[bayarearefugee]

I would argue that being rabidly apolitical while a dangerous threat to western democracy has been growing in America for years is the rough part.

I'm an old person. I have a leftist bent. I used to get along with many conservatives, I just had different policy viewpoints than they did. What we are seeing now is a completely different political landscape where one of the parties is actively setting up a dynastic plutocracy in the open.

FWIW I have a ton of criticism for the "other" party too as an ineffective mess sucking the corporate teet almost as hard, just without the actual proto fascism.

[aliasxneo]

> I would argue that being rabidly apolitical while a dangerous threat to western democracy has been growing in America for years is the rough part.

Some of us are just here as technology professionals looking to learn and keep current on the latest trends. There's nothing wrong with that.

[_DeadFred_]

Some yes, but maybe not you? Because you used the following language yesterday:

"Only a few short months ago, I was under constant attack from various public members of the Democratic party for being a white male with center-right views. The vitriol was quite unhinged, really." when asked for specifics you went to '...on CNN for example'.

[dang]

Digging up people's comments from unrelated threads* starts to cross into personal attack. Please don't do that here.

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

* edit: I mean for use as ammunition in an argument. It's not that you're wrong—it's just that the cost (to the intended spirit of the site) outweighs the benefit (being right in an argument).

[mindslight]

TBH this idea that each comment should stand individually on its (including HN's downplaying of the usernym with grey) seems like it contributes to some of the problems with modern discourse. When someone I know says something challenging, I know the context they're coming from, what I do agree with them on, what skills of theirs I respect, etc. Whereas message board comments are just tiny slivers of information with which you can agree or disagree.

[dang]

Oh for sure. There's nothing wrong with people getting to know each other, and their views, by reading through past comments.

It's just not in the intended spirit of HN to track down contradictions and use them as gotchas in arguments. That's a narrower point. I've added an edit to the GP comment to clarify that.

[aliasxneo]

Do I engage in politics on HN occasionally? Yes. Is it my primary motivation? No. I don't open up HN with the intention of having rigorous political discussions, even though I sometimes fall into them.

My comment history, which it seems you only partially perused, demonstrates this to be true. Especially if you go back a year ago before things became politically charged around here.

I also don't see what relevance my example has to this conversation. It sounds like you're trying to corner me into a specific label (Republican, maybe?). I guess thanks for proving my point about discussions around here?

[_DeadFred_]

I haven't used party labels on HN. You seem to be the one forcing an identity on me? I would respond but my post was out of bounds so I shouldn't elaborate/reference further.

FYI if you read my post history you will see I am a libertarian leaning (Santa Cruz hippie libertarian not Rand Paul 'my dad got me the job but I believe in everyone earning their way' libertarian) refugee from the Bay Area to a small town in a very red state. I don't have the agenda you think other than calling out hypocrisy and a desire for a functioning health system.

[johnnyanmac]

Certainly. So what interested you on this story that is more about medicine on HN?