Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by defrost 1043 days ago
They're effectively contentless comments of no merit.

Any slogan yelling should get downvoted by HN standards regardless of partisan bias.

An Eat the Rich comment that includes a quality recipe, however, should be rewarded with tolerance if not upvotes.

2 comments

I can't say I agree, if someone made a high effort post arguing for eating the rich, I personally would still flag it because I flag all calls to violence, whether they are low effort or not. (Some people say "eat the rich" to mean "redistribute wealth through taxation," if I could tell that's what they meant I probably wouldn't flag it, other people uh, don't. Maybe the recipe you referenced is a policy proposal, let me know if I've misread you.)
How is advocating for eating the rich a call for violence though?

Are you assuming it's a call to kill them rather than a plea to not waste the protein?

The thing many people fail to realise about the Fore people in PNG was that their cannibalism was a mortuary rite of reverance for highly valued in group members that weren't killed for sustenance.

I can quote a paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2581657/ or simply say I learnt that first hand 40+ years back as child tagging along on supply runs with Mike Alpers (see Author list).

Now .. given you might have gained a snippet of new infomation, how do you feel about upvoting this comment about eating high value members of society?

> Are you assuming it's a call to kill them rather than a plea to not waste the protein?

It could possibly be such a plea if the implication is that their death is already imminent. Which means it's still advocating their downfall.

This isn't about cannibalism and your comments here are a waste of everyone's time.

I wasn't born yesterday.
I love babies!

...I just can't eat a whole one.

Hmm - a self evident non sequitur that fails to address a real point about the actual world and the assumptions made by people about both violence and cannabalism.

That's a poor comment from yourself- I'd hoped for better.

If you'd like a higher quality response, sophistry and performative disappointment isn't the way to get it. I'm not going to give a serious detailed response to an unserious comment, I'm going to find a better use for my time.
I don't follow you at all I'm afraid.

I'm completely serious about the facts here:

* You don't have to kill people in order to eat them,

* I've had cannibals as babysitters in PNG as a child,

* I'm much the same age as Mike Alpers own children who I know from my days in university.

etc.

You claim to not be engaged with such topics because <<violence>> and I've quite accurately pointed out that violence isn't a neccesity here.

Why, exactly, are you having a little tantrum here?

If God didn't mean for poor people to eat rich people, he wouldn't have made them of meat. [1]

The Cannibal Cookbook: Human meat recipes from around the world

https://www.amazon.nl/-/en/Nico-Claux/dp/B08SGR2W6M

[1] Paraphrased from The Reluctant Cannibal:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjAHw2DEBgw