a legally protected class.
Why does that matter for this discussion?
Because nerds are not a real class deserving protection, any more than amorphous arbitrary groups such as “SJWs” or “bros”. These are (pop) cultural designations based on folk definitions without any real basis in reality.

Furthermore, being scolded in Buzzfeed News now and then does not constitute bullying and is not actual persecution. The closest thing to actual violence against “nerds” (wrt the actual subject of TFA) were rocks thrown at tech company shuttle buses a few years ago in the Bay Area, which doesn’t seem to happen anymore. And those actions can be framed as relating to real issues such as tension between different economic classes and how localities change with economic development.

It’s ludicrous to claim that there’s such a thing as a “nerd class” and hold Bill Gates as an exemplar of one, when his time at Microsoft can be likewise framed as nerd exploitation- see everything about Microsoft’s monopolistic actions in the ‘90s impacting other “nerds”.

Unlike classes based upon religion, race, nationality, gender, or socioeconomic status, “nerds” are a tribe that don’t actually exist beyond the schoolyard. At least, it’s far more fuzzy, even compared to other identities such as “hacker”, the latter which is at least tied to specific technical professions and activities that exist in the real world.

Finally, if people are going to codify nerd identity, then we’re going to end up relitigating the tiresome “nerd culture is being appropriated” pop culture battles over comic book and sci-fi/fantasy movies and video games becoming mainstream, and that’s a very tedious can of worms.

Dude even race is a largely cultural designation.

Also, without codifying nerd identity how do you expect the bullying to end?