[oshout]

Education and resources for things to that end are potentially being directed and filtered by and through a self-perpetuating "bureaucracy of thought" product and marketers, which, allegedly, demands strict adherence and conformity with their dogma, beliefs, and potentially facts if some topics are taboo.

The article & discussion is relevant to hackernews in many respects: subversion is often construed with hacking. education and hacking.

If you believe the topic taboo, then your taboo is being 'hacked'.

I concede that the primary goal is likely to foster discussion of individuals found on hackernews opposed to inform the hackernews audience, though it's not without merit either way.